the narration


I loved most of this movie. But the narration!!!! Ugh!!!!

1, It shatters the tone set by the lack of dialogue elsehwere.

2, More significantly, its only real function is to help the audience understand what's happening. ("This is her FATHER" or "This is IN HER MIND"). Which in turn...

3, Is condescending to the audience (you are too dumb to figure this out yourself, aren't you?).

4, Does not display a lot of confidence in its own ability to communicate ideas implicitly.

And 5, Removes a lot of potential for interpretation / discussion, since it outright tells you what's happening in what could have been an ambiguous scene.

My only guess is that it was submitted without the narration, but some test screeners were confused, and the studio made them add it in or something. (Kind of like what happened with the intro of Dark City.)

Ugh!!!!! Huge mar on an otherwise great film.


Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/and the feeelin's right/Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/what a fight

reply

I agree 100.100%. It's like trying to appreciate a work of art by Salvador Dali or M. C. Escher, only to find that someone scrawled explanations all over it in permanent marker.

I really wish I could find a copy of the original unnarrated version of the film to watch, but so far I haven't had any luck.

A Superman without trunks isn't worth watching or reading about.

reply

I read in "Incredibly Strange Films" (or was it "The Psychotronic Encyclopedia of Film?") that the ham-fisted narration was provided by none other than Mister Tonight Show himself, one Ed McMahan!!!

reply

It's on YouTube without the Ed McMahon narration, which was added (along with a few edit cuts) because the Powers That Be decided it was otherwise too weird and confusing.

reply

Dementia is the version without narration and it plays much better. The narration begs to be made fun of.

reply

The version with narration is basically not even the same film, it's like watching an animated version of The Godfather or something.

reply