I re-watched Michelangelo Antonioni’s Red Desert (1964) recently.
I’m not a huge fan of Antonioni, but I have a certain measure of respect for him. He is the classic case of an artist who tries to do something new and original, but in his case doesn’t quite manage to make it successful. Hence my respect - in that he does in fact try for originality and freshness - even if he ultimately doesn’t completely hit the mark. Unfortunately, those who are both original and successful in their efforts are the rarest breed. In contrast to Antonion’s “almost there” work, we see the much more common artist who doesn’t understand that it’s not enough to just do something “different”, it also has to be aesthetically successful - and that’s how we get a “sculpture” that consists of the contents of an overturned ashtray - lazy, dumb, and fraudulent. Coincidentally, I watched Nolan’s “Tenet”, and here we have an example of someone who attempts to do something “new”, but which is unfortunately a dismal failure - and sadly a completely expected failure, where the film fails to engage at all. Therefore I see Tenet as a comprehensive failure and a waste of time.
Red Desert is an example of how you can have engagement with minimal amount of “action” or plot. His compositions, actors, the cinematography and particularly the sound are all very successful elements that allow great engagement from the audience. In fact, I was struck by how the sound in Red Desert is positively Lynchian - the industrial sounds that are such a prominent artistic element in Eraserhead, find their antecedent in Red Desert. His use of musical cues is also very advanced and modern, far better than the vast majority of these efforts in the last 50 years. The camera often doesn’t focus on obvious subject matter, but on flat industrial or urban architectural elements, and we are nonetheless never bored. It helps that Antonioni had the good sense to employ Monica Vitti and Richard Harris, both highly charismatic actors (in contrast to Nolan’s choice of charima zeros in Tenet).
Ultimately, Antonioni’s aim of Red Desert being a depiction of “the alienation of modern life” fails, because Monica Vitti’s character merely comes across as mentally troubled, without the cause of her problems being *shown* to result from the travails of modern life - that cause is merely asserted without being demonstrated - as such, it ultimately is a miss. However, because the film is highly engaging, we don’t feel robbed of our time. This for me is a pattern with Antonioni - his films are engaging, and highly ambitious, but ultimately just (barely) miss his goals.
I still think it’s a worthwhile film to see; my rating is 7.5 out of 10. YMMV.
I’m not a huge fan of Antonioni, but I have a certain measure of respect for him. He is the classic case of an artist who tries to do something new and original, but in his case doesn’t quite manage to make it successful. Hence my respect - in that he does in fact try for originality and freshness - even if he ultimately doesn’t completely hit the mark. Unfortunately, those who are both original and successful in their efforts are the rarest breed. In contrast to Antonion’s “almost there” work, we see the much more common artist who doesn’t understand that it’s not enough to just do something “different”, it also has to be aesthetically successful - and that’s how we get a “sculpture” that consists of the contents of an overturned ashtray - lazy, dumb, and fraudulent. Coincidentally, I watched Nolan’s “Tenet”, and here we have an example of someone who attempts to do something “new”, but which is unfortunately a dismal failure - and sadly a completely expected failure, where the film fails to engage at all. Therefore I see Tenet as a comprehensive failure and a waste of time.
Red Desert is an example of how you can have engagement with minimal amount of “action” or plot. His compositions, actors, the cinematography and particularly the sound are all very successful elements that allow great engagement from the audience. In fact, I was struck by how the sound in Red Desert is positively Lynchian - the industrial sounds that are such a prominent artistic element in Eraserhead, find their antecedent in Red Desert. His use of musical cues is also very advanced and modern, far better than the vast majority of these efforts in the last 50 years. The camera often doesn’t focus on obvious subject matter, but on flat industrial or urban architectural elements, and we are nonetheless never bored. It helps that Antonioni had the good sense to employ Monica Vitti and Richard Harris, both highly charismatic actors (in contrast to Nolan’s choice of charima zeros in Tenet).
Ultimately, Antonioni’s aim of Red Desert being a depiction of “the alienation of modern life” fails, because Monica Vitti’s character merely comes across as mentally troubled, without the cause of her problems being *shown* to result from the travails of modern life - that cause is merely asserted without being demonstrated - as such, it ultimately is a miss. However, because the film is highly engaging, we don’t feel robbed of our time. This for me is a pattern with Antonioni - his films are engaging, and highly ambitious, but ultimately just (barely) miss his goals.
I still think it’s a worthwhile film to see; my rating is 7.5 out of 10. YMMV.