![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Can you imagine what it's like to erase your own past?
At the very beginning of tonight's movie, I said to Caitlín, "I'm glad to see this director likes German Expressionism." Near the very end, I said, "That is the best film I have ever seen about the process of apotheosis." Both of these statements are true; neither is going to convey how much I liked Dark City (1998), which begins like a solid little film noir and ends like Gnosticism. And of course it recalls Metropolis (1927) and M (1930) and Das Kabinett des Doktor Caligari (1920) and even some films that aren't in German, chiefly Jeunet and Caro's Delicatessen (1991) and La Cité des enfants perdus (1995), but I am not sure I had ever before seen a street scene simultaneously evoke Franz Kafka and Edward Hopper and you know, they're a natural fit. I can't imagine how the theatrical cut was supposed to work. I've had it explained to me, but I still can't imagine it; I don't know what it is about thoughtful science fiction that makes studios want to tack on idiotic voiceovers, but I hope it's not some kind of actual, contractually-obliged law. And even if one could make a convincing case that the central mystery of Dark City is less compelling than the characters' actions once they figure it out, I still can't figure out why any of the deleted scenes were, because one of the neatest things about the film as it stands is its three-dimensionality, the sense that any of its characters, John, Anna, Bumstead, Schreber, even Mr. Hand, might be the protagonist: and so, by turns, they all are. Take out certain lines, conversations, even reaction shots, that depth of field is lost. God, I bet this is how you jinx a movie, taking Fritz Lang as your model. At least Alex Proyas didn't have to wait eighty-plus years for the restoration.
. . . It's mostly the hair, and a little of the cheekbones, and the eyes, but I kept looking at Rufus Sewell as John Murdoch and being reminded of Michael Cisco. This comparison may haunt me for years. Then again, any film that contained multiple shout-outs to Daniel Paul Schreber's Memoirs of My Nervous Illness (1903) would probably remind me of Michael Cisco all by itself. I still wonder if this explains anything about the world.
In other news, we did not, unsurprisingly, finish line-editing Two Worlds and In Between; I'm staying until Wednesday. I'm very tired. Funny how you write that at four in the morning and it's still true the next day.
. . . It's mostly the hair, and a little of the cheekbones, and the eyes, but I kept looking at Rufus Sewell as John Murdoch and being reminded of Michael Cisco. This comparison may haunt me for years. Then again, any film that contained multiple shout-outs to Daniel Paul Schreber's Memoirs of My Nervous Illness (1903) would probably remind me of Michael Cisco all by itself. I still wonder if this explains anything about the world.
In other news, we did not, unsurprisingly, finish line-editing Two Worlds and In Between; I'm staying until Wednesday. I'm very tired. Funny how you write that at four in the morning and it's still true the next day.
no subject
At one point I was on the verge of doing the same thing to show the movie to the then-Buffy gang, but then I heard about the director's cut and decided to wait for it instead. I thought it might be many years before it was released, but it proved to be just a few. I bought it on Blu-Ray and was distraught to discover that on my system the picture was all but unwatchable, too lacking in contrast between the blacks and the greys (we're not watching proper Blu-Ray but down-resing it). I subsequently completely re-did all the TV settings and am now quite hopeful that the movie will look just fine, and I somehow left if off the list of films I just sent you that I wanted to rewatch from my collection, when it fact it should have been at or near the top. Just as well, because none of the B5 gang have seen it and we should all see it together.
I've read one review comparing the director's and theatrical cuts, by someone who saw the former at a test screening. Their complaint was much more about re-editing which they thought destroyed the rhythm of the film, rather than omitted material. I can't wait to see the real, actual film.
no subject
Caitlín mentioned the differences in pacing; I don't see how the film could have unfolded any differently. It's a relatively fast-moving story as it is, simply by virtue of its structure as a mystery, and I think anything more obviously quick-cut would have ruined the city's sense of dreamlike time, that circles endlessly, but goes nowhere.