Thursday, January 20, 2011

rhyme on strozek

The word that comes to mind when I think of Strozek is stark. Films from the 70s--because of the picture quality--always seem slightly washed out and bleak to me, the colors muted and dim. When we watched it the first time with Herzog's commentary, he mentioned at one point (when Bruno's home is being wheeled away after being auctioned off) that he likes to linger on a shot longer than most directors, that he purposefully holds the scene out longer than the audience expects. There is a sort of universal dialogue to watching films, and as you fall into the rhythm of the scenes there is this natural feeling of when they should end, how long a character should pause between delivering their lines and walking away. And man, does Herzog ever linger. The empty pauses as the characters stare out, stand still, as the scene rolls on and on and on...the reality of the situation is presented so bluntly. As a viewer you don't get to escape the uncomfortable through a quick cut--you're confronted with the character's shame, embarrassment, and disappointment as clearly as they experience it.

I don't know about everyone else, but this is not something I enjoy as I experience THE MOTTS quite easily. (THE MOTTS being, simply, the feeling you get when someone else is making an ass of themselves, but is completely unaware of it; see also "second-hand embarrassment.") It's far too easy for me to empathize with fictional characters--as a kid I read obsessively to the point where my typical punishment was to have my books taken away. The end of Strozek in particular was difficult, as Bruno became increasingly more alone. I'd like to think that the shot at the end was fired on accident as the turkey (his last friend!) fell off the ski lift, but obviously no one can say what exactly happened.

I think Herzog makes a stronger connection to me since his work is narrative-heavy, as my own is, which I talked about in my last post.Though I don't prefer film as a medium, I too would like my work to reach out to people in a similar way; perhaps you don't understand it, but you can sense something about it that grabs your attention, even if it makes you uncomfortable or mott-sy. Human connections interest me enormously, though I generally find the best way I can explore them is by expressing aspects of myself through my work. Maybe this will change as I grow out of my self-absorbed 20s? Who can say!

4 comments:

  1. Interesting explanation in terms of contrast, muted colors, and "the motts." Having not been familiar with that term it did not come to my mind while watching, but I can understand what you mean. I think I missed the part where he described drawing out scenes intentionally, but I really did notice that. I think it explains the kind of quality that instills discomfort in the viewer when he emphasizes the struggles of each character.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree that this movie is really depressing. I mean it's dramatic on a regular life base not like the the kidn of Gossip Girls drama. And that's why the story is really convincing and that makes the audiences relate themseleve to teh charachers much more easily.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I got the same feeling in the scene with the little kid crying against the wall. It was held long enough for you to become uncomfortable and confused. And yeah that house being wheeled away was excruciating.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The power of something so simple as the camera dwelling a little bit too long on a scene gives us hope that a compelling story can still be told. Do those long moments seem longer now when attention spans are supposedly shorter?

    ReplyDelete