Crimes and Misdemeanors (Woody Allen, 1989)
Holy shit, it's been forever since I've been on this blog. What can I say, I've been busy with other stuff.
Anyway, to keep myself thinking about films (and to force myself to write about cinema more often), I'm going to use (steal) my friend cahiers_du_2006's idea of writing a bit about every single film I watch. That's easier than trying to half-ass my way through some theory, although I'll still probably do that from time to time.
So, first up is Woody Allen's Crimes and Misdemeanors. I had seen the first part of this film years ago but never had the chance to finish it till now. I loved the juxtaposition between the separate stories, each with its moral dilemma. A murder in one, infidelity in the other. I noticed how Woody Allen used his camera to draw the audience into the debate, almost forcing us to come to terms with which situation we cared about more, which we condemned the most (that is, if we condemned them at all).
For instance, in the Martin Landau/murder portion of the film, Allen used long shots at key times, almost to distance us from the characters, to emotionally detach us from it. On the other hand, in the Woody Allen/infidelity portion, Allen used a lot more close-ups at key times, drawing us more into the story and calling attention to the ethical dilemma. You have to stop and remind yourself that murder is more serious than the infidelity portrayed in the comedic half of the film, which forces you to ponder the same questions about morals and higher powers that the characters themselves are pondering. Brilliant.
Also, I loved the ending when the Woody Allen and Martin Landau characters met and discussed the situation, emulating the kind of debate the audience should have after watching the film. It's very much in the style of Incomplete Cinema, the Cuban theory of radical film from the 70's. Great stuff, this.
Anyway, to keep myself thinking about films (and to force myself to write about cinema more often), I'm going to use (steal) my friend cahiers_du_2006's idea of writing a bit about every single film I watch. That's easier than trying to half-ass my way through some theory, although I'll still probably do that from time to time.
So, first up is Woody Allen's Crimes and Misdemeanors. I had seen the first part of this film years ago but never had the chance to finish it till now. I loved the juxtaposition between the separate stories, each with its moral dilemma. A murder in one, infidelity in the other. I noticed how Woody Allen used his camera to draw the audience into the debate, almost forcing us to come to terms with which situation we cared about more, which we condemned the most (that is, if we condemned them at all).
For instance, in the Martin Landau/murder portion of the film, Allen used long shots at key times, almost to distance us from the characters, to emotionally detach us from it. On the other hand, in the Woody Allen/infidelity portion, Allen used a lot more close-ups at key times, drawing us more into the story and calling attention to the ethical dilemma. You have to stop and remind yourself that murder is more serious than the infidelity portrayed in the comedic half of the film, which forces you to ponder the same questions about morals and higher powers that the characters themselves are pondering. Brilliant.
Also, I loved the ending when the Woody Allen and Martin Landau characters met and discussed the situation, emulating the kind of debate the audience should have after watching the film. It's very much in the style of Incomplete Cinema, the Cuban theory of radical film from the 70's. Great stuff, this.