After I watching Ingmar Bergman’s film, Persona, I was initially quite disturbed with the opening scenes of the film. I thought that this feeling would subside once the plot progressed but the movie just heightened this feeling all the more. I find it difficult to explain what actually happened since I was skeptical how the events played out. It was hard to discern the chronological order of the movie. There were scenes wherein it seemed to be part of a memory but in some cases it seemed to be what was actually going on. Though, it made me wonder if all of this was only happening in their minds (or at least only in Elisabet’s mind) I consider the film as a horror or thriller movie because overall the contents and events that transpired had some eerie vibe into it. The fact that this film contains this vibe made me anticipate for situations that would shock me but some scenes just left me baffled.

As previously mentioned, Persona mostly contained unusual images which was evident already from the beginning.  Though the dynamic of the two main characters made me ponder how the director tried to build and destruct each one’s persona. The names of the characters were Elisabet and Alma. The former was an actress who suddenly did not speak with others but remained to interact with others by doing eye contact and using her body language. She was a patient, which seemed  to be in a psychiatric ward. The latter portrayed as Elisebet’s personal nurse. Instead of staying in the ward, they went to a vacation house where Alma ended up opening up to Elisabet about her past experiences.

Their relationship seemed to be odd, I could not fully grasp how they perceived each other since there were scenes where they were best buddies but later on Alma getting frustrated with her and shouted at her. What confused me was a scene wherein she read a letter that Elisabet wrote for her doctor to get updates. Apparently, according to that letter Alma was the one being studied by them. I started to question was Alma the one who had mental issues or was it both of them. Another scene which further disoriented me was when the husband referred to Alma as Elisabet. From then on, I started to interpret that possibly the two main characters was essentially one person who has an issue with having a split personality. That is why this particular woman turns her persona into either Alma or Elisabet . (That’s just my theory after watching the film.)

It can be implied that this movie requires the audience mental capacity to reflect about the events happening in the film. They have to process and I guess come up with their own interpretations that may be similar to what writers wanted or not. From what I did, pondering about the film despite leaving me feeling disturbed at first helped me understand what happened and get rid of this feeling.

Raw, honest, truthful. This is L’Avventura in three words, for me. The Italian film was easy on the eyes, just as its characters were. The meat of the film delved with the complexity and limitless capacity of love to push people to move, act, and bend in ways one would never have thought of. As someone who has never been in the position of Claudia, I found it odd that I am able to relate to her plight to a certain extent. It was unsettling. My objective self would think that the film is romanticizing cheating and diminishes the value of loyalty. However, I also understood where the two characters came from. It wouldn’t normally make sense to me how one would be able to forgive a partner who cannot say he loves her properly and fully, a partner who cheats, but after this, I now see how love is not as easy as we perceive it to be. Maybe it is possible to forgive someone despite the pain, if you truly love the person—and perhaps there is nothing wrong with that. I don’t even know, honestly. I can’t judge Claudia and Sandro. I can only say that they were honest in depicting love and that the movie unfolded ever so beautifully, that such sensitive topic became easy to consume with an open heart. Props to the writers and the actors. The 2 hours and 23 minutes of L’Avventura was quite an adventure indeed.

Persona still haunts me weeks after viewing it. The 1966 psychological film has a twisted way of arousing feelings and emotions from the viewer, almost similar [but not quite] to how horror films utilize images, sounds, and scene shifts. As I watched the movie, I found myself feeling on guard, anticipating a jump scare or a shocking event to take place in between the lingering silences and quietness of the movie. The film gave me a sense of anxiousness, making me feel like quitting the viewing while also making me anticipate what is supposed to happen next. The characters were so dynamic, especially the two female leads (the actress and the woman taking care of her). Their isolation highlighted the contrast of their personalities. The actress attentively and eerily listened, her silence deafening, while the other woman showed vulnerability so much so that I felt scared for her. The actress was unpredictable, her stares filled with secrets and dangerous, even sexual intentions. Meanwhile, the woman taking care of her seemed to be bending and adapting to the way the actress silently manipulates her into talking. It was mind-boggling. To be honest, I did not really make sense of the film in its entirety but it did make sense. To me, it’s ass if they were taking on ‘masks’—personas—that makes them think, feel, and act in very unpredictable ways. Technically speaking, the play of shadows and silhouettes in black and white stood out for me. The scenes were simple but the way they were framed and captured added to the psychedelic, twisted effect that leaves the audience clamoring for more. Personally, I do not like rewatching films, but this one is an exception for I feel like every time you watch it, there is a new meaning you just ought to discover.

153726

To say that “A woman is a woman” is a feminist movie is to undermine the complexity of this film. Godard’s carefully crafted cinematic masterpiece is not something that would strike you as very interesting right out, but it has a particular hook—the kind that makes you wait patiently for when the film is going to pick up its pace. Now, it was mentioned that this film is a musical. Knowing that, a lot of people would expect dramatic musical scores anchoring the plot and continuous episodes where actors erupt into chorus throughout the film. But “A woman is a woman” shied away from that. Instead of being disruptive and sudden, the ‘musical’ aspect of the film underscored the sudden silences and pauses of music. This rather ingenious way of playing with music highlighted the moments where the character seemed to be viewed from a third person perspective, moments where Angela was vulnerable, moments where you just know something significant is about to happen. 

153726

Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’Avventura is not your typical love story wherein the rich woman marries the rich man and they live happily ever after, no. The movie was actually quite far from that, which may have also been the reason as to why I surprisingly found this movie very interesting. The title L’Avventura or “the adventure” in English narrates that there will be a certain mystery to the film that the characters will have to deal with. I quickly assumed that they will all be stuck in a remote island filled with trees and killer creatures that will slowly take the life of each character one by one. I was wrong. Instead of an island filled with exotic plants and creatures, they were in an island filled with nothing but rocks. Even a shore wasn’t present in that island. At that certain point, my expectations for the film lowered since it turned out to be pretty dull in the middle parts of the film.

The black and white cinematography of the film shows the classic and sophisticated style of film that European authors and directors are known for. Along side with the visuals of the movie, the script-writing was also a factor as to why this movie can be difficult for regular film viewers to understand. This film does not have that much climax, rise and even a fall to its plot. Not much emotion was shown which is a little ironic since the title is about adventure. After trying to grasp the message that the director may want to exhibit to his audience, the biggest question I had in my head was “This is the adventure of which character?”. This was the question I kept on asking myself since the movie started with Anna saying goodbye to her father, which then move to her and her lover Sandro talking about their life together. After her disappearance, the story quickly revolved on Anna’s best friend Claudia who Sandro started to be attracted to.

In summary, I am not quite sure if I enjoyed the movie or feel disappointed (especially with the ending) with the film. I really found the visuals and the character very appealing especially with the 1960’s feel in Italy. However, with the film’s plot and how the story lacked progression, I found it to be a little bland.

 

What if the shoe did not fit Cinderella’s feet and was doomed to spend her life with her evil sisters? What if Dorothy never found her way home from the magical land of Oz? What if Harry did not bump into Sally anymore?

Hollywood cinema has constantly presented to us an orthodox equation of a film in its combination of elements and themes. The cinematic world is accustomed to follow the norms that should come into play in a typical film. We have already acquainted ourselves with these norms as we already search for them even at the very start of the film. We expect the cinematic universe to follow a linear and comprehensive plot which provides a problem and resolution at the end of the film. But, that is not always the case, especially with Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’avventura. 

At the start of the film Michelangelo Antonioni introduces us to a romantic relationship between Sandro and his girlfriend, Anna, as they off to go on a cruise off the coast of Sicily. As the yacht comes to a stop at a volcanic island, Anna takes a walk and was never seen again. At this point, Antonioni catches us off guard from the abrupt change in plot. What seemed to be a love story turns into a mystery as the same recurring question continues to resurface in our head, “where is Anna?”. An extensive search was conducted by the rest of the characters in the film, yet she was never found. If a linear plot were to follow this film, it would have focused on a mysterious search for Anna, looking for clues on her disappearance. But Anna’s disappearance only paved the way for another turn of events and scenarios of Antonioni’s film that will come into play. In fact, Anna’s disappearance gave the film an opportunity to progress the story further. Which, in return, lead to the love story between Claudia and Sandro.

The tables have turned at this point of the film when the missing Anna has been forgotten by the characters. Here, Antonioni puts focus on the romantic relationship between Claudia and Sandro. But, at that point of the film, in the back of our mind, we still wonder about the whereabouts of Anna as she still seems to be missing. Whether we admit it or not, we are still waiting for her to pop out of the scene and catch Claudia and Sandro in the act. Instead, the film ended without a conclusion or solution as to where Anna was. 

The element of unpredictability of Antonioni’s film caught us off guard. It may have been racking our own brains at the end of the film as we are left with a puzzle that is missing one last piece. The unconventionalism of the film introduced us to what they would call “anti-cinema”. L’avventura can be considered as an anti-cinematic film that does not provide a resolution to the problem in the ending, nor did it solve the mystery of how Anna went missing. Antonioni seemed to provide us with merely a distraction thinking what we think this film was going to be about which only made the plot unforeseeable.

Romantic movies never really appealed to me, new or old. Perhaps the only romantic films I’ve genuinely enjoyed have only ever been romantic stories in the context of a larger genre or theme – an action movie, a musical, etc. Furthermore, I’ve always had an aversion to movies that depict infidelity, as they often border on its glorification. Perhaps these prior personal opinions are what gave me my initial reservations throughout the course of the film.

Nonetheless, L’Aaventura embodied European Cinema at its finest once more – though it may not be as avant garde nor ostentatiously “weird” or “odd” as its counterparts e..g., the films we’ve seen in this class prior, it nonetheless portrayed, in a more subtle way, especially with regards to narrativity, and perhaps the slow pacing of the plot.

First and foremost, the film is, quite obviously, not an adventure about the search for Anna – she is barely mentioned. The adventure could be interpreted in a multiplicity of ways exploring a variety of different themes – is it the adventure in the progression of Sandro and Claudia’s relationship? An adventure into the exploration of the bastardry of cheating men and men in general? An adventure into the aftermath of Anna’s disappearance, an exploration into the relationships she has and how little it seems everyone seems to care about her – the shallowness of human relationships, the finite nature of commitment and fidelity to girlfriend, friend, or acquantace? Is it a testament to human shallowness and how easy it is for us to forget? The only person who seems to give a damn is her best friend Claudia. And yet even the strength of her commitment to Anna is tried, tested, and has its own perceivable flaws.

La’aventura is not exactly a love story, rather, a story of sexual desire. The storyline was both simple and simultaneously complicated in its ambiguity, rendering some viewers perhaps even frustrated at the lack of “huge” events or at least a single narrative that binds the entire story together. We initially are led to believe that the film is about Anna and “The Adventure” is about their search for her, but the character of Anna ultimately regresses into the background and we transition to the story of Sandro and Claudia, who intermittently mention Anna, with Claudia’s character finally coming into the foreground as she transitions from minor character to a character whose relationship with Sandro becomes the plot that creates the main storyline. It is important to note here that it seems like she is the sole person who still gives a damn, and this is perhaps what makes her character rather likeable as opposed to the others towards whom I personally felt no affliction or feeling. While we are introduced to Anna at the very beginning of the film, she disappears, and we never get any closure whatsoever as to her disappearance. What, then, is this story about?

Another break of expected plotlines here occurs in the location. Antonioni’s films have the quality of being rather languid, and slow. Here, there are so many things going on, and yet none of it occurs on the island where Anna disappears.

Nonetheless, the film is striking. It can be even be likened to a silent film. While there is no sense of closure, there is always something about the gestures of the characters, the smoothness of their movements and the transitions in their interactions, that speak volumes. There are even certain points in the film wherein we seem to be intruding upon the characters (e.g., the window scene) moments meant to be private and intimate are filmed in such a way that is seems like the director wants us to actively feel this as if we are imposing on an actual moment – as if we are intruders instead of film viewers.

Relating the film to A Woman is a Woman and Persona, the three are all classified as Art cinema, and yet are all so distinctly different. There is a need to focus on their narratives, and how these narratives are portrayed on screen, all of which offer a distinct type of viewing experience.

However, again European film and film does not rely solely on its story to project what it aims to portray and send out into the world – L’Aaventura was Art because it was untraditional in its on-screen portrayal and plotting. Despite its incongruity and moments of languidity that sometimes make it difficult to watch, the beauty of it is that it manages to keep your attention, and despite not feeling invested in any of the characters, and despite our propensity to hate them all, we continue watching. And watching. Despite the closure that never comes.

As I would expect from most European films, L’Avventura is also not one of your typical love stories. Despite the film being dragging, that aspect of the film was able to add to the underlying meaning it was trying to convey.

The film begins with showing Anna, along with her best friend, Claudia, on her way to her boyfriend, Sandro. The two ladies met up with Sandro for a planned cruise trip together with other seemingly wealthy couples. In the beginning of the film, all would most likely perceive Anna to be the main female protagonist, but, surprisingly, things would quickly change later on. Before and during their cruise trip, Anna showed multiple signs of her disappointment in her relationship with Sandro and hey had another argument during one of their island stops. Then out of the blue, Anna disappears. Anna’s cruise companions, and even marshals from the main island, searched for her a number of times, all of which ended up in failures. They tried all possibly ways to find her, but they were never able to even until the end of the film.

Given the disappearance of Anna, L’Avventura was expected to be film about searching for Anna and being able to find her in the end. Notably, the director, Michelangelo Antonioni, decided to steer away from this assumed plot. Anna’s disappearance created a long-lasting suspense for the film that helped keep the audience captivated. This is the first time I have seen a film wherein the anticipated lead of a film suddenly just vanishes, showing zero signs of her presence as the film progressed. Shortly after Anna’s disappearance, there was a new development occurring between some of her companions. Sandro showed signs of feeling something for Claudia even when they were searching for his very own missing girlfriend. At first, Claudia resisted Sandro’s signals, but that did not last for long. The two were portrayed to have a lot more intimate scenes during the latter parts of the film while still searching for only reason they met each other in the first place. One thing led to another and the two started falling deeply in love with each other. Eventually, the two completely forgot about Anna to the point that they were having conversations about getting married.

Claudia and Sandro ended up being the main characters of this story, throwing Anna overboard. Initially just being in the sidelines, Claudia bumped Anna out of Sandro’s thoughts. In the film, Claudia mentioned something about change happening so easily and simply being accepted. I believe that is the main theme the film is trying to portray and it was able to do it pleasantly. Aside from Anna’s literal disappearance, it was noticeable how she also disappeared from the minds of everyone else moving forward. Scenes where shown wherein people would already just joke about her disappearance. Of course, this “second disappearance” of Anna was also seen with how Claudia and Sandra developed.

In the end, despite not having a theme which most would not abide to in today’s time, I was able to see how Antionio was amusingly able to execute it for the audience’s delight. Although change is needed, the L’Avventura is not a typical story due to it showing that change is easily accepted without having to look back at what was there before.