MovieChat Forums > L'avventura (1961) Discussion > Complete waste of time

Complete waste of time

posted 17 years ago by robi1138-1
38 replies | jump to latest

Let me qualify two things before I support my opinion:

1. I love (and appreciate) "film-as-art" films. IMHO, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Apocalypse Now, Magnolia, Eyes Wide Shut, 8 1/2, and almost any film by Kurosawa or Zhang Yimou are some of my favorite films.

2. I did not finish watching this film...I only made it through about an hour and a half.

My first qualification is written simply to emphasize that I am a fan of film and do not deride something as "boring" simply because i don't understand the deeper meaning of a film. My second qualification is included because I have not finished the film and really shouldn't be offering my opinion on it...but of course, I will.

For any film to be successful, you have to have some type of connection with the character (even if he is evil, despicable, etc.) In M, the main character is a child molester whose pursuit by the law is compelling, but he is an empathetic character (to whatever degree) and this lends weight to the movie. Even if he wasn't, the hunt for him makes an interesting film. Dave Bowman (in 2001) is neither a sympathetic character nor a villain. He is quite emotionless throughout the film but there is still a connection made with the audience due to his predicament and the larger picture Kubrick is painting.

L'Avventura, on the other hand, is simply a picture about annoying, petty people...nothing more. It's arguable if the film is "wonderfully shot" (as I have read)...personally I found it to be adequate...neither wonderful nor pedestrian. The direction is better than average but not mind-blowing either.
So what is left? The story: a disappearance that doesn't get solved. That's fine by me if Antonioni has a higher purpose than simply depicting a mystery. Apparently he does, from what I've read. To sum it up succinctly: money can't buy you love and the decline of morals in 1960's society.

Is this message potrayed adequately? IMHO, not at all. In order to see this point, one must have some empathy towards the characters. Unfortunately, every single character in this film is a shallow, self-absorbed, a**hole (for lack of a more appropriate term). If they are meant to represent the lack of morals in 1960's society, they do a grand job. Does this make the film entertaining, thought-provoking, deep, and/or compelling? Absolutely not. I've never cared less about characters and what happens to them then I did in this film.

Very often films require multiple viewings to fully understand the whole picture being painted. Just as often films are devoid of anything interesting or entertaining on any level. This film falls into that latter category.

ADDED: Just wanted to add that now that I've seen La Dolce Vita (a film about similar topics) that L'Avventura appears even worse than before. La Dolce Vita is a far more interesting, artistic, and appealling take on similar subject matter (though it is a bit long).

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] velvet_virginia 17 years ago

Yeah, you should have finished it. I generally disregard reviews written by people that did not actually watch the film in its entirety.

[–] tieman64 17 years ago

"I love (and appreciate) "film-as-art" films. IMHO, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Apocalypse Now, Magnolia, Eyes Wide Shut, 8 1/2, and almost any film by Kurosawa or Zhang Yimou are some of my favorite films."

The films you listed, though, can be appreciated on a superficial level without having to understand them. They have mainstream audiences in mind. Antonioni, however, is much more difficult. Unless you completely empathise or understand what he's trying to convey, there's nothing superficially entertaining for you to latch onto.

"2. I did not finish watching this film...I only made it through about an hour and a half."

That's normal. The first time I saw it, I switched off after 10 minutes. Maybe you should watch it in 30 minute chunks, and give yourself time to think about what you've just seen. You have to be in the right mood for this film. You have to put some thought into it and really feel what it's trying to convey. If you don't empathise or understand what the characters are feeling, this film does not work.

"L'Avventura, on the other hand, is simply a picture about annoying, petty people...nothing more."

The film is not about "immoral rich people". These rich people simply have the time to fully contemplate their lives. For example, later in the film we see a couple who run a pharmacy. Their marriage is a wreck, but they're busy tending to their store. Free from their routines and their basic needs (shelter, income, food etc), they'd probably find themselves in an existential nightmare too.

"Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown."

[–] Bonifacij 16 years ago

"Maybe you should watch it in 30 minute chunks"

that is a terrible idea. You cant chop up its mood into pieces. See the film the way it was meant to be seen.

[–] chopper-9 9 years ago

I don't disagree with you but I have not had the time to watch a movie in it's entirety for quite a long time. I have been forced by circumstance to watch this in 45 minute chunks. As such I am two thirds of the way through and am loving it. Better to watch it in chunks than not at all.

"Never eat yellow snow" 

[–] MTulliver 16 years ago

I have to agree w. you. I only made it through an hour, and even that was pushing it. I have no problem w. films that are "different", either...this one just bored me out of my mind.
I didn't feel a connection w. any of the characters so I didn't really care to see what happened, either.
I actually found some of the shots to be overly long.
I was surprised to see that it has almost 8 stars here, frankly.

[–] tieman64 16 years ago

"that is a terrible idea. You cant chop up its mood into pieces. See the film the way it was meant to be seen"

I agree, but how else do you get someone to get into an Antonioni film? Most people haven't been to the places Antonioni's films dwell in. It takes a very specific personality trait to fully get what he's doing.

"Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown."

[–] Bonifacij 16 years ago

Perhaps some shouldn't get into it, yet. Maybe the will see it in a different light later in life.

"Most people haven't been to the places Antonioni's films dwell in".

I think Antonioni's message applies to all of us, and the "place" you mention is inescapable for modern man, no matter if he is as rich as the countess or as miserable as the pharmacist and his wife. Sure some can ignore or deny it. Perhaps some lack introspective and dont notice it in themselves. But it is there

[–] tieman64 16 years ago

"I think Antonioni's message applies to all of us, and the "place" you mention is inescapable for modern man, no matter if he is as rich as the countess or as miserable as the pharmacist and his wife. Sure some can ignore or deny it. Perhaps some lack introspective and dont notice it in themselves. But it is there."

Yeah, and the lack of that kind of introspection is a survival trait as well. We're genetically predisposed to not thing about these things.

Antonioni himself was born into a very well to do family, and unless I'm mistaken, he had no wife or children either.

"Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown."

[–] cinesteam 11 years ago

Antonioni was married to Monica Vitti for a while.

[–] Bonifacij 16 years ago

"To sum it up succinctly: money can't buy you love and the decline of morals in 1960's society."

Thats not what the film is about. 1. It has nothing to do with money. Money is only used to make a point. Most of us have no time to think about what we really need or want because our jobs (staying alive) keep us busy for the most part of our lives. Only those who dont have to work at all can be used to show what is left of our human nature, once survival is guaranteed. 2. Once the shift turns to sex/love you can see that the conflict of morals/values has nothing to do with the sixties in particular, but to modern man in general. And there is no decline of morals, they are still there, fundamentally unchanged since the time evolution shaped the first Hominae into social animals with conscience. It is only now, in the age of reason and science that we can observe these morals/values for what they are: incomplete, contradictory, inapplicable and dare I say it... obsolete.

You completely misunderstood the film

[–] william_pnsn 16 years ago

Lucky for you, and for me as well, there is a wonderful commentary with the Criterion Collection DVD that really helps with understanding why this film is so highly regarded.

When I first viewed it I felt that the movie was uneventful to say the least, but after watching the commentary, learning what techniques, methods, motifs, and other elements to look for, then watching it again, I found it much more enjoyable. I don't know if I would give it a 10, but a 9 certainly, or even a 9.5.

This is one of the most subtly beautiful movies I've ever seen. There is a ton of emotional depth, and most of it is tied in with the techniques and composition of every scene, instead of being outwardly expressed by dialog or action. I can see why people think Sandro is a shallow and pathetic character, although I think he's aware of his problems to some degree and is emotionally distressed, but Claudia is a sympathetic character. I think she's struggling with the pull of this lifestyle that Sandro leads, and at the same time she is growing in to herself and is becoming more free and independent.

But yeah, watch the whole film, then the commentary, then watch the film again, maybe even with subtitles off so you can focus on the images. The commentary also lays out some of the ideas and themes to look for in the rest of the trilogy, so if you ever come around to it La Notte and L'ecclise should make more sense as well.

[–] robi1138-1 16 years ago

First I'd like to say thank you for not ripping me a new one...not having finished the film is a big no-no in film criticism but I truly found myself bored beyond caring. Thankfully there don't seem to be many trolls who actually watch L'Avventura so I appreciate all your comments. I haven't responded (I normally do when I write a long post) but I still haven't watched the end of the film. I do intend to but I've been distracted by other (generally much stupider) films I own and still haven't watched.

Anyway, thanks again for the comments and when I do re-watch the film, I'll post my remarks here.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Don_Farshido 16 years ago

I think with L'avventura it's the same story with every viewer, the viewer back then as the modern viewer now.

It's nearly impossible to grasp its beauty when you see it only once. I was already an Antonioni-Fan and considered L'eclisse one of the greatest of all films before seeing this one, and I was almost ashamed at how little I felt for it. It doesn't look that mind-blowing the first time.

But in the second time you'll realize how many secrets one can find at every corner, how mysterious, how emotional, and how mind-blowing that film is. I don't have time to go into detail, but it absolutely doesn't matter how many other "difficult" directors one knows or how many post-L'avventura art-films one already has seen, every great director can be understood only at his own terms. Fellini is different, and "La Dolce Vita" cannot help you understanding L'avventura in this case ("topics" do not matter, style and the specific way of storytelling is what matters in our reception of such works).

And the direction IS mind-blowing and unlike anything before or anything ever since. Monica Vitti opening the window of the small cabin on the island and the morning sun at the far end of the horizon, just at the verge of sight, shining into her eyes does not serve any clear narrative purpose, but is so hauntingly spiritual and beatiful that you'll never forget it once you begin to realize what you have seen. The final scene is breathtaking.

I'd say that L'avventura is more a challenge than an adventure at first sight, a greater challenge than most art films, but it will fulfil your deepest wishes if you really look for something special. I could watch it every day and wouldn't find it boring once.