MovieChat Forums > Don't Look Now Discussion > Subtlety in Films Is a Lost Art

Subtlety in Films Is a Lost Art

posted 13 years ago by BunnyCake
14 replies | jump to latest

What's wrong with a little subtlety in a film? It works. Roeg got people talking, even 40 years later. In an age where everyone wants what they want 10 minutes ago, I love that films exist where the filmmakers flip the audience the proverbial bird!

(Case in point: "The Tree of Life." I nearly had a psychotic episode during the Big Bang sequence. I kept thinking, How exactly do dinosaurs fit into the Brad Pitt-Sean Penn dysfunctional father-son dynamic? Only Terrence Malick knows.)

Cookie-cutter, formulaic films are a-plenty. Who wants to be hit over the head with endless flashbacks, expository speeches and "clues," like the director is saying, "See? Get it?" Sometimes ambiguity is what makes me want to watch a film over and over.

One of my Top 3 favorite films is Peter Weir's masterpiece, "Picnic at Hanging Rock." I've seen it a dozen times and with each viewing I conjure up new theories as to what really happened to the girls. It is one of the most mysterious, surreal, beautifully maddening films ever made. Absolute perfection.

Reid: "We need some butts rushed to the lab for DNA analysis."

[–] robsea32 13 years ago

Agreed! I believe three of the finest films ever made are Walkabout, Don't Look Now, and Picnic at Hanging Rock and precisely for the reason that each is such an elusive and dense piece of work.

While most movies boil down their message into a few easily digestible morsels, Don't Look Now has information all over the screen for the entire running time and it's really on you to pay attention to it and pick up on its significance. The whole experience of watching the movie is so much more interactive than the average movie -- you aren't just passively watching it, but struggling to understand what it's saying and where it's going.

I love that dialogue like Donald Sutherland saying in passing that "seeing is believing" is a throwaway line on it's own, but in the context of the film and the other clues, is a palpable part of his characters development. It's an indication of his attitude, which in turn is directly responsible for the grave outcome of the story.

Great movies shouldn't be easy to summarize -- you shouldn't be able to simply watch them once whilst folding your laundry and understand every important moment on the surface area of the film. Instead you need to study them to gain the full power of their message. Great mysteries must retain some of their mystery too, not spoil it.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] denise1234 11 years ago

Agree with both above comments :)

Nowadays, a good movie comes along every once and again, with fine touches of subtlety, and on IMDB there are then bound to be some posters with remarks about pseudo-intellectualism, etc.

While there are *some* films that are artsy-fartsy just for the sake of being so, they should not be lumped with other fine 'work of art' movies, such as this one ~

"I will not go gently onto a shelf, degutted, to become a non-book." ~ Bradbury

[–] Eve_of_Destruction 13 years ago

Totally agree...

[–] PsychoDingo 12 years ago

consider seeing Kieslowski's Blind Chance, if you haven't done so already, and don't read about it first. just get it and watch it

She gave me a smile so sweet you could have poured it on your pancakes.

[–] BunnyCake 12 years ago

Thanks for the recommendation, sounds good!

That's why her hair is so big - it's full of secrets!

[–] somesunnyday 12 years ago

Lake Mungo is subtle but very creepy

[–] PoppyTransfusion 11 years ago

To borrow a quip from another poster on IMDb, I like films that make me dream. Such dreams emerge when there's space for my imagination. Heavy-handed expositions, films that build towards a specific emotional climax in correspondence with a single moral view and films where it's impossible to think because there is either constant chatter and/or rapid action destroy dreaming.

When I'm not with you
I dream of my hair falling out

[–] denise1234 11 years ago

PoppyTransfusion^

Wonderful post :)

"I will not go gently onto a shelf, degutted, to become a non-book." ~ Bradbury

[–] ResidualLimit 11 years ago

There's always hope for interesting new films as good as Don't Look Now. Any more good recommendations please? Recent or not.

[–] Franco67 11 years ago

I'm sure it's suggested frequently enough but the majority of works by David Lynch share the similar themes with DLK (eerie mysteries about loss, grief, fear, sex, dwarves etc). I'd recommend Mulholland Drive and Twin Peaks (TV series) if you haven't watched them already.

[–] ajukoor 11 years ago

Screw the subtlety. We want gore and explosions and fart jokes. We want to know who the killer is in the beginning of the film. We don't care about mystery so we could just enjoy the jump scares and brutal killings. Bulding up tension slowly is boring. We don't have time to think over a film. Action from the start. Why we need to know the background of the characters as long as they blow the bad guys away.

(P.S. Sarcasm.)

Please, visit my Hell Hole. Thank You! prguauk.myminicity.com/tra

[–] BunnyCake 11 years ago

ajukoor - But sadly true!

Last night at the dance, my little brother paid a buck to see your underwear.

[–] kcornelg 11 years ago

SheIsSoRetro

Well said. Don't Look Now remains a fascinating, amazingly stunning film for me more than 40 years after I first saw it during its original theatrical release.

Two years after his performance in Klute and her performance in McCabe & Mrs. Miller (two other films from the 1970s that, like Don't Look Now, are well worth repeated viewings), Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie combined to create one of the most unforgettable couples in film.

If it is what it is, what is it?