Unlike,
for instance, comedy or drama, both rooted primarily in inherent faculties of
human emotion and empathy, certain cinematic genres find themselves and their
life spans distinctly linked to specific cultural and historical contexts. Film
noir is the classic example, its immediate life—from the early 1940s to the
late 1950s—short enough to warrant the protracted argument that continues to
this day as to whether it can indeed be classified a genre at all. Inextricably
linked to the social circumstances of the United States in the period
immediately following the Second World War, noir’s dominant themes and tropes,
though still reworked now in films categorised as neo-noir, address issues
particular to that place in that period of time. The western, too, though still
more recognisably intact in its classical form than noir, would seem to offer
little explicit relevance to modern America, its frontier narratives now
outdated by more than a century. The road movie, then, is a particularly
interesting case: arguably growing only more relevant with the passage of time
and the ever-increasing ubiquity of infrastructure, the genre has nonetheless
encountered ebbs and flows through the course of its lifetime that suggest an
important link between social circumstances and the road’s cinematic
exploration thereof. In briefly examining these resurgences and assessing the predominant
narrative and stylistic tropes that characterise the genre, this essay aims to
examine the films of director Kelly Reichardt in the context of modern America,
and through them to posit the emergence of a new breed of road movie that
speaks to the issues facing the nation today.
Tuesday, 30 July 2013
24 Lies per Second: Illusionism and the Excess of Reality in the Films of Michael Haneke
“Film
is 24 lies per second at the service of truth”
—Michael Haneke (24 Realities per Second)
Such
a play on Jean-Luc Godard’s famous dictum as to the inherent truth of the
cinematic medium is typical of the cynical postmodernism of Michael Haneke, the
Austrian writer-director whose feature films have consistently engaged in
revealing and reassessing what he sees as the inevitable falsity of the filmed
image. Considered a realist by virtue of his often long takes, predominantly
naturalistic dialogue, and anti-sensationalist presentation of violence and
sexuality, Haneke’s work has in fact constantly pointed toward its own unreality, exposing the abstraction of
the cinematic image and the long tradition of the mechanical reproduction of
reality as, necessarily, a manipulation of truth and thereby of the spectator.
In eleven theatrical releases to date, he has repeatedly drawn attention to the
extent of this manipulation, using his films as incitements to his audiences to
re-evaluate their own relationship to reality and question the degree to which
modern media—television and the internet as much as film—has divorced them from
a meaningful connection to the truth of the world in which they exist. This
essay intends to assess Haneke’s subjugation of the cinematic apparatus to his
own self-reflexive end, and to reach—through an investigation of the manner in
which he implements and inverts typical tropes of screen realism—an
understanding of the key themes his oeuvre addresses by way of this intently
self-aware, postmodern deconstruction of filmic reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)