This is a film I appreciated, but you're writeup made me appreciate it even more. Especially drawing on the Makhmalbaf and Kieślowski influences (I also see Lynch, but only superficially, because it never actually feels Lynchian) in how trauma shapes our sense of identity and the narratives we tell ourselves. Still, there's something about the film that didn't quite connect--it's been a month or so and it's almost evaporated from my memory--and maybe it's that haziness you are hinting at that actually undermines some of the impact? Either way, you got me thinking about the themes more deeply so good job! :)
As always, thank you so much for reading and taking the time to leave a thoughtful comment! I’m particularly thrilled you mention the Makhmalbaf and Kieslowski influences — I’ve seen so many folks touch on Lynch, so this was a fun exercise of sitting down and forcing myself to dig deeper :)
Yeah I think Lynch signifiers have become a lazy way to explain anything that's remotely surreal or features doubles/dueling identities. I'm sure I've been guilty of it too in the past, so it's nice to read something that takes the time to move beyond the obvious.
Side question: Do you actively dislike any films? My guess is you choose not to write in depth about ones you hate, as I've yet to read any savage eviscerations haha
Ha, I get this question often. I definitely have films I dislike, though I try to keep Rewind & Revive focused on the work I want to celebrate. My Letterboxd, on the other hand, is where the occasional salty thought makes its way out — there was one VIFF watch recently that really didn’t work for me, for instance. By and large, though, I’m at a point where I avoid new releases I know probably aren’t my taste, and even if a film doesn’t resonate, I try to look at what *does* work (if possible)— or dig deeper into why certain choices didn’t land for me.
There are so many moving parts to getting any film made, of course, that I always find it worthwhile to do a bit of extra sleuthing when something perplexes me. At the very least, it offers clarity! Anyway, a long-winded answer from me as usual, haha. :)
Completely understandable! The only reason I ask is that I appreciate your writing and would love to hear some of your dissenting takes. I enjoy criticism where there's a level of healthy discourse (not the annoying film Twitter or bro-y Reddit type, of course) and part of that for me is looking for interesting alt opinions. I've also used Substack so far largely for positive appraisals or shining light on certain things too, but Letterboxd is a different story ha
100% agree. When it comes to Letterboxd, I’ve been debating eliminating my ratings altogether and doing what you do (heart/no heart), since I’m usually never really married to how many stars I give something (and it can often change). In any case, that’s where you’ll find my less-than-stellar thoughts!
This is a film I appreciated, but you're writeup made me appreciate it even more. Especially drawing on the Makhmalbaf and Kieślowski influences (I also see Lynch, but only superficially, because it never actually feels Lynchian) in how trauma shapes our sense of identity and the narratives we tell ourselves. Still, there's something about the film that didn't quite connect--it's been a month or so and it's almost evaporated from my memory--and maybe it's that haziness you are hinting at that actually undermines some of the impact? Either way, you got me thinking about the themes more deeply so good job! :)
As always, thank you so much for reading and taking the time to leave a thoughtful comment! I’m particularly thrilled you mention the Makhmalbaf and Kieslowski influences — I’ve seen so many folks touch on Lynch, so this was a fun exercise of sitting down and forcing myself to dig deeper :)
Yeah I think Lynch signifiers have become a lazy way to explain anything that's remotely surreal or features doubles/dueling identities. I'm sure I've been guilty of it too in the past, so it's nice to read something that takes the time to move beyond the obvious.
Side question: Do you actively dislike any films? My guess is you choose not to write in depth about ones you hate, as I've yet to read any savage eviscerations haha
I’m with you there!
Ha, I get this question often. I definitely have films I dislike, though I try to keep Rewind & Revive focused on the work I want to celebrate. My Letterboxd, on the other hand, is where the occasional salty thought makes its way out — there was one VIFF watch recently that really didn’t work for me, for instance. By and large, though, I’m at a point where I avoid new releases I know probably aren’t my taste, and even if a film doesn’t resonate, I try to look at what *does* work (if possible)— or dig deeper into why certain choices didn’t land for me.
There are so many moving parts to getting any film made, of course, that I always find it worthwhile to do a bit of extra sleuthing when something perplexes me. At the very least, it offers clarity! Anyway, a long-winded answer from me as usual, haha. :)
Completely understandable! The only reason I ask is that I appreciate your writing and would love to hear some of your dissenting takes. I enjoy criticism where there's a level of healthy discourse (not the annoying film Twitter or bro-y Reddit type, of course) and part of that for me is looking for interesting alt opinions. I've also used Substack so far largely for positive appraisals or shining light on certain things too, but Letterboxd is a different story ha
100% agree. When it comes to Letterboxd, I’ve been debating eliminating my ratings altogether and doing what you do (heart/no heart), since I’m usually never really married to how many stars I give something (and it can often change). In any case, that’s where you’ll find my less-than-stellar thoughts!
Join the "no stars" club. It's liberating!