Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 17:44:16 +0000
From: Alastair Dickson <adickson-AT-stirmargrev.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Aren't we all critics?


Michael Moretti <moretti-AT-mac.com> wrote
>To me, a movie which "inhabits some waking hours for a day or so" is how I
>might regard its overall success. It's easy to recall movies where I had a
>very strong emotional or intellectual response, but for a movie to really
>succeed for me it has to transcend such effects.
>
>Nostalghia, for example, left me contemplative for days afterward. During
>the film I tried to decipher the various symbols (the mineral baths, the
>doves). In other scenes I felt frustration as I watched Eugenia struggle
>with Gorchakov's detachment. At other moments I found myself watching the
>film's most excellent cinematography. The overall effect of the film has
>been its measure for me, and this particular one is a favorite.

I'm interested that Michael mentions that film in particular. I recall
being very surprised by my own experience of "Nostalgia". During the
showing, I was feeling very disappointed by it, feeling it to be rather
Tarkovsky-by-numbers, especially in the scenes in the mineral baths.
Perceiving myself to be bored by it, I slackened my attention from the
film and my mind drifted far off into entirely different matters. Some
minutes later I was startled to find that what I had believed to be my
entirely autonomous, extremely personal thoughts on a recent
bereavement, suddenly slid back in key with what was happening on the
screen. Never have I experienced such a close in-tune-ness with a film,
a fact that stays with me, even when my rationality evaluates
"Nostalgia" as a much lesser film than say "Mirror" or "Stalker".

-- Alastair Dickson, Stirling, Scotland
-- <adickson-AT-stirmargrev.demon.co.uk>


     --- from list film-theory-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---