Showing posts with label Poetic Cinema. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Poetic Cinema. Show all posts

Busong (2011)

...


Busong is one of the few films that break out from the line up of Cinemalaya Independent Film Festival 2011. With a non-linear narrative structure and a catchy stylistic heterogeneity, it transcends from the dominant themes of Philippine cinema placing itself as one of the most important local films about tribal culture. What permeates within the juxtapositions of images and associational elements in the film is this pervading concept of tribal space and time.

Solito's personal reflections on Palawan's history has assimilated within the aesthetics of his film. He uses it to construct the film's unique spatial and temporal unity of Palawan's struggles to reclaim their degrading landscape and to revoke the lost spiritual identity of the region after years of captivity from foreign forces. This pluralistic and personal approach of creating a filmic world is itself a creative achievement in contemporary Philippine cinema. It resurfaces the rarely explored linkage of cinema and tribal history told through a personalize spatio-temporal design. Solito adapts the non-linearity of the oral tradition his of tribal ancestors to his film by fusing it to its editing. He places great importance on this constructional principle that with this, the film can be situated within the discourse of the loob-labas (internal-exteral) system, one of the central discourse in Filipino Psychology, indigenous to the Filipino self.

The film itself is a journey from outside to the inside, from labas to loob. Angkarang carries the badly wounded Punay in a hammock from the outskirts of the beaches of Palawan to its inner mountains in search for a healer of Punay's wounds. This mystical search for the healer drives the narrative of the film. In their journey, they met three locals: Ninita, a woman troubled by her husband ailment from an accident after an Amingus tree fell down on him; a fisherman troubled by the loss of his son after an encounter with an abusive foreiner who claims he owns the island; and Aris, a returning local from the city in search for his roots to fulfill his ancestors' wish to become a shaman. The journey narrates the process of healing of Palawan's destroyed rainforests from environmental degradation in a metaphorical sense. This process is from the outside to the inside.

The foliage of the leaves and the mystical sounds of the forest mimics the internal self of the character, Punay, and her mysterious and elusive role as Palawan herself. The depth of her wounds on her feet and on her skin scarred not only her physicality as a being but also her internal consciousness. As the first healer, a friend of Ninita who also tried to heal her husband, fails to heal Punay, the fisherman acts as a precursor, linking the first healer to the final healer, Aris. In Ninita's story of the fate of her husband Tony, the manifestation of the 'dark force' responsible for the metaphorical wounds of Punay appeared covertly via the juxtaposition of chainsaw to Tony's body during his healing with the first healer. It is with the fisherman that the 'dark force' appeared in a full physical form via the foreigner threatening the fisherman and his son to leave the island. These covert and overt display of opposing forces provide a sharp critique to the locals who continuously destroy the forest of Palawan and to the US's responsibility in the territorial struggle with the local people, and also the hypocrisy of those local guardians who follow the US in abusing Palawan's tribal riches.

The interaction between the physicality and non-physicality of nature in Busong acts as a building force at the end of the film. As the film reaches its climax, symbols became intensified and superimposed. The film ends with Punay successfully healed with butterflies emerging from the surface of her wounds. The symbolism becomes apparent: rebirth from within oneself.

Within the eternal verite of Busong a message purports to tell that: situated inside the forces of nature lies this naturalistic, non-physical force, busong (literally means karma), that can destroy those who ills Palawan's riches or re-create effortlessly Palawan's beauty. This dualistic nature of busong haunts the film with a self-reflexive force as the film mirrors to our lives this indigenous and personal relationship to the environment.

Ciao!
****

Andrei Tarkovsky at The Walter Reade Theater: July 7 - 14, '09

i wanna go there... now na!

[videos cued from here]


Films of Andrei Tarkovsky, an Exploding Poetry:
watch it right here, right now!



I wish, and only wish, I live in Upper West Side, Manhattan preferably at 165 West 65th Street, upper level between Broadway and Amsterdam Ave. I wanted to go there so badly but i am stuck here in this pseudo-neurotic cityscape of Manila, consumed by 'the mechanics of materials' and plagued by the sound of the night sighing how life directly translates to 'here and now.' Because i never had a chance to download a 1.70 GB Andrei Rublev (1966) and Mirror (1975), i just sulked on a corner and dried my tears. Yet, I am filled with thoughts about how one cinephile should grow from all this nurturing experiences, that if one is serious about film, one must watch any Andrei Tarkovsky's because he is
'one of the greatest, the one who invented a new language, true to the nature of film, as it captures life as a reflection, life as a dream' --- Ingmar Bergman.


I am filled with hope and enthusiasm of gaining my wings, stretching it from the skin of my back the flowing ivory white feather, so that i would fly and come to Manhattan to join The Film Society of Lincoln Center's revisiting of Tarkovsky.

On the contrary, i am very much surprised on the cost of the tickets. From their website:
"Walter Reade Theater General Admission:
$11 public ......... [P530.09] (exchange rate)
$8 senior (62+) ........ [P385.52]

$7 Film Society member & student (w/ID), child (6-­12, accompanied by adult) ........ [P337.53]

Online service charge: $1.25 per ticket. Cash only transactions at the box office and concession stand. ....... [+P60.24]


Series Pass:
$40 public ......... [P 1927.60]

$30 Film Society member ........ [P 1445.70]

Admits one person to five titles in a series. Purchase in person at the box office (cash only); may not be combined with any other ticket offer. Individual screening tickets and series passes subject to availability." (link here)

I thought i died there. I cannot think of a cinema that costs that much in my life. I watch movies on local theaters at an average rate of P110.00 [$2.28] per ticket and this is a week after the opening of a blockbuster movie. Perhaps maybe because this one is a special screening and also because it offers a high selectivity on the audience catering to those who have realized cinema's big elephant in the room or maybe to those who have realized solitude and contemplation as their form of happiness. Either way, movie viewing costs an ample amount of fortune. If one would choose, let us say a sensible young man of ripe age and maturity with a high level of tolerance and patience, filled with curiosity and wondering, between a box-office summer movie (i.e. Harry Potter 5th sequel) and Film Society's screening of Andrei Tarkovsky's masterworks, it is in a manner of personal taste that permits him to choose the better experience from the two. But to say that Andrei Tarkovsky's works are preferable than Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) is incredibly dull and pretentious. They are totally different from one another and they do not resemble one another except that, of course, they use cinematic tools to deploy narrative and produce effects, and the certainty of a cut or a duration of a shot is highly dependable on the genre, conventions, and historical manifestation of the films. To produce evaluation on both filmic experience, judging one to be subordinate from another, is a matter of economy for the mass viewers something that i cannot stomach.

Ignorance in cinema is symptomatic of one's faithlessness to the medium.

Ciao!

****

Toasted [2008]

a short commentary



[video credits to Mike Celona's MySpace Video Profile]
[you can find him at his website, or his youtube channel]




Toasted





Mike Celona made my weekend complete. It could have been that my weekend would composed only of Hitchcock, Polanski and a little dash of shorts from the Pixar studio but Celona broke the ice. The truth is i haven't found any clarity or peace with my weekend line-up of films, no offense to both directors. As usual, a rush of curiosity brought me to Senses of Cinema again to check their link list.

I had shivers from caffeine addiction and it must have brought the defective concentration on carrying out my study goal for tonight: to make notes on my Engineering Science subject. I just dropped over Senses of Cinema to break the ice. But then i end up with the film site FLICKER.

In search for something eventual, perhaps (in terms of my current interest on long unbroken shots) something 'poetic', i retraced my deep affection back to the aesthetics of experimental cinema.

Mike Celona took me there.

Toasted is considerably a figurative filmic exposition quite reminiscent of Krzysztof Kieslowki style: a deep focus on metaphoric elements, as in this case, a champagne glass.




In a particular scene in THREE COLORS: BLUE (1993)[shown above], Kieslowski effectively use a superimposition of two images displayed on the frame. The foreground shows a less focused image of blue beads superimposed on the middle ground where our heroine, Julie achieves a meditative look. The blue-beads inherently reflects Julie's inner subconscious, a style of Kieslowski that i admire.

Toasted significantly imposed this style but established a wider, more lyrical superimposition. The superimposition of the champagne glass to the moving background, possibly Parisian life, suggest that there is a world beyond the screen. it unfolds in a dramatic, subtle and contemplative way by using a digital rotation very rarely attempted in video but a established technique on feature films.

On my sudden concentration on contemplative cinema, i might consider this as a higher subordinate: an example of contemporary contemplative video art.

----



La double vie de Véronique [1991]

[photo credits to David Bordwell's site]




Veronique and the crystal ball.
Is she looking at her world,
or her other world?




In works well if poetry manifests in cinema.



La double vie de Véronique (1991)
Krzysztof Kieslowski

France circa 19991
93 min
1.66 : 1
Polish/French


Un Homme qui dort (A Man Asleep) [1974]

a commentary


[video credits to Mubarak Ali's Supposed Aura and arcilsota]
[photo credits to Jack on Cinema talk; read Jack's review on the remarkable, poetic film]



BEFORE anything else,




A Man Asleep [Georges Perec & Bernard Queysanne, 1974]

.
.
.
.

Alienation.

.
.
.



.
.
.


To isolate oneself.

.
.
.


To detach.



To feel one's existence through a second voice.
.
.
.
.

Speaking and reaching out.

.

.
To believe...
.
.
.
.

... an empty life and...
.
...nothing more...
.
...nothing less...
.
.
.
.


.
.
.
.



REFLECTION: I began my February 18 just like this, just like what happened to him, alone and doleful. As if my whole life is embodied in small moments, carefully formed in packets of time, stretched out through centuries, through the years and months of reveries, through the wide angling trees, through the winds and the skies and seas... Everything seemed lost... Everything is there but lost... Everything is lost

.
.
.
... But i felt happiness instead...