|
Your silence
is appreciated.
by Gianpiero Cognoli
|
I don't believe in talking about movies.
No, seriously.
I think Kitano said it best: When you talk too much about a film you risk making people hate it before they even see it (it was something like that, anyway). Put less simply, talking at length about a film conditions the expectations, and enjoyment, of the film for a would-be viewer. It doesn't allow the art to do the talking and accomplishes only the following:
1. It spoils the film.
And I'm not just talking about a "she dies in the end" or a "the butler did it". ANY talk about the story (or other aspects, for that matter) of a movie dilutes the experience for a person seeing it for the first time. Surprise is the child of creativity and if you go into a movie knowing what colour the 13-year-old boy prostitute's leather boots are, that's one less thing for you to discover, and enjoy, at the theatre. Filmmakers make films with the idea that their movie is taken in one frame at a time. They work extremely hard to create a particular experience, and every shadow, every colour and every nuance is extremely important. Knowing any of the details beforehand is an unnecessary, and often non-productive, distraction.
Also, we all see things a little differently, and our individual interpretation of a film contributes to our experience. One person may describe the above boots as "red", while to another person they may seem to be more of a sparkling sunset fuchsia. Why force the second person to see "red" boots (which is what would happen if you described them that way beforehand) when their experience can be so much stronger, richer and more intimate. Ok, bad example. But you wouldn't reveal the fourth line of a sonnet or the middle section of a painting to a friend who hasn't experienced either, would you? The bottom line is, movies are meant to be seen not heard about.
|
|
 |
2. When describing, analyzing or criticizing a movie, it's very easy to infer, distort and embellish.
Anybody can make a claim such as "the director intended to make a statement linking 20th-century avant-garde cross-dressing to contemporary man's search for meaning". However, it might just be possible that the director put a pink outfit on the male actor for lighting reasons
Now, I'm one of those people who just loves dissecting movies in every way possible, and I love finding new relationships, allusions or historical references in movies I've already seen. However, like most enjoyable activities, it's much better to do this kind of thing in the privacy of your own home, preferably with people who have already seen the movie (see 1. above).
I'd like to propose a new way of talking about movies. Simply state whether it's worth seeing or not. The rest of us would probably benefit more. By comparing your yay-or-nay about the movie with what we know about you, we can decide whether we might want to see it or not. This is a much more useful method for figuring out what movies to see, rather than listening to some obscure-reference-laden critique or analysis that leaves too much room for interpretation and misunderstanding. Besides, any comment on the film is not part of the script.
3. It wastes time.
I love movies. And if you're reading this, chances are you love movies too. I don't know about you, but I have approximately 45 (in the least) movie-watching years left in me. That's not very many. I haven't seen "The Graduate" (no, for the last time, I HAVE NOT YET SEEN The Graduate), along with a long list of other great movies. But I would like to. And I'm trying desperately to, every day.
So if you hold me up at a Festival such as Cinema - Festa di Roma with your useless banter about how you believe the movie I'm about to see is is more or less Truffaultian or Orsonwellesian and you start making me late for my show, I'm likely to tell you to politely shove your Kirosawaese up your Fellinian so that I can go and enjoy my movie.
Which is what it's all about.
|
