Stay
I just saw a movie by Mark Forster. I love the photography and the architectural look of it; how the camera plays a part in the movie, the visual clues. The scene transitions are great, and the music was very well chosen to enhance the general feel of the movie. Above all, I like the originality and unpredictability -you don't feel for a second that you are seeing a retelling of a hundred similar stories.
The critics are mostly negative. While it is true that the movie could be more, the style and atmosphere alone are worth watching. But I can see why people may not like it, be upset by it. The movie is not linear and logical, breaks a lot of rules of filming and story-telling, and there appears to be no point to all this, until the end. The problem is, I think, that most people assume a movie is always told in a sequential, logical way.
But what if the story is told from the point of view of an individual experiencing some kind of psychological disorder, or a dream. Does that make it any less valid as a story? Imagine you are attending an art exhibit: you thought it was about photography, but the pictures look nothing like reality, they are surreal, distorted. It turns out they are paintings -there is absolutely nothing wrong with them, other than your own wrong assumptions.
Luckily, artists need not be bound by their audience's comfort zone.
The critics are mostly negative. While it is true that the movie could be more, the style and atmosphere alone are worth watching. But I can see why people may not like it, be upset by it. The movie is not linear and logical, breaks a lot of rules of filming and story-telling, and there appears to be no point to all this, until the end. The problem is, I think, that most people assume a movie is always told in a sequential, logical way.
But what if the story is told from the point of view of an individual experiencing some kind of psychological disorder, or a dream. Does that make it any less valid as a story? Imagine you are attending an art exhibit: you thought it was about photography, but the pictures look nothing like reality, they are surreal, distorted. It turns out they are paintings -there is absolutely nothing wrong with them, other than your own wrong assumptions.
Luckily, artists need not be bound by their audience's comfort zone.
Comments