Yesterday
G-Max and I went to the Madstone and saw a Chinese
film called WHAT TIME IS IT THERE? It's a beautifully
conceived tribute to and emulation of Truffaut's
classic first film, THE 400 BLOWS. (We see one
of the main characters watching a videotape of
THE 400 BLOWS on his TV, and the action alternates
between Taiwan and Paris, with some of the Paris
images echoing famous images from THE 400 BLOWS.)
Both movies convey the same central theme: we
fear being alone, we desperately desire love and
companionship, but the quest is doomed -- love
is nearly always denied or thwarted, and if it
is attained, it's attained in a debased form,
not on our own terms, not as we idealize it, and
thus it invariably disappoints us. This is bleak
shit, but it's more truthful than the 893 movies
I've seen whose theme is that love conquers all.
I need to mention that WHAT TIME IS IT THERE?
is a very slowly paced movie. I have criticized
TIME OUT and RAIN for being slow. Am I inconsistent?
No doubt, but there is a key difference: in TIME
OUT and RAIN, each slowly paced scene shows us
only what we already know, but in WHAT TIME IS
IT THERE?, each slowly paced scene reveals something
new and important about one of the characters.
Moreover, many of the scenes can be seen as vignettes,
complete little short, short stories, so they
not only add to the overall dramatic payload of
the whole movie, they also provide their own self-contained
dramas. These dramas are subtle and quiet; the
movie's messages and themes are conveyed through
what you see, not through what the characters
say, and you have to think about what you see
and interpret it. This is a skill that many moviegoers
seem to lack.
Afterwards, G-Max and I headed out into the lobby
and were confronted by two snickering geezers
even older than ourselves, one of whom said with
good-natured amusement, "Did you fellers
get anything out of that? That was the most boring
movie we've ever seen, and we can't make any sense
out of it at all." I snapped back, "I
got a lot out of it," and stalked into the
men's room.
The cinematography, the acting, and the editing
are outstanding. A number of key images recur
throughout the film; they resonate with delicate
nuances of possible meaning rather than being
obviously symbolic or pretentiously significant.
And I really liked the soundtrack: most of the
scenes are very quiet, with no music, so that
on the few occasions when music is used, it adds
nicely to the dramatic effect; in this respect,
I was reminded of MABOROSI.
|