I have a confession to make: I did not understand ANY part of this film. I would have left half way, were it not that the venue was fully booked, and I would have stepped on many toes to get out. Moreover, I'm willing to accept that my horizon needs broadening. In the hope that some insight would fall on me later on, I stayed. And I tried to understand what the makers were trying to get across. It works every now and then, but not this time.
The landscapes were great, camera work well done, but all the rest was incomprehensible. For instance, what was the idea behind the fact that the two ghosts had a horse (only one!) some of the time, one wheelchair at other moments, and an artificial horse at still other moments. The latter was burnt, by the way, maybe serving a useful purpose, but I did not get it. In spite of travelling without any luggage, I saw a toolbox appear at some moments, and a pan at another time. A hidden meaning below all this??
The final scene ended with some J S Bach (from cantata: Gottes Zeit etcetera), but that did not rescue the film for me.
A very original touch was the reading (!) of the credits at the end.
The landscapes were great, camera work well done, but all the rest was incomprehensible. For instance, what was the idea behind the fact that the two ghosts had a horse (only one!) some of the time, one wheelchair at other moments, and an artificial horse at still other moments. The latter was burnt, by the way, maybe serving a useful purpose, but I did not get it. In spite of travelling without any luggage, I saw a toolbox appear at some moments, and a pan at another time. A hidden meaning below all this??
The final scene ended with some J S Bach (from cantata: Gottes Zeit etcetera), but that did not rescue the film for me.
A very original touch was the reading (!) of the credits at the end.