Discuss.

Auteur Series Number 02

a personal favorite of mine, metropolitan malaise is just my thing. and I know how many times it's been said before, but every shot, without fault, is perfect.

I've only seen 4 of his films at the moment (the 4 obvious ones), but apparently The Red Desert may get a US distribution finally later this year (by Criterion, of course, and in association with Janus Films )

I've seen Red Desert. I found it quiteinteresting, even though for some reason I misinterpreted her as having had a misscarriage for no reason what so ever. The color use is of course what the film is known for, because Antonioni sets up the scenes so bleak and black and white, and slowly starts painting in sections and scenes of sections as the movie unfolds. The color is very synthetic, and it reminds me of when you used to use watercolors and some kind of hyposomethingorother fluid to paint in black and white photos in class. I really like that look.

Anyways, its really about inner awakenings being reflected in the exterior landscape. Its quite good.

Everyone knows that Blowup and L'Avventura are two of my all-time favorites. Zabriskie Point I saw years ago and it was just plain weird. I don't really remember it as much as I remember my responses to it.

Those four are admittedly the only films of his that I have seen.

You haven't seen La Notte?
get on that.

Anyone seen The Passenger?

Yes. I did.

But... you have no eyes!

That's a disgusting lie. Someone should ban and execute you immediatly.

I see nothing but shadows where your eyes ought to be!

I'm in a bad shape, i guess.

Ok, I admit that I have seen you with Cuba Libre(s) in your hand.

I just got L'Avventura from the library.

Is it worth it? I like Blow Up.

No, it is like 'Velvet Underground & Nico'. Nobody likes it, but everybody pretends to love it.

I do love VU and Nico. On my first listen, I didn't. But it becomes a transcendent, immersive experience. Melody is not the band's strength, but at times, the music takes me to Lou Reed's garage during the drug-fueled 60s era I hear about, but never "enjoyed." It's both psychedelic and realistic (and that's sorta impossible).

But my runner-up would be the self-titled album.

hogwash.

Indeed, but you need to know the background.

I fear his reputation may have died along with his flesh. my film class and the teaching assistant hadn't the slightest interest in him, and magnus doesn't seem to watch his movies at all.

those thoughts are wrong though.

I finally got around to seeing Red Desert. Even for an Antonioni fan, the pacing is rough. The film's overlying viewpoint is so starkly bleak it initially appears beautiful, but simplistic. I was confused the first time through (which is partly the point), but the metaphors come together after some time, and the images last. It's a good film to disprove Magnus' idiotic point with: yes, Antonioni is meticulous enough that there are plenty of perfectly crafted shots that are works of art in their own right, but when I think "Red Desert," its an experience and a condition that come to mind (although I wouldn't say 'atmospheric'), not a frame.

Recently, i've watched Antonioni's trilogy of the modernist couple's alienation (again) ...

While Bergman is critisising many films and directors, we shouldn't forget what attracts him in movies (for example in those by Fellini or Tarkovsky...) and what attracts those he like to criticise (Bergman, Godard, even Hitchcock) and why, despite the similarities, their approach in making movies differ...

Bergman, who also directed stage plays, is clearly interested in the interiority and the drama of his characters: he used methods of freudian theories to analyse the mind, and questioned religious morals to create the sociological component of his characters. But for the most part, he didn't leave this ground: in portraying lost faith, he used his lutheran knowledge - he was never able to leave it behind himself. god could be dead in his film, yes ... but for a certain time in the past, he existed.

That's a spirituality that isn't shared by Antonioni. In his films; the environment, the present time and the human beings are portrayed equal. The characters in his films are often creators, busy creating the environment they choose to live in (or to not live in), and the speed of his movies is the speed of his characters' life. In the interaction between those components Antonioni not only allows you to take a look on individual characters but on modern society itself. That's a far different approach: the persons in his movies, though lacking spirituality, still exist, breathe & live...

To find a meaning in their life, Bergman's characters are looking into mirrors, while Antonioni's characters are looking on the surfaces of the world they created.