|
Post by roverpup on Sept 26, 2017 22:39:16 GMT
I think I understand what you're saying, and I think it could be applied to all of the characters. We knew nothing about them really, their likes or dislikes, what made them be this way instead of that way. Why the wife chose to retreat into solitude, why Stephen couldn't stop looking for Kate, etc. It was more of a tone piece than a character study. Is that what you mean? But to me "character study" doesn't mean that you learn every motivation and detail of a specific character. It means that we look into a character as the driving force of the story and not the plot or action. In this piece the characters and their personal struggles were who we were focusing on, not the act of the disappearance of the child. And we do learn a lot about both Julie and Stephen. You just have to watch and listen to them as they move through the piece and also see how others react to them throughout. Stephen made it quite clear (at least to me) why he couldn't stop looking for Kate - he said it in the scene with the decorated Xmas tree - "Self-harm" and then went on to explain it further when they were drinking tea. As to what made them that way? I don't know if that is pertinent to this particular version of the story. In a book you can go into a lot more detail but no movie (and certainly not a 90 minute one) can supply all those details. And I don't expect it to either. Movies are very different animals to books and have their own strengths and weaknesses as the format dictates. You can't come away from a movie asking something of it that it just can't do because of the type of medium it is. :-))
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on Sept 26, 2017 23:04:28 GMT
Lol, and now I'm having trouble articulating. For me, it felt like a tone study, not a character study. I guess I expect more internal and external development from a character piece. Some sense that a person's character is being molded by their circumstances and decisions more directly. Both Stephen and his wife were pretty bland people. Yes, they were reacting to trauma in specific ways, specific to them, but mostly I felt a sense of disconnected floating and a general, terrible sense of loss and bereavement that led to that disconnection. I didn't see as much growth in them as I saw two people just getting through a horrible thing. That's not bad, it's just what I saw.
It might have been interesting to see how it would have been different with different actors, to suss out my own projections onto the forms presented to me.
I'm in no way comparing the book to the film. I haven't read it. I don't mind big gaps and little detail in the narrative, and I did like it. A lot. I'm just trying to understand what we're talking about. I don't have a very good film critique vocabulary, and the film was pretty diaphanous, so...
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 27, 2017 0:35:48 GMT
Something that bothers me in movies is when someone does something out of character, and that doesn't happen here. We learned enough about Stephen and Julie that their actions were totally believable to me. Not only that - I was able to predict some of what they said and did because the characters were so well established. It's funny that as I was watching it, I thought "These two people really need another child to love" - but not as a way to replace Kate, of course. Kate will always be there, somewhere, and they'll always love her and wait for her. But I was so happy when the did get a second child at the end!
If I am that happy for fictional characters, I think the movie has been very successful.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Sept 27, 2017 1:07:55 GMT
Sorry QZ but I really don't know what exactly a "tone study" movie is supposed to be. Can you give me an example of another movie that you think as a "tone study"? That might help me.
If you mean a movie that puts a great deal of emphasis on one pervading mood rather than the plot or the characters then I can think of a couple but they wouldn't be films like TCiT at all - I imagine them to be more like gothic love stories or very dark moody movies like a mystery. Maybe like "Body Heat" but even that I would classify as something much more than just a "tone study" (although the whole sweaty heated mood of the movie was something that dominated the film).
I guess I am having trouble putting my finger on this label for TCiT because I had so many emotions during it and to me it didn't have any dominate tone to identify it with. There was an initial sad quality to the circumstance of the couple but because of the non-linear form, the movie shifted from that to humour or a lighter mood (as when Stephen met Caharles and Thelma for lunch) rather quickly so the whole film never felt burdened with sadness. Or like when he chased after the little girl in the yellow coat and slipped and fell but then the very next scene was him greeting Julie at her cottage and him making light of his muddy appearance. And then it shifted to a very tender scene with them in the shower and in bed so that was uplifting and very sweet.
I see your point about the disconnect with the characters from the trauma but I think this was purposely done in the beginning of the film to indicate their shock at what had happened to their daughter and also how this drove them into being isolated from each other. It came to a head for Julie much earlier in the film (when she screamed at him "I can't live like this!". For Stephen it turned when he realised just how out of touch he was with the world around him when he broke down in the principal's office.
I think they did a wonderful job showing them reconnecting with others (Julie playing piano and giving lessons) and eventually reconnecting with Stephen (offering him piano lessons) and supporting him when he needed her (the scene with them in the aquarium) all the while maintaining her independence. And they also beautifully showed how Stephen reconnected with the world (meeting the committee woman for a friendly walk and chat) and in one of the most moving scenes decided that he could miss Kate without being desperately broken and realise that she would always be there in spirit (the scene with him talking to her by walking-talkie).
Oh shit, now I am starting to choke up again just thinking of these scenes! :-)
Dan and I are watching a couple more episodes of Ken Burns' Vietnam series tonight - don't want to sit down with tear stains all over my cheeks when I have to watch "Tricky Dick" make his debut! LOL! Excellent series BTW! Burns has a real winner with this series!
:-))
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on Sept 27, 2017 15:09:21 GMT
I guess what I'm talking about is a more poetic movie. This one was lyrical and elegiac. Other movies that have felt that way to me are Third Star and Dean Spanley. That the FEEL of the overall piece is more important than the plot or characterizations. The mood did shift, but not hugely. The humor was very quiet and even the sweet moments were contemplative and rested in a foundation of loss. Burdened isn't the word I'd use, but I did feel that the entire piece carried a deep sense of sadness, loneliness, and longing, which was heightened by the music. That "wanting" underscored everything. And it was beautiful which is why I wouldn't call it burdened.
Anyway, thems my reasons. 😃
|
|
|
Post by miriel68 on Sept 27, 2017 15:36:03 GMT
I think I understand what you're saying, and I think it could be applied to all of the characters. We knew nothing about them really, their likes or dislikes, what made them be this way instead of that way. Why the wife chose to retreat into solitude, why Stephen couldn't stop looking for Kate, etc. It was more of a tone piece than a character study. Is that what you mean? Hi queenzod, yes, it is indeed what I meant. It has a feeling of a medieval Morality play where the characters are not real figures, being subordinated to the allegorical message. I am fine with it, but it seems to me that film didn't manage to make it always coherent. For example, if you go for a mystical experience of time, you shouldn't explain it in your face: I loved the idea of Stephen seeing his mum through the window but was quite unhappy with her explaining it to him. He (and we - audience) could deduce it from an old photograph, for example). I would prefer to see more of Julie & Stephen BEFORE the tragedy (not necessarily with something really happening, just the feeling of the ordinary life) to flash out the difference in their behavior AFTER the tragedy: these little snippets of "happy life before" had a feeling of a generic postcard look-at-the-happy-family-we-were. Of course, people do tend to idealize the past, but IMO it would add the depth to the theme of we never know how happy we were until we lost our happiness.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 27, 2017 20:43:05 GMT
Those little flashbacks were mostly Stephen's memories, and the whole story was really from his point of view. I think it makes sense that we only see them after Kate vanished. It's like that in real life, isn't it? Our world falls apart and life is forever changed. Everything then becomes either "Before Kate disappeared" or "After Kate disappeared", and the movie was showing us the After.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Sept 28, 2017 4:23:41 GMT
I guess what I'm talking about is a more poetic movie. This one was lyrical and elegiac. Other movies that have felt that way to me are Third Star and Dean Spanley. That the FEEL of the overall piece is more important than the plot or characterizations. The mood did shift, but not hugely. The humor was very quiet and even the sweet moments were contemplative and rested in a foundation of loss. Burdened isn't the word I'd use, but I did feel that the entire piece carried a deep sense of sadness, loneliness, and longing, which was heightened by the music. That "wanting" underscored everything. And it was beautiful which is why I wouldn't call it burdened. Anyway, thems my reasons. 😃 I guess I would say that I find it very difficult to just look at this film as being focused on the tone instead of the characters. For me it was very definitely about the characters (especially Stephen) and the tone, music, the way it was filmed and the way the actors delivered the dialogue was all done in support of the characters. All those elements went into giving me an understanding of who Stephen was and helped me journey with him as he moved through his grief and disconnection with the world around him. And to me, there was quite a shift in the film as far as mood is concerned - it did have a lot of sadness in it but I found the ending completely uplifting and hopeful. :-))
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Sept 28, 2017 16:55:31 GMT
I was reading Duskybatfishgirl's entry in her blog about TCiT and came across this passage which struck me as a good summation of a "reading" the film (hope you don't mind DBFG that I have purloined it and reporoduced it here)...
Stephen began the film as an isolated, empty person who was so consumed by the guilt of not being the protector of his family that he had stopped feeling any emotions. His motions in life were done by rote (witness the trudging out of the house with almost mechanic motion - including him posting the sign on his door advertising that "no one" was within that house), he didn't want anything disturbing his misery (his conversation with Thelma and Charles confirms this) because in a way his misery was his self-induced punishment for losing Kate ("of course it always has to be like this" he says to Julie later).
When the movie ends I got the feeling that Stephen had gone through a definite catharsis. He didn't want to be that "fish" any longer, denying his connection to the world around him, to stop feeling anything except his guilt about the loss of Kate. He knew he must think think about other things other than Kate and remember everything about her, not just wallow in his own "self-harming" ways.
The whole scene with him talking to her with the walkie-talkie was so pivotal in showing the audience how he was journeying through his grief towards acceptance and beyond. "Take your time" he said "We'll be here." He wasn't going to go searching any longer but he would be ready for her love to reach out to him (to find him - as Julie suggested) finally. And that is what Kate does to him in the ending scenes - she is waiting for him with "Mummy" at the hospital (she said as much on the walkie-talkie) and reaches out for his hand as he goes to Julie (an absolutely stunner of a scene). She can't be seen as he goes through the door and reaches out to Julie (but I know her spirit is with him) and he is telling himself, as well as talking to Julie, to "keep breathing" in the ending moments of the film (even after the visuals had gone to black he says it again). At that moment I knew he had come through the storm and was a changed man. Just beautiful and perfect. This is a beautiful and uplifting character study of a very damaged person who becomes healed in the end.
All the elements of this film converge to give us this portrait of Stephen and it works so well IMO. It also has other things to say along the way, but this was the main thrust of the film as far as I was concerned.
:-))
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 28, 2017 19:32:21 GMT
I agree with your entire post, Roverpup! That's exactly how I saw the film.
|
|