5 Doomed Romance Leonardo DiCaprio Movi ...
Wes Anderson's 5 Best Commercials
Can 'World War Z' Break Even?
Steve Soderbergh On Cinema, Studios, Mor ...
Recap: 'The King Of Comedy' 30th Anniversary ...
Excl: Lake Bell Joins 'Million Dollar Ar ...
10 Essential Cinematic Antiheroes
![]()
If the name Béla Tarr rings any sort of bell in your head, chances are you've already formed an unwavering opinion of his work. He hasn't exactly shaken up his approach since 1988's "Damnation" (that said, this writer -- probably like most -- isn't familiar with his crop of '90s short films), and if despairing (yet deeply moving) minimalist films composed of stark black-and-white single takes doesn't tickle your fancy, this film won't change your mind.
Nobody has stuck out like a sore-thumb more in these last two decades of cinema than this Hungarian auteur. Modern filmmakers have fully digested mentors Andrei Tarkovsky and Ingmar Bergman into their own styles, quite often producing lesser results. Tarr, who shares certain stylistic qualities of the aforementioned film giants, feels less like a student and more so like a peer employed in the wrong era. Maybe it's a vague thing to say, but his perspective and sensibilities always seemed firmly rooted in '60s and '70s art cinema.
A tale of philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche precedes the movie, concerning a time when he was driven to embrace a horse that was being whipped by its owner, before he collapsed and was carried away. After the incident, the final decade of his life was spent in almost total silence -- but what became of the horse?
Tarr's eye is attuned to every detail of their habitual behavior and relishes in it, somehow making a man blowing on his hot supper incredibly intriguing. He finds and exploits these moments as the camera follows every action in the house, quietly embracing and exhibiting the grim environment. No shot is too long for this filmmaker, and he does as much as he can in an uninterrupted take, making every minute spent with this unfortunate family feel even heavier.
Tarr's final film is ultimately an extension of his decision to give up, and keeping with that, the movie closes without even a grain of optimism. Despite its descent from bad to worse, it thankfully never feels repetitive. This is likely due to the director's constantly wandering lens and eye for even the smallest idiosyncrasy, each lingering second striking at the heart and uncovering pure humanity. It won't win any new fans (and judging by the sighs and subsequent giggles during our screening, it's probably not an entry point for newcomers), but it's without a doubt a haunting picture that'll burn into your conscious. Quite unforgettable, whether you fancy it or not. [A-]
4 Comments
jason | February 15, 2012 3:13 AM
great movie .why didn't nominated?
Dan | February 13, 2012 9:55 AM
"Tarr's final film is ultimately an extension of his decision to give up" - actually, he is supposedly opening a film school in Croatia. Hardly what I would call 'giving up'.
Also, curious to know what the cause was for the A- (as opposed to an A or A+).
BOO YAH | February 9, 2012 4:46 PM
AMAZING FILM!