Béla Tarr's first film experience is a strange, depressive and disappointment pseudo-documentary about a military veteran who gets thrown out from his boarding room yet he keeps on fighting with the managers and his own nephew just to stay one more night. The plot describes that he's getting thrown out because he was fired from his job but at no point in the movie this is mentioned so it all seems random and arbitrary until we find out he's drunk most of the time, always gets into some confusion and to make matters worst he stole a motor from someone at the place or the neighborhood and although he wasn't alone in the act, he firmly believes his young nephew ratted him out which made him an unwelcome guest there.
I insist on the use of pseudo-documentary because none of that rings true and it all feels staged, rehearsed and precise as fictional movies are. Considering Tarr's later cinematic works one must conclude he developed the long continuous shots and some slowness each frame goes by to distance himself from this soap-opera-ish film. I know European documentaries of the period didn't include interviews or the usual talking heads mode as it'd became frequent in subsequent years in the genre. And without that device we keep imagining what was the real aim of such documentary in exploring those pitifully sad characters and their dull situations. The whole time time they just yell at each other and the old man tries to defend himself, expose his views on why he wants to stay at the hostel and there's some bickering about his times as an air pilot during WWII where his plane was shot down three times and people keep questioning his heroism.
As a "documentary" is a tragedy that goes nowhere; but as a fictional story it's kind of funny at times but it also goes nowhere. I didn't care for the old man since his erratic behavior doesn't help him or anyone; the nephew is very despondent, the woman who runs the place is very annoying and doesn't have one iota of empathy in her bones and her uncle, who also runs the place, just whines about money even after getting paid by the old man. It's not a total waste of time but it doesn't generate interest from viewers. 4/10.
I insist on the use of pseudo-documentary because none of that rings true and it all feels staged, rehearsed and precise as fictional movies are. Considering Tarr's later cinematic works one must conclude he developed the long continuous shots and some slowness each frame goes by to distance himself from this soap-opera-ish film. I know European documentaries of the period didn't include interviews or the usual talking heads mode as it'd became frequent in subsequent years in the genre. And without that device we keep imagining what was the real aim of such documentary in exploring those pitifully sad characters and their dull situations. The whole time time they just yell at each other and the old man tries to defend himself, expose his views on why he wants to stay at the hostel and there's some bickering about his times as an air pilot during WWII where his plane was shot down three times and people keep questioning his heroism.
As a "documentary" is a tragedy that goes nowhere; but as a fictional story it's kind of funny at times but it also goes nowhere. I didn't care for the old man since his erratic behavior doesn't help him or anyone; the nephew is very despondent, the woman who runs the place is very annoying and doesn't have one iota of empathy in her bones and her uncle, who also runs the place, just whines about money even after getting paid by the old man. It's not a total waste of time but it doesn't generate interest from viewers. 4/10.
