Movie Review: Black Swan
This movie does not have a story. This movie is a character study. Except very little about the character is concrete. Most of what you know about Nina is pretty standard and fairly plain. Everything else is insinuation, allusion, implication and visual underlining.
I guess for some people, that counts as "subtlety" but it doesn't for me. "subtle" is when something is said lightly, barely or faintly. Its still stated, as a fact, but its not pushed in your face or explained in great detail. I like subtle. What I don't like is implying things (via outside sources) and then proceeding as if that's all you need to know. No,when I meet someone, I want to know who they are through THEIR experiences, words and deeds, not other people mentioning of their supposed characteristics. When I watch a character, in a human drama (as opposed to pure fantasy which has its own rules) then I expect to gather a certain amount of understanding via that character itself. Hearing other people gossip about that character doesn't work for me. My assumption is that gossip is gossip. Hearing STORIES about the character might work, as storytelling is often a psychological tool for presenting uncomfortable truths about someone in a context that allows me to draw proper conclusions as well as possible motivations and designs. Having people stand around gossiping? That just makes me wonder about the people gossiping.
Mostly, the problem I had with Black Swan was that it wasn't subtle at all. It was all there; visual metaphor, insinuated comments, emotional color-matching, Hitchcockian flash-frames, foreshadowing, "good/evil" light changes, even the use of handheld shakey camera work (which I hate) as well as some pretty decent CGI. There was nothing subtle about it. The reviews I've read rave about all this as ART and blah blah blah. I think that's because of the name ARONOFSKY!!!!
But without an actual story (and I don't mean he used a different timeline or went non-linear or anything so "edgy") it just seems... lacking. Natalie Portman is amazing as are all the actors, but without a definitive story behind them, it seems a lot of wasted talent.
I guess for some people, that counts as "subtlety" but it doesn't for me. "subtle" is when something is said lightly, barely or faintly. Its still stated, as a fact, but its not pushed in your face or explained in great detail. I like subtle. What I don't like is implying things (via outside sources) and then proceeding as if that's all you need to know. No,when I meet someone, I want to know who they are through THEIR experiences, words and deeds, not other people mentioning of their supposed characteristics. When I watch a character, in a human drama (as opposed to pure fantasy which has its own rules) then I expect to gather a certain amount of understanding via that character itself. Hearing other people gossip about that character doesn't work for me. My assumption is that gossip is gossip. Hearing STORIES about the character might work, as storytelling is often a psychological tool for presenting uncomfortable truths about someone in a context that allows me to draw proper conclusions as well as possible motivations and designs. Having people stand around gossiping? That just makes me wonder about the people gossiping.
Mostly, the problem I had with Black Swan was that it wasn't subtle at all. It was all there; visual metaphor, insinuated comments, emotional color-matching, Hitchcockian flash-frames, foreshadowing, "good/evil" light changes, even the use of handheld shakey camera work (which I hate) as well as some pretty decent CGI. There was nothing subtle about it. The reviews I've read rave about all this as ART and blah blah blah. I think that's because of the name ARONOFSKY!!!!
But without an actual story (and I don't mean he used a different timeline or went non-linear or anything so "edgy") it just seems... lacking. Natalie Portman is amazing as are all the actors, but without a definitive story behind them, it seems a lot of wasted talent.