• _On Body and Soul_

    From septimus_millenicom@q.com@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 29 18:16:02 2022
    They are replicants! Maria the substitute meat inspector,
    and Endre the chief executive in a slaughter house, dream
    of the same electric deers! Or at least some sort of deer,
    loitering in an idyllic forest. These deer sequences --
    one of which opens the film -- are in stark contrast with
    the brutally depicted mechanical killing of cattle, although
    the film leaves it to the viewers to make their own inference.

    Maria is fresh-from-college social misfit. She has perfect
    memory recall but is super sensitive; she would replay her
    casual encounters at work with lego blocks at night (to
    get things right the second time?). Still seeing her
    childhood psychologist for her Asperger syndrome, she
    mechanically watches porn to get ready for dates, without
    success. Endre is much older, has forgotten too much,
    and wants to keep it that way. The two has little in
    common except dreamscapes in this Golden Bear-winning
    cute romantic fable from ldikó Enyedi. Enyedi won fame
    with her sophisticated fantasy _My 20th Century_, but her
    more recent _Tamas and Juli_ is also a simple romance with
    magic realism flourishes. The bland _Simon the Magician_,
    set in Paris, aims for the same effect but misses badly.
    _On Body and Soul_ is a strong return to form, with droll,
    dead-pan acting and beautiful cinematography that always
    seem to be peering into the protagonists' souls through
    a doorway, or a window with reflections superimposed on
    the characters; the intricate compositions belie the
    simplicity of this tale.

    To the extent that each film is "a metaphor for all of
    cinema, "_On Body and Soul_ seems to share the dreams
    of _Blade Runner_ (Maria certainly appears to hail from
    outer space, and the slaughterhouse violence eclipses
    anything by Rutger Hauer). But it has uncanny
    connections to so many small films set in dead end
    towns of rural Europe, where the only employer is a
    soul-deadening meat-packing plant. There is Laurent
    Laffargue's _The Mad Kings_, an _Iliad_ transplanted
    to a commune outside Bordeux, where Eric Cantona (the
    ex-soccer star) and Sergi Lopez act like they have caught
    the Mad Cow disease. In Inara Kolmane's _Mona_, another
    abattoir in Latvia becomes another scene of sexual
    obsession and horror (a monster actually emerges).
    I'm sure slaughter houses in African and Asian cinema
    serve as metaphors for man-made environmental disasters
    and provide avenues for escape from chaos, for
    redemption. To fight climate change experts believe
    we need to get rid of cows and turn their grazing
    grounds into solar farms. One day we may have movies
    in solar farms of dead-end towns. I don't know what
    metaphor that would be, but it would surely be progress.

    Never one to pass up a gratuitous chance to criticize
    the arthouse critics, perhaps over the last 20 years
    the latter have become like Maria the autistic, rigid
    meat inspector (minus her individuality)? Critics
    should be the interpreters, cultivators, guardian of
    cinematic dreams. They should reveal, give form to
    the hidden, mysterious web linking disparate films
    like a morning dew. But the "Film Comment"/"Village
    Voice" axis of bad taste instead dismantled these
    precious connections, whitewashed vital parts of
    cinematic history, Bolshevik style, to make room for
    undeserving false idols. The most obvious example is
    Kieslowski, from whom sprung a generation of admiring
    filmmakers and TV series creators (including those
    who made "The OA," the great streaming series of
    the 2010s). By forsaking the Polish master, how can
    the critics interpret the cinema from this Kieslowski
    generation? They couldn't. They turned into monsters,
    the killer of dreams.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)