ThinkyTimes
DAVID CARR, THE ASTUTE GENTLEMAN JOURNO WHO WRITES NY TIMES' MOVIE AWARDS SEASON BLOG, THE CARPETBAGGER, gives a nod to an article of mine published this week: "Sometimes amidst the din of the chanting Oscar Ninnies - Dreamgirls can't be touched!" or "United 93 is fading!" - it behooves us to remember that directors are artists and that their medium has a history they should study and understand. Over at The Reeler, Ray Pride, the editor of Movie City Indie, and Alfonso Cuaron, the director, have a discussion steeped in cinematic antecedents about Children of Men, Mr. Cuarón's dark look at a future where humans have lost the ability to reproduce... Mr. Cuaron is a funny guy, and he offers a thinky, and occasionally hilarious look inside the craft. Among other things, Mr. Cuaron tells Mr. Pride he is fed up with simpleminded cinema that does with very little with images save moving the story along in the very predictable ways.
"What I hate is when cinema is hostage of narrative," he told me. "Then I say, 'Come on - don't be lazy, read a book.' If you want to see performances, go to the theater; it's fantastic. It's an actor's medium there and a dramatic medium - at least conventional theater. But come on, leave cinema alone! Let cinema breathe, in which narrative is an element of the cinematic experience, but it's [just] an element, as acting is an element, cinematography is an element. Music and decors, those are elements. But right now? Cinema becomes just about seeing illustrated stories as opposed to engaging audiences in an experience in which you don't explain much."
Mr. Cuaron points to the work of his fellow Mexican director Guillermo del Toro to suggest that it is a film's exploration of themes, as opposed to its narrative, that determine its ultimate success.
"A lot of reviewers nowadays, they fall into that vice: they want stories. They want explanations, they want exposition and they want political postures. Why does cinema have to be a medium for making political statements as opposed to presenting facts, presenting elements and then you making your own conclusions - even if they are elusive? There's nothing more beautiful than elusiveness in cinema." [Speaking of elusive, a commenter to Carr's entry offers this remark: ""Is this Comedy Central? An interview in The Onion? Is this the guy who made mint directing HARRY POTTER? — Posted by marrtyy"]
"What I hate is when cinema is hostage of narrative," he told me. "Then I say, 'Come on - don't be lazy, read a book.' If you want to see performances, go to the theater; it's fantastic. It's an actor's medium there and a dramatic medium - at least conventional theater. But come on, leave cinema alone! Let cinema breathe, in which narrative is an element of the cinematic experience, but it's [just] an element, as acting is an element, cinematography is an element. Music and decors, those are elements. But right now? Cinema becomes just about seeing illustrated stories as opposed to engaging audiences in an experience in which you don't explain much."
Mr. Cuaron points to the work of his fellow Mexican director Guillermo del Toro to suggest that it is a film's exploration of themes, as opposed to its narrative, that determine its ultimate success.
"A lot of reviewers nowadays, they fall into that vice: they want stories. They want explanations, they want exposition and they want political postures. Why does cinema have to be a medium for making political statements as opposed to presenting facts, presenting elements and then you making your own conclusions - even if they are elusive? There's nothing more beautiful than elusiveness in cinema." [Speaking of elusive, a commenter to Carr's entry offers this remark: ""Is this Comedy Central? An interview in The Onion? Is this the guy who made mint directing HARRY POTTER? — Posted by marrtyy"]
