In the not-distant-future, the market has taken over everything, thanks to the marketers. The consumer is king, and those who see value outside of the marketplace are "enemies of the consumer", terrorists, and "partisan" enemies that the state must dispose of. Protagonist Jack seems to be at one with the media corporations (after all, his marketing ideas led to the institutionalization of the exchange of sex for enhanced buying power), but is he somehow involved with the feeble and pathetic resistance movement? Does he love Cecile, his colleague, or is she a pawn in his game? And what of the mysterious girl from Monday? Are immigrants from the star system "Monday" really assisting the partisans?Written by
Martin Lewison <email@example.com>
It's such a long way down, it's strange. The word becomes - flesh? The body remains... what? She had traveled light years to get here. And in the vaporous fields of her home star no one had bodies, or names, or identity. A living thought or feeling, stretching out in all directions. Not measured but desired, elegant. But here, in the flesh, the revolution had come.
See more »
deep movie if you have the skill to look past production value
I would like to suggest to those who comment on this film, of which there are many, that if one is to judge this movie as 'simplistic' or trite, then one has to answer a set of questions raised by the film -
1. What is the relation between embodiment and desire? Hartley raises this beautifully with the presentation of the girl, and intertwines it with the other themes (among many!) that I would like to point out.
2. What is the role of Christianity in this film? The word become flesh, the girl reading a study bible, the interviewer asking Jack if he is religious, and the idea of sacrifice and martyrdom all raise this issue in interesting and provocative ways. (this is especially interesting considering the film's conclusion and the question it raises about the possibility of a messiah in a capitalist context (i.e. where "value" only means monetary value))
3. What is the relation between desire and the structures of society? Does desire resist that power structure, or is it rather created by that power structure? The film raises the question of whether or not the resistance that is possible is also "good for business," and suggests that desire is fully malleable by the power structure. BUT, it also opens the possibility for real resistance, without being overly optimistic about this.
There are many many other interesting questions raised by this wonderful and thoughtful film, but these are just a few that immediately strike me as central, and which do not seem to play a role in the criticism of the film voiced by many of its detractors.
It is important to develop the skill to enjoy many types of film - important insofar as it simply increases pleasure in watching film - and so it is best to be able to ignore problems with the low production value and bad acting and to enjoy it for its strengths, rather than focus on the negative and not enjoy one's time with the film.
P.S. Anyone else wondering about the references to Homer's Odyssey in the film? So many questions . . .
4 of 10 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this