pallas_athena: (Default)
[personal profile] pallas_athena
My local cinema is showing Bergman's The Seventh Seal, and last night I went to see it with the ever lovely [livejournal.com profile] fracture242.

Bergman's own recent checkmate by Death saddened me. I loved so many of his films: in addition to Seventh Seal, I adore Smiles of a Summer Night (which Stephen Sondheim adapted for his musical A Little Night Music) and of course The Magic Flute, which to this day is one of the best examples of opera on film.

Seeing The Seventh Seal in all its monochrome glory on the big screen, the overall effect is one of terrifying clarity. On the one hand, the gaps in the production values are more obvious-- yes, they're wearing faked-up knitwear chainmail-- but on the other, moments like Death's appearance in the blinding light on the stony beach have about ten times the impact.

What filmmaker today would dare portray Death without using CGI? Or the dream-visions of the actor Jof? Bergman does it all with acting: the story is told on the faces, in merciless close-ups which are all the more revealing on the big screen.

In the opening scene, Death asks the Knight why he wants more time. The Knight replies "To accomplish one meaningful thing." In the Knight's case, he means seeing his wife again after ten years on crusade-- but in Bergman's, I think, that thing was this film. It's amazing in so many ways.

on 2007-08-12 05:51 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] laughingmagpie.livejournal.com
I remember watching some special-effects laden classic films, including silents, and being suddenly, thoroughly impressed with their effects. Some might be obvious, some awkward, but there was so much earnest craft in them. I'm sure there's a lot of earnest work in today's effects, but it's just not as out there and easy to see.

And some of those effects are more puzzling and mysterious because it's hard to figure out how they were done - today you can just watch a film and know "Oh that's blue screen", "CGI", etc.

on 2007-08-12 06:00 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] artnouveauho.livejournal.com
That's true. I'm as fond of a good Harryhausen romp as the next girl, and Speedlime has taught me proper reference for the dream sequence in Sherlock Junior.

My problem with a lot of films being made now is that they use CGI as a substitute for acting-- for example, the "bestial Bilbo" and "Darth Galadriel" moments in FOTR. Ian Holm and Cate Blanchett could have conveyed those moments better through acting alone, perhaps aided by a lighting change.

I think with CGI at the moment, there's a feeling of "we've got this marvellous new tool, so let's use it a lot!" Maybe future generations will exercise more restraint?

on 2007-08-12 10:36 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] justpolina.livejournal.com
How much more right could you possibly be re sfx being used at the expense of acting. That's been my major complaint about most sci-fi for years. I know it's an old horror but I watched Metropolis the other night - never fails to be a knockout even despite hairy clunkdom of effects.

I've never seen Seventh Seal on the big screen. Envy.

(and Sherlock Junior rocks!)

on 2007-08-12 11:22 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] spyinthehaus.livejournal.com
Oh! I must try to see this, definitely. Meanwhile, Max von Sydow appears alongside Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker in Rush Hour 3. A fascinating career.

Profile

pallas_athena: (Default)
pallas_athena

January 2024

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 16th, 2025 07:55 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios