I'd agree missSpivey, laughter provides a quality of realness that intensifies the rest of the film... sure, its often said that we laugh cause otherwise we'd cry.. maybe it should be, we laugh because we cry. the dichotomy of the relationship between laughter and despair is so strong in 'nil..' it really forces home the idea that laughter and tears need each other... I'm really passionate about the idea that social realism (esp british social realism)achieves 'realism' (and by this i guess i mean 'emotional realism'.. but its all part of the same pie eh?) with far more clarity when it pursues both forces- that is, laughter and despair. You should certainly watch some Loach... 'Kes', especially, achieves both the ability to make us laugh and the ability to make us cry.. all at the same time. check out the football scene and the scene in the headmasters office for the most sublime examples of this... we laugh and in laughing come across the realisation that what we are watching and laughing at is horrific (much the same as what you said about 'nil')... barry hines, the guy who wrote the novel of this film, said that 'kes' began as a series of stories that his mates (who went to such schools)told him- for laughs- down the pub... and i love this concept... overcoming persecution and oppressive circustance by laughing at it... turning instances of oppression into a means of laughing at the oppressors (turning them into 'Comic monsters' if you like)... I absolutely love it and only wish i could find more films that did it... actually shane meadows is a director who more often than not achieves the same kind of thing... laughing at despair, so if you haven't already watched any of his stuff then you really really should. rant over : )
reply
share