The Pianist 2002
By Peter Tonguette
I’ve heard about this film for long time ago but haven’t watched until tonight. Struggling with finding the topic to write on blogger, I have finally ended up watching this film. The movie was illustrating the disgusting and horrible thing that Nazi Germany did on Jews. The film was about a Polish pianist’s utterly miserable life to overcome the Holocaust, and finally be able to return to play piano as the thing her love the most. Wladyslaw Szpilman was a Polish Jew and was born in the middle of World War II. It was slightly similar to Schindler’s List, but more musical and does have some joyfulness. The Polish pianist started playing piano over the radio and in some restaurants, then the radio station got bombed and there the war came. He and his family were separated to escape the Germany’s destructive slaughter. They constantly witnessed the killings and time-to-time got scared to death. Fortunately, he was helped by a friend, and from then he began to help the rebellion of Warsaw Jews by providing guns over the walls of the ghetto. However, the rebellion was terribly failed and he felt he had no hope left but to survive. And again, he was provided and aided by another friend; he was hiding in a small room, and living quietly to get away from Germany’s notice. He survived more than 3 years, and after all devastating series happened in his life, he finally backed to play Piano in an orchestra.
The movie was touching and tearful. I found myself very engrossed in the film. The film was successfully made by constantly drawing the viewer along the series of the tragedies. For example, I was immersing in the curiosity of how the pianist would survive. The film also was made based on the true story of Polish pianist and scripted by Ronald Harwood. Yet I don’t know exactly that the antagonist was fictional or non-fictional. In addition, I also think that the historic events, character’s development, and thematic meanings in the movie were explicitly presented. Of course, what really happened in reality was more dramatic, brutal, and fiercely than in the movie. For as much, the Pianist was considered as the finest narrative film ever made “about” the Holocaust.
In comparison, Gloomy Sunday was also another Drama Romance during Holocaust, but it was gone way out of line, and too far away from the truth, which I disliked about. I found that the Pianist was distinctive emotional dark drama, but still based on real life.
The film has good and bad ethnically, and so the most shocking humanizing image input in the movie, which I believe that it wasn’t based on the truth, is that during the final weeks of the war, Szpilman was fed and housed and protected by a decent Nazi officer. Ouch, it totally destroyed the movie as soon as I seen it, that Polanski tempted to reduce the most monstrous villain in the world, and soften the Nazi’s immorality and evil. I didn’t appreciate what Polanski did betray the history by putting this fictional events. And, by all means, I find that it is so obvious that the Pianist was characterized and idealized as protagonist, hence the movie followed Hollywood narrative form, meaning HAPPY ENDING.
Overall, I was so into Hollywood’s movies before taking this class; and I find that it is really hard to ignore to see Hollywood’s theme. And, after reading the book, I felt that I was so fed up with the Hollywood’s dreams.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Hans Richter – Vormittagsspuk (Ghosts before breakfast) 1928
I’ve just watched this short film – Ghosts before breakfast last night from youtube, and it was really hard for me to understand its meaning. Some people call it as a surrealism film, some consider as a Dada’s film, other consider it as a Nazi’s film because the movie was intended to convey the political destabilization of the status quo. In my view, it is considered as a surrealism film. This experimental film was made around 1927-28, about anarchy during the World War I.
What I like the most about this movie is that it was dominantly implicated by symbolism, idealism, impressionism—the confusion causes abstraction. Objects were acted or represented as people, such as, hats, cups, and clock. After researching about the meaning and the history of the movie, I more understood about the meaning behind its scene.
The story of the Ghosts before breakfast was originally scripted following Werner Graff’s film, which was about the rebellion of revolvers. And, Richter opposed this idea, in terms of revolvers that rebel do not shoot; hence, to Richter, shooting was not considered as an action. The hardest symbolism that I couldn’t understand after watching this film couple times is the flying hats. Thanks to an article on Internet, I found out that the flying hats refer to a German linguistic pun, meaning, “being taken care of protected or shielded”, another saying; it means “wary, careful, or cautious”. Also, the flying has contains another potent metaphor as a symbol in German literature—cultural symbolism. Similarly, the image of hands of the clock showing five minutes to twelve is a metaphor signifying danger. Ultimately, Richter tried to indicate the society’s stability in danger, and it is urgent (five to twelve). Political saying, this is the last chance before noon and time is up at twelve. So, when the clock strikes twelve, nothing more can be done.
“ It is time to act”!
Another thing that I appreciate about the movie is the score. The conducted orchestra definitely contributed to the film’s movement and drew along the series of action.
Overall, the movie was made creatively, distinctively, and meaningfully. However, the message was vaguely sent to the viewer but might be obvious to contemporary viewers. Identically, the unusual camera angles, quick cutting, repeated motion (flying hats, a man walking), distortion (a man with his cutting hand waving), are quite strange and boring.
Also the message that the filmmaker tries to send is distracted and somewhat irrelevant to me by dragging the story with the series of unfamiliar insights, unusual images, and unrelated objects. Therefore, in my opinion, the film somehow appears as a member of Dada. I am wondering whether it is intentional that people were identically robot-like, or it was manipulated to tease on the status quo. Technically, the film was successful in Film form especially literary devices; yet, the content was merely a contemporary work.
I also watched other avant-garde films, such as, Anémic cinema by Duchamp, which he filmed a spinning spiral design intercut with a spinning disc containing French phrases; or Le Retour à la raison (Return to Reason) by Man Ray, which heavily borrowed from Dadaism, and suggested the deconstruction of art itself, was at nearly the heart of Dada ethics. Honestly saying, those films of Dada movement were incredible absurd and meaningless to me; however, it is helpful to watch those experimental surrealistic films to know the process of cinema’s development and practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)