First of all, this is a situation in which my review of this movie cannot fully be justified because it operates as a video installation as well as a movie. The split-screen video effect of it is not the same as viewing this on multiple walls, which enforce a spatial dimensionality to the subjective perspective of the viewer. However, the split-screen is at least a sufficient analogy for the effect that can be appreciated in its own regard. Basically, if you can let your eyes moving back and forth between bilateral frames refer to what it would be like to actually have to physically move your body to see, you'll get an idea of what this is supposed to be like.
Anyway, the contrasts here are sharp, like the cinematography. Male vs. female, audience vs. loneliness, narrative vs. abstract, traditional vs. avant-garde. The man on the left sings Rumi, the woman on the right creates a layered vocal composition. The frame on the man is fixed, gradient, and balanced, the frame on the woman is spinning, contrasty, and dizzying. These abject differences still point to a sense of shared space and shared culture, a similarity of performative impulse... only since we're dealing with Iranian culture, the man's frame is more privileged in about every way possible for such a succinct movie.
--PolarisDiB
Anyway, the contrasts here are sharp, like the cinematography. Male vs. female, audience vs. loneliness, narrative vs. abstract, traditional vs. avant-garde. The man on the left sings Rumi, the woman on the right creates a layered vocal composition. The frame on the man is fixed, gradient, and balanced, the frame on the woman is spinning, contrasty, and dizzying. These abject differences still point to a sense of shared space and shared culture, a similarity of performative impulse... only since we're dealing with Iranian culture, the man's frame is more privileged in about every way possible for such a succinct movie.
--PolarisDiB
