Silence

It is not easy to summarize Masahiro Shinoda's Silence (1971). In a way it's like Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal (1957) if it was set in the 17th century Japan. But that would be a misleading comparison for multiple reasons.

First of all, Silence is not expressionistic at all. Secondly, it is not only about the "silence of God" because Shinoda makes the most of Endo's original novel which criticizes Japan and organized religion as well as exploring a cultural conflict vividly. How does he do that? By telling a story of two Portuguese Catholic priests sneaking into Japan to guide the Japanese Christians in secret, which leads to a long and gruesome aftermath. One might wonder if Shinoda can keep it all together coherently within a single film. He surely manages to do that: the writing is surprisingly fluid in all aspects.

However, the form is not perfect. The jaw-dropping cinematography and powerful editing work well with Takemitsu's musical score, but there are a few irritating inconsistencies. The lighting is odd in the early scenes and the worst offender is the English dialogue. It is written well, but the British actors stumble with it terribly. And it doesn't help a lot when it hasn't even been recorded well. This is a problem when English is used for a third (if not more) of the entire dialogue of the film.

Silence could have become the ultimate clusterfuck of religion, culture and faith if it the glaring flaw had been polished to be less noticable.

Score: 9 out of 10

Love Exposure

I reviewed Sion Sono's Love Exposure (2009) last December after I had seen it for the first time. I finally decided to rewatch the epic 4-hour film now that I own it on DVD. The film doesn't lose even a shred of its tremendous power on a rewatch. The experience of watching the film for the first time was so involving that I mostly forgot to approach it more analytically. During this rewatch I received the chance to fix that and the film still holds up as one of the greatest films I've ever seen.

Essentially Love Exposure is a love story. Try to imagine the most absurd and convoluted love story ever made and make it one that is intensive and interesting for 4 hours - then you are close to understanding what Love Exposure is like. Add outrageously funny jokes, an exploration of religious problems, crossdressing as a serious story device and a lot of other things. Love Exposure explores so many different directions it's a miracle that it is even coherent.

Even though (obsessive/delusive) love is more like a frame story in Love Exposure it is also an important, central subject/theme in the film. As the title suggests the film is about "being exposed to love", but the film adds its own twist to it by exposing love to a few of the most mentally screwed characters of the decade. The conflicts and problems of organized religion are approached via moral corruption and amorality that is guaranteed to disturb anyone. It really tells something about the film's perversive screenplay that panties and hard-ons are used as significant motifs for self-discovery.

Not only does the writing switch constantly between different moods (tangible drama/tragedy & laugh-out-loud comedy), the form is very flexible as well. Visually Sono employs interesting techniques on different occassions: Tarantino-esque editing and camerawork, long take aesthetic, modern shakycam (surprisingly well done in the right context) and even splitscreens. He knows exactly when to pause the chaotic madness and lets the audience catch their breath - and even then the plot marches forward at an insane pace. The soundtrack also reflects the various moods by alternating between Yura Yura Teikoku's charming psychedelic rock and classical music.

Due to its enormous length the film relies a lot on its young cast. Nishijima, Mitsushima and Ando perform superbly - and even though Nishijima does most of the heavy lifting, the ladies steal every scene they are in. Weirdly enough that never distracts the audience because Sono manages to make it feel fitting/justified.

Love Exposure is Sono's magnum opus in all possible ways: it delves into heavy themes while retaining his interest for gore. It's one hell of a tour de force for everyone involved in the production because it is utterly complex yet surprisingly simple and understandable at the same time. It's not only a technical exercise in complexity and absurdity, it's also emotionally involving to the point that it becomes a truly enjoyable catharsis for the viewer.

Score: 10 out of 10

Andrei Rublev

(image source)

Andrei Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev (1966) is a film that blew my mind - and I find it nearly impossible to write a proper review of it. It is something that has to be seen. The questions it raises about art, religion, society and power are profound and intriguing. Tarkovsky's meditative and brilliant form kept me glued to the screen throughout the film. Just go and watch it.

Score: 10 out of 10

The Boondock Saints

Troy Duffy, Troy Duffy what have you done? I've just witnessed one of the worst examples of American trash cinema with a huge cult following. Troy Duffy's The Boondock Saints (1999) is a lousy film which insults the viewer's intelligence. I'll simply call it BS because - strictly speaking - that's the most honest description of it: it's BULLSHIT. FADE INTO BLACK.

Essentially, BS is about two Catholic brothers whose mission is to kill everyone who is 'evil' in the world. FADE INTO BLACK. The world is completely black and white and it never even attempts to question what is evil - instead all drug dealers and criminals must be rotten. All the characters are thinner than paper and mostly they are extreme stereotypes. FADE INTO BLACK. It's as if Troy Duffy believes that "the white people" should uphold justice and kill all "fuckers". FADE INTO BLACK. That reminds of one another god awful aspect in BS: the dialogue. It's completely riddled with the "F" words without any natural use of them. The dialogue is either 1) forced quips which even action movies wouldn't use or 2) utterly pretentious mumblings about religious stuff. FADE INTO BLACK. It even tries to be silly by going all metafictional to justify its use of awful tropes, but it only makes BS worse.

FADE INTO BLACK.

The BS's attempt to glorify the violence is simply stupid. Camera moves in ridiculously showy ways and slow motion is used in every possible place. Add to that the freaking stupid cutting which makes no sense. FADE INTO BLACK. To be serious and cool, it uses both opera music and "cool" music in every possible scene, which makes BS all the more terrible. FADE INTO BLACK.

If you think BS is ridiculous, just wait for the ending which makes the whole film even SILLIER. The pseudo-documentarian clip at the very end is horrible. FADE INTO BLACK. You can think of it as a way to make the film a satire, but what's the use when you have done everything possible to make the audience think otherwise? The director has already had fun with the action scenes and the pretentious religious and racistic bullshit, then he supposedly becomes serious and show that the Americans' sense of justice is terrible. That's only one assumption. FADE INTO BLACK. You can also take it as a continuation for the whole tirade about getting rid of "evil" people. It seems as if the writer wanted to justify the film's message with pseudo-real statements.

Troy Duffy seemed to be eager to replicate Tarantino to portray his idea of justice and people in an "entertaining" way. Yet both his form and content are simply terrible even when compared to Tarantino. In the end, BS is a poor man's Tarantino film. The only good thing about it is Willem Dafoe's magnificent performance as the wild detective.

Score: 2 out of 10

PS: FADE INTO BLACK.

Love Exposure

At first, I'm going to warn you about this review: it's not probably going to be coherent because it's more like a recollection of my viewing experience than a good review. I apologise in advance for the possible inconvenience caused by the review.

Sion Sono's Love Exposure (2008) is a long film. Its length is around 4 hours. Describing the film is nigh-impossible because it touches on so many things and one could say it has "too much of everything". Yet, it works flawlessly. Love. Religion. Family. School. Society. Delusion. Obsession. Perversion. Crossdressing. Sexuality.

During the first 10 minutes, the film provides us with 3 major characters (not the only major characters though) in a dense introduction. After that, all hell breaks loose already. Try to imagine the most wonderful and funniest farce you've ever seen. For me, that was Visitor Q's last 15 minutes. Love Exposure is even funnier than that - for the first hour and a half. It is so tongue-in-cheek about everything. The plot becomes quite complicated - although completely comprehensible all the time - and I have to admit I have never ever laughed as much as I did during the farcical period.

After laughing very, very hard I did not expect what was coming. I was trolled really hard as the film became serious yet it still retained its cartoonish tone at the same time. For a moment, I was utterly lost and felt disappointed, but then I realised how Sono had trolled me completely. Before I got used to the change of tone, I was completely mindfucked by the film. The flick was so intense that it grabbed me from my balls and just kept throwing me around for ages. That was the point when I realised how the film had me think and attacked my world view in a way only Neon Genesis Evangelion had done to me.

After the initial reaction to the mindfuck, things became a bit smoother for a while - until the film made me weep. The utter sadness was only interrupted by one laugh-out-loud moment, but the ending really tied it all together somehow. While the film was very depressive most of the time - or at least seemed so under its playful mood - the ending was extremely uplifting. The cathartic impact is undeniable for the film is life-affirming beyond comprehension.

While it is possible to doubt its content by looking at its narrative which seems unnecessarily complex, it would be simply dumb to criticize the film for that. It never failed to impress me despite its possible weaknesses and the power of its complicated structure is harrowing. Sono's editing is quite frantic most of the time, but it is never distracting. It builds up more and more tension as the film goes on - and releases in a few glorious moments. And when it does calm down for a moment, it is even more intensive. In those moments Sono leaves the film on the shoulders of the actors - and it is even more powerful that way.

Speaking of acting, the performances are pitch-perfect in the film. How is it possible to have 3 perfect tour de force performances in one film? Especially Hikari Mitsushima's performance as Yoko is haunting and magnificent.

The soundtrack for the film is baffling. It ranges from classical Western music to J-Pop. Sono's use of Ravel's Bolero is heart-rending and unforgettable.

How is it even possible to craft such a solid and perfect entirety out of such bizarre and diverse elements? Love Exposure has proved me cinema can go further than I believe. Now I'm afraid I might not like it as much when I rewatch it, but I'll leave that for later.

Score: 10 out of 10

A Conversation with God

I happened to find Tsai Ming-liang's rare short film, A Conversation with God (2001), on YouTube. I decided to watch it because I'm very interested in Tsai's filmography. He made this short film while working on What Time Is It There? (2002), and I guess it is about religious rituals. The short film is put together from documentary footage that Tsai has shot on his own, it seems. There is hardly any coherency in the film. We have shots of a religious ritual, a stripper's performance, lots of dead fish and yet another religious ritual, the purpose of which couldnt be understood. I'm not wondering why Tsai hasnt put a lot of effort into this film because it seems to me that he simply took his camera and wanted to shoot something and experiment with it. All these different scenes/sections/sequences are separated by shots of white tunnels. It gives the film a clear structure and rhythm so that it is a little easier to follow. There is nothing redeeming in the form either. It is a simple point-and-shoot film, with no effort put into the form. The rating might sound horrible, but it wasnt a waste of 30 minutes for me though. Whatever Tsai does, I'll do my best to watch it.

Score: 2 out of 10