Fourth

The Five Obstructions by Lars von Trier & Jørgen Leth

What makes a mentor? A teacher? An ‘idolized figure’? What makes art artistic?

The movie The Five Obstructions gives us a deep look and understanding of a mentor and mentee relationship. The story begins with Lars von Trier asking his friend and mentor Jørgen Leth to recreate and imagine Leth’s famous short, The Perfect Human in von Trier’s terms creating five obstructions that he must have to comply with. The beginning was all fun and games, von Trier giving the most random yet somehow meticulous instructions such as filming the scene in Cuba or make it into a cartoon. The different obstructions were unique in its own way as the film split between showing scenes from the original shirt film The Perfect Human with the new creations that Leth has created. All very weird that I may not be too much of an intellectual to understand but I’d like to think that this was created just for art. So in that case it was merely art for art’s sake. It made me want to watch The Perfect Human by its own without any cuts because I wanted to see how it actually flowed. To at least try and understand the true basis from where the documentary and von Trier’s obstructions were coming from. Would it have been a difference? Would it have changed my perception of the documentary itself if I had watched it before The Five Obstructions? All these obstructions made me question what truly is art and how it is made. Did The Perfect Human become more special or unique with these obstructions or should it have been left alone and let the short film speak for itself?

But what really struck me was the fifth and final obstruction. How it felt as if von Trier was actually the mentor in all this and Leth the mentee. In the beginning it was clear to me that von Trier is technically the mastermind in all this. When Leth had made a mistake in one of the obstructions, von Trier insisted that he must go back and do it again. During the documentary I felt as if their relationship although friendly on the outside, there was a strained relationship between them. I felt there were times that Leth did not want to do it yet von Trier kept insisting and so Leth did it. They did not really give any context as to why they did this experiment in the first place so for me it made it all more confusing because there weren’t any great incentives to what Leth was doing for von Trier.

At the end, I think the real take away I got from the documentary is that these mentors, the people that we look up to and idolize do not always have the answers to everything. We learn through them and with them as well. Sometimes these students can also give outputs and ideas that turn out to be better and there is nothing wrong with that. They have created their own masterpieces with the help of their own mentors but can also speak for itself.

Third

L’Avventura by Michelangelo Antonioni

L’avventura weaves a tale of finding yourself through lust and within people. We are thrust into a world where the characters are all simply wanting more to their lives. Wanting, needing for a change, to escape. The first 30 or so minutes helped establish the characters especially Anna. Anna who seems to be in a limbo of sorts especially in her relationships. In the beginning with her strained relationship with her father, her relationship with her lover, Sandro which based from her character showed how she has been slowly building a wall in their relationship. She complains about wanting to be alone yet also wanting to still be with him. Her final scene with Sandro became her “wake up call” of sorts to finally go on her own adventure and we never see her again. Anna’s adventure was never really for us to see. Claudia and Sandro’s first scene shocked me because other than the fact that they shared a kiss (although strained and it also confused me how they only met three days prior. From this, it can be seen how dependent and needy Sandro to have a woman by his side 24/7. He always seems to try and present to the women he pursues as charming, waxing poetically about how much he is willing to sacrifice for them. In the end it never really became trying to find and rescue Anna but the back and forth relationship of Anna and Sandro.

The view of women in the movie presents them as objects to the male gaze. A very traditional way viewing female characters that has been a on going problem as well in media. Women seen like Gloria Perkins for example. A writer yet is flocked by men not for her writing but simply because she tore her skirt which showed a hint of her undergarments and her natural beauty. Not much was known about her and she even has sex with Sandro on a couch. The movie itself is highly romanticized. Women are captured in a way that makes you see their beauty through the frames.

This movie for me was kind of hard to watch as it was quite dragging at times and the plot was not really my type. The characters especially Sandro were quite annoying (as men usually are). At the end, I may not have enjoyed the plot as much but the way the movie was filmed was absolutely breathtaking. the sprawling mountains and the vast ocean created a great atmosphere for the movie and helped to elevate the boundless emotions and problems within the characters themselves. The black and white of the movie was something I did not mind as well.

Second

Persona by Ingmar Berman

A nurse and an actress. Different fields of work yet brought together by the same need for escape and peace. At the core of it, they are both just human. Just as the first shots show, watching the beginning of the of Persona, I started off with a lot of questions, the random string of images; A penis, guts spilling out, a hand being nailed, and a view of a spider from below. What would any of these have in common? How are these images connected to the movie itself? I was very confused with everything and I could not really understand why it unsettled me so much. Although it did remind me of the movie Fight Club when the penis appeared and how Tyler Durden places it in the middle of the film slices as to confuse and disturb viewers. After these images, the entire movie (which was presented in black and white) created an environment that both gave an avenue for great performances from both actresses who played the principle roles who were named Anna and Elisabeth. I think it would not have the same effect if it were not in black and white because somehow it could present to us the contrast of these characters but are both colors are needed to create the story, Together hand in hand.

Anna being the nurse portrayed a typical care taker towards Elisabeth. Elisabeth on the other hand after her sudden and abrupt change in attitude, of her not wanting to speak was a great contrast to the fact she is an actress who is supposed to be known for her expressions and emotions tried to avoid the one thing she is supposed to do. As the movie progressed I continued asking more questions, what does it mean to be a person? To have to be your own unique self and be free to have your own story? Once both of them were isolated in the beach house, away from modernity, we find ourselves somewhat disturbed and trapped by the conversations and images presented by the movie and its characters. What was once supposed to be freeing was then a spiral into the craziness of the human psyche. Not much action is needed with Anna’s intense dialogues with Elisabeth (that become monologues instead). There is beauty in the silence as well but every line is calculated, presenting the slow madness that consumes the both of them

The film confused me especially during the last few minutes. It was as if Anna and Elisabeth were suddenly becoming one. Just as in the posters of the movie itself, the characters seem to have merged together or to be two connected pieces to that one puzzle. Overall, this was quite an enjoyable movie and something I would watch again. The way it was all kinds of disturbing and for me is what films should be, to be molded into becoming art pieces in each frame. It leaves you confused yet at the same time wanting more, to delve deeper into each character and their stories.

First

A Woman is a Woman by Jean-Luc Godard

When our professor explained that this would be the first movie that we would watch, talking about how the plot was on a woman (a prostitute nonetheless) who wanted to get pregnant, yet her husband did not want a child (so she slept with someone else) was kind of easy to understand. A “neorealism musical” was a heavy term to swallow right off the bat. The musical part I got but neorealism? A modified form of reality? I have never watched a movie that would present itself as ‘neorealist’ At first thought, okay? so what? What would be so special about this movie that it would make it the very first movie we would watch on a class on European Films? The plot was not anything about Europe as a culture or something that was specific to just the continent. It was a story I could see anywhere else, why would we have to watch this one specifically? But then the first few minutes started, and I realized I had no idea what I was talking about at all.

The beginning was loud. Big fonts that took up the entire screen with bright colours, presenting the actors, the director, producers, and the like. It was all very theatrical. And upon us meeting the protagonist, Angela, she herself was wearing white, seemingly standing out against the other people around her. As the film progressed I realized how different and divergent it was from the usual films that I have watched in the past. Full of random fourth wall breaking, cuts in the musical score when Angela would be talking on the phone with her husband, Emile, to a magical door that when walking through it would mean an automatic change of clothes. The movie turns into more than just a string of scenes telling a story, but it becomes a piece of moving art. Not to say that most movies are not art itself but there was a way in which the movie created the scenes, the score, the dialogue (or even the lack here of), the colours used, everything was important to make the story a visual spectacle for the viewer.

What made me love the movie in the end were the last few scenes. After realizing that Angela has slept with someone else, Emile (with Angela’s help) decide to have sex as to perhaps cancel out the fact that she may be having someone else’s baby. They realized how great of a plan this is until after Emile finally realizes that Angela tricked him into finally having a baby. “Damn you, woman,” Emile says. “Not damn me, but dame me,” Angela replies and faces to the audience to wink at the camera. That last scene for me helped wrap up the entire movie and helped encompass the title of the movie, A woman is a woman. A woman who knows what she wants in life and how to get it no matter what the cost. A woman is a woman. What else can she be?