Showing posts with label fear. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fear. Show all posts

Monday, June 1, 2026

An Unfinished Film


 





















Director Lou Ye












AN UNFINISHED FILM                 B-                                                                                 China  Singapore  Germany  USA  (107 mi)  2024  d: Lou Ye

A film crew was harshly gobsmacked
When the deadly Wuhan virus attacked
Forced to their rooms
And reliant on Zooms
They sat until they collectively cracked

An Unfinished Film (一部未完成的电影) - The Steel Frog Blog

Returning to the scene of the crime, the outbreak of the Covid pandemic in China at the beginning of 2020, with masks and social distancing becoming a regular part of our daily life, yet told through an unusual angle, blurring the boundaries between fiction and documentary, as Lou Ye, one of the most uncompromising Sixth Generation voices of China’s film industry, a filmmaker known for his bold and often controversial approach, has made what can be described as a cellphone film, as it normalizes the use of cellphones, a reminder that social media surrounds us everywhere, which some find as commonplace as any other daily ritual, yet a major distraction for others, who aren’t yet ready to call vertical-screen cellphone videos an artform, but this film builds its case.  Initially shown out of competition at the Special Screenings section at Cannes, this is essentially a behind-the-scenes, documentary style glimpse of filmmaking, a movie about making a movie, which extends to the multitude of largely unseen personnel who collaborate in the creative process, as we watch them work collectively, led by director Xiaorui (Mao Xiaorui, an actual television director), trying to reconstruct a film out of the remnants of a project that started 10 years ago but abruptly stopped for lack of financing, using outtakes or unused footage from what appears to be a sequel to Lou’s own gay-themed film SPRING FEVER (2009), among the first Chinese Mainland films to graphically depict gay sex, which won the Best Screenplay award at Cannes in 2009, but did not endear himself to Chinese authorities, released as a French/Hong Kong production to circumvent his imposed 5-year ban from filmmaking after SUMMER PALACE (2006), which was set against the background of the Tiananmen Square massacre.  Breaking out all the old outdated computer equipment that has been in storage, they rediscover the original files, while Xiaorui has also secured the participation of the same lead actor Jiang Cheng (Qin Hao), who is now an in-demand star, though when he rejoins the cast he explicitly states, “Your film will never pass censorship.”  Nonetheless, defying authorities, he’s eager to work with the director again, though they are all significantly older, carrying with them new life experiences, as some have gotten married and have families, including Jiang whose wife has an expectant baby on the way.  Filming begins in Wuhan only after the baby is born, becoming a poetic ode to the courage and tenacity of independent artists who are willing to buck the government censors, risking their careers and even reputations for so little, as there was no guarantee anyone other than the participants themselves would ever see this film, with Jiang heard uttering at one point, “If nobody can see this film in theaters, then what’s the point?”  Yet they choose to do it anyway.  Written by the director in collaboration with his wife and longtime co-writer Ma Yingli, this project gives them the opportunity to look back at the past, as the director and crew are constantly examining what they filmed a decade ago, which becomes a catalyst for their own introspection, constantly challenging viewers to question what is real and what is staged. It’s never clear what role Jiang has in this production, yet all communication starts from him, where part of the persistent rhythm is devoted to video chats between Jiang and his wife Sang Qi (Qi Xi), where the actress was really at home in Beijing taking care of her one month old baby, so this reality was built into the film, as she is only seen on a cellphone screen, often shown on a split screen to show both of them speaking quietly to each other, in one tender moment even falling asleep together, each holding their cellphones next to their faces.  A commentary on the film process itself, with the actors playing a film version of themselves, what we see is not just a film about interruption, but a film that interrupts itself, as its incompleteness is the central thesis that speaks volumes through time gaps and silences.  

Originally conceived as a film consisting of old footage of Jiang playing various roles, reflecting the changes in China over the past decade or so, but yet another unforeseen circumstance happens while they are shooting in the town of Wuhan, as they’re also grappling with this huge, unprecedented global pandemic unfolding all around them, taking us back to the very earliest stages of the Covid pandemic when it was just beginning, shifting the entire perspective of the film, becoming an hour-by-hour update on the changing focus of containing the outbreak, which suddenly becomes part of what they’re filming.  Despite television news reports of blocked roads alongside a very public military presence, at first no one paid it any mind when a hairdresser from Wuhan is sent home, or a production assistant faints in the corridor, thinking those affected were simply random illnesses, as the production would still move forward, AN UNFINISHED FILM Clip | TIFF 2024 YouTube (1:53).  What they envisioned in making this film never comes to fruition, instead they are continually interrupted with public health updates, which is mirrored by security enforcing a contamination zone, not letting anyone in or out of the hotel, which literally happens overnight and is completely inconceivable for some, who just assumed they would be home by the Lunar New Year to celebrate with their families, as travel plans had already been arranged.  But that comes to an abrupt halt when they are forcibly locked inside their rooms, while people in full-body hamzat suits bring their food or other essentials to their door, yet none of this eruptive chaos ever feels like it is staged, but remains viscerally raw, as cinematographer Zeng Jian’s handheld shots move between observation and confusion, mimicking the anxiety and disorientation people must have felt in the early days of the pandemic, where the emotional power lies in restraint.  The euphoric mood of the opening, hoping to create something entirely new, quickly turns into panic mode, initially met with anger and indignation, forcibly trying to make their way through security, followed by resignation and despair, with the realization that they would be stuck there for quite a while under quarantine, literally cut off from their families and the rest of the world, yet unlike those who voluntarily chose to stay at home and shelter-in-place, these individuals were really forced to lock down, where the entire crew must remain inside their respective hotel rooms, unable to leave until this is over, separated by circumstance and/or arbitrary health rules enforced by the military.  Blending actual footage of those early lockdown days with staged scenes, not everyone viewing this film wants to re-live these experiences again, as it may be too soon, still traumatized by what happened, with astronomical death rates that had never happened before during our lifetimes, yet at the very beginning, no one knew that it would lead to a worldwide pandemic, thinking only about its effect in the immediate vicinity, as the majority of the first reported cases of coronavirus are in China.  What happens at the hotel is a mini-version of what’s happening in the entire city, as the whole population of 14 million people are under a lockdown enforced by authorities, leaving the streets eerily empty, like a post-apocalyptic view of how the world might look after a nuclear war, so in essence the film is a time capsule of a historic period in our lives, and while the film was censored in China, completed only with financing from Singapore and Germany, it has been embraced around the world, largely for its critical thinking.  What this film thoughtfully captures is the fear, the isolation, and that longing for connection, things we can all universally relate to and understand, while also questioning the role of art during times of crisis. 

A film about creative inspiration quickly becomes a Covid documentary, a reflection of the chaos and confusion of the times, and a social and political crisis that played out differently in different places around the world, with cellphones documenting what the cast sees in the hallways, courtyards, or out their windows, where a constant stream of ambulances are seen arriving and departing, with disinfectant being sprayed everywhere, completely changing the fluid pace and hopeful outlook of the beginning, which is reduced to a crawl when the entire crew is left alone in their hotel rooms under lockdown.  With phones and televisions becoming their only window into the outside world, viewers are suddenly privy to personal messaging back and forth, sharing the latest updates while attempting to keep their spirits high, reaching an apex when they all gather together on a group video call and count down the seconds to the Chinese New Year (January 25th in 2020), then exploding in celebration, each alone in their rooms, breaking out into music and dance onscreen, where it’s all captured by cellphones.  Overly rambunctious in their joyous celebration, they spontaneously break out into the hallways and comingle, violating all health protocols, which is immediately shut down by security who orders them all back into their rooms.  It’s a brief moment of elation, lasting only a few minutes, but it captures the essence of what they’re all feeling, just wanting to feel alive again in a world where all the emphasis has shifted to the pandemic.  In just the first few months, a main focus of all the news reports is an inexplicable public health phenomenon that spreads rapidly, with no known cure, becoming more and more contagious, offering a rare glimpse into the Chinese experience of the pandemic, where some of the few surprises includes actual clips of news footage, CCTV surveillance footage, and TikTok-style children’s covers of songs that went viral on the Chinese internet, creating this kaleidoscopic effect, showing how individual experiences are intertwined with surrounding events, bringing us right into the middle of all the chaos and uncertainty.  With little advance warning, authorities completely stifle the population from coming into contact with one another, shutting down the city of Wuhan and the surrounding regions to contain the virus, though six Wuhan hospital doctors died in just the first six months, including infamous whistleblower Dr. Li Wenliang, who warned his colleagues about the virus before succumbing to it himself, and is remembered on TV clips.  Speeding through a collage of conspicuous events over the next several years, including footage of the riots that followed the 2022 Ürümqi fire that sparked nationwide protests against the government’s Zero-COVID policy, which was irrefutably unpopular and controversial, yet the number of infections spiked drastically when the policy was dropped, leading to a massive amount of infections and a staggering death count, which are conspicuously missing from the film, though the magnitude of the loss is profound, feeling more like an elegiac memoriam by the end.  While mostly contained to just a few months immediately after the outbreak, this is a highly personalized, insular view of what transpired, a calm before the storm, as over 7 million people worldwide eventually died.  The film seems to challenge our collective memories, asking if the world has changed significantly since then, are we any different, did we learn anything, and has this situation changed us?  Personal phone calls between Jiang and his wife give way to random videos posted online (click here to watch the video, 4:35), with an imprinted date stamp indicating how long after the outbreak, all poetically capturing the mood and feel of living under lockdown and slowly coming out of hibernation, as if released from captivity, where the joy of simply walking unimpeded down a city street feels like a precious moment of unleashed freedom.    

Wednesday, January 1, 2025

2024 Top Ten List #9 The Beast (La Bête)


 

























Director Bertrand Bonello




Bonello on the set with Léa Seydoux











THE BEAST (La Bête)          A-                                                                                              France  Canada  (146 mi)  2023  d: Bertrand Bonello

The first idea was to do a melodrama, which is something I’ve never done before, and that drove me to a short novel by Henry James called The Beast in the Jungle.  For me, it’s one of the most heart-breaking, beautiful, and awful stories you can imagine.  I wanted to mix this with some genre [elements], because, in James’s novel, love and fear are so related.  So I wanted to have some ‘fear’ scenes,  and there is almost a slasher movie inside this film.  The other thing, that came quite quickly, was the desire to do a film, for the first time in my life, in which the main character is female.           —Bertrand Bonello

One of the better films exploring the boundaries between fiction and reality, revealing just how elusive reality can be.  Bonello, who is also a professor at the prestigious La Fémis, is a French director whose films deal with provocation, the difficulty of human relations, the anguish of living, the sexual condition, and abstraction, from the opulently beautiful House of Tolerance (L’Apollonide – souvenirs de la maison close) (2011) to the misguided radicalism of the selfie generation in Nocturama (2016).  Yet it’s his first film, the rarely screened SOMETHING ORGANIC (1998), that really stands out, made for $100,000 and shot in just 15 days, where especially memorable is a woman’s inexplicable journey to the farthest northern region in Canada, where she’s the lone female in a sparse makeshift town enveloped in snow next to an oil rig on Hudson Bay, where all that’s open is a drinking establishment, expressed in extreme quiet, where she eventually has a drink with every guy in town, leading to staggering consequences.  While that is a minimalist aesthetic, this massively ambitious effort is a riveting, two-and-a-half-hour mind-altering, sci-fi adaptation of the 1903 Henry James novella The Beast in the Jungle (which can be read in its entirety in less time than it takes to view this movie), a cautionary tale where a man refuses to love as he’s overcome by a belief that something horrible will happen, so he puts his life on hold, postponing everything, entering a metaphoric waiting room, until it becomes apparent that his anxious-ridden withdrawal from life *is* the monster he’s been avoiding.  But this is no literary adaption, as the director instead expands upon his own wildly inventive themes, mixing classical and contemporary, switching the gender to a female perspective, as we are immersed into the life of a woman named Gabrielle Monnier (the utterly fabulous Léa Seydoux, a once-in-a-generation talent with astonishing assurance and range) spanning three different time periods, each referencing a timeline of emotions through real-life historical catastrophes, the flooding of Paris in Belle Époque France in 1910, a period when fears and emotions are completely repressed, a Los Angeles earthquake in 2014 when they are overexpressed and overwhelming, and a placeless, dystopian future of 2044 when they are totally absent, as artificial intelligence has taken over the world.  In each time period she bumps into the same man in her life, Louis Lewanski (British actor George MacKay in a role initially envisioned for Gaspard Ulliel, to whom the film is dedicated, who died tragically in a ski accident in 2022), where her connection to him is clouded in mystery and intrigue, yet she is intrinsically drawn to him.  Like a time-travel story, reminiscent of the largesse and ominous feel of Chris Marker’s La Jetée (1962), they are destined to find one another through space and time, consumed by the deep-seated terror that some strange, horrible unknown is about to obliterate her, where that fear prevents either of them from realizing who they want to be.  Curiously, there is another film adapting the same Henry James novella, Austrian filmmaker Patric Chiha’s THE BEAST IN THE JUNGLE (2023), taking place in a nightclub awaiting an impending apocalyptic event.  Rejected by the Cannes Film Festival, it instead premiered in Venice and has played the festival circuit.  Structurally, the closest thing this resembles is Michel Gondry’s ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND (2004), especially the erasure of memory, as in the future humans are viewed as a useless burden, where emotions are perceived as a weakness and a threat to a productive society, leaving only menial jobs available, nothing that requires any intelligent aptitude, so in hopes of obtaining a better job (they cross paths during interviews), Gabrielle reluctantly undergoes a DNA purification procedure that will wipe out her strongest emotions, described as “affects,” in an effort to find a more fulfilling job while keeping pace with more productive AI counterparts in the workforce.  But in doing so, she experiences flashbacks to previous lives, each containing traumatic memories.  Written by Bonello with contributions from Guillaume Bréaud and Benjamin Charbit, even composing his own musical score with his daughter Anna, this is a wild ride of a movie with constantly shifting time periods, mood alterations, and atmospheric shifts, with brief snippets from Harmony Korine’s TRASH HUMPERS (2009) thrown in for good measure, also Xavier Dolan (one of the producers) as the Alphaville (1965)-like AI voice of a computer, where very little is actually explained for viewers.  Veering into moments of horror, the entire film is embedded in a baffling enigma of bewilderment, something of a mindfuck of a movie, a sensory surprise, but in the best possible sense, as it’s an eerie and positively transfixing experience, where the title may actually refer to the fear of love, or the ferocity of unrequited love in a Sisyphean cycle of missed opportunities through the strands of time, potentially leaving one imprisoned in the purgatory of Sartre’s hellish No Exit, forever denied the essence of our own existence.  Even the end credits are shrouded in secrecy, as they are hidden behind a QR code, leading to an audience of smartphones pointing at the movie screen, revealing the credits and perhaps even an unseen sequence, before the lights come on in the theater.  The end.  But the end of what, you may ask?        

Using melodrama in a world that’s largely emotionless is not an easy thing to pull off, yet it’s handled deftly, as the filmmaker is directly involving the audience, making sure they feel the totality of the deeply unsettling experience.  Having worked with this director twice before in ON WAR (2008) and SAINT LAURENT (2014), Seydoux feels completely comfortable and at ease around him, having the freedom to explore on camera, as she has a very instinctual approach, sharing a common artistic vision, developing a firm belief they are collaborators.  Inspired by a crippling fear of the unknown, Bonello transposes the loneliness and fatalism of the source novel into a postmodern world obsessed with eliminating any connection to feeling anything at all, where there’s a core of anxiety running through this movie.  In our struggle against loneliness, we are oftentimes our own worst enemy, creating imaginary obstacles that stand in our way in order to justify our perceived failures.  While never actually specified, the world of the future has experienced some sort of natural disaster, possibly biological, as no cars are seen, no presence of social media, and no social life at all, while people on strangely empty streets are wearing protective face shields, with AI leading humanity into a newer, safer existence, where humans are expected to purge their flaws and weaknesses in order to conform to a more ordered and robotic future.  While some have suggested this film takes on the same grandiose scope as the Tom Tykwer and Wachowski sister’s sci-fi spectacle Cloud Atlas (2012), constantly moving backwards and forward in three different time frames, but that does this film a disservice, as it’s not anything like the jumbled mess of that film, displaying much more originality, told in an intensely personal manner that is uniquely challenging to viewers, seen through the eyes of a single character, where it’s the power of Seydoux’s extraordinary performance that compels viewers to stick around through the lengthy duration.  French-Canadian cinematographer Josée Deshaies, the director’s wife, is in complete command, providing the exactitude of Kubrickian compositions, including extreme close-ups, while also giving expression to the unspeakable.  The earlier historical period was shot on sumptuous 35mm, giving the screen a sensual texture, while the other sections were shot on digital, providing a stark contrast of sterility and coldness.  In the opening prologue sequence an actress is asked by the offscreen voice of Bonello, “Can you get scared by something that’s not actually here?”  She is then seen performing before a green screen in a horror movie, given specific instructions of what to do when the camera rolls (Ironically, Seydoux has largely avoided CGI scenes in her career choices, working almost exclusively in arthouse cinema).  In an empty room she screams, moves around, picks up a knife, and imagines herself confronting an unidentified beast, where the bare-bones nature of the minimalist set forces viewers to imagine the scene playing out in their minds before it happens, setting the stage for images and abstract ideas that follow.  It’s then over an hour or so before that scene actually appears in the movie.  It’s a clever device that works beautifully, where her instructions to scream recalls Fay Wray’s rehearsal instructions for a dreaded encounter in King Kong (1933), both terrified at the sight of some unseen beast, having absolutely no idea what it is, yet viewers can tell immediately that they’re in good hands, as this is a director who can navigate our journey through the unexpected, where it’s an exhausting yet fascinating aesthetic, not really like anything else we’ve seen.  That opening scene gives notice that the film is really about Léa Seydoux, as Bonello wrote it for her, and she is the driving force of the film.  Gabrielle is a virtuoso pianist in turn-of-the century Paris, gracious, well-mannered, and immaculately dressed, seen wandering around a museum-like setting at a high society party with champagne flowing as she strikes up a conversation with the elegantly dressed Louis, cutting a dashing figure in his tuxedo, admiring a series of paintings that she describes as “Violent, psychiatric, and rather beautiful.”  He then reminds her they met years ago when she somewhat drunkenly confided to him a startling fear, making him the only other person aware of her secret, recounting the conversation almost exactly, where he promises the utmost confidence in protecting her, a pledge she does not take lightly, impressed by how he so accurately remembers the precise details after the passing years, as it obviously made an impression on him, The Beast (La Bete) new clip official - Venice Film Festival 2023 YouTube (1:32), yet that fear of something terrible happening prevents them from fully consummating their love.  This rekindling of passion, however, which doesn’t exist in her overly safe marriage, suddenly coincides with taking a big risk.  Like a manifestation of her own fears, Paris is suddenly submerged in water, where a plan to escape together goes terribly awry, yet produces some of the most extraordinary images of the film. 

Combining elements of sci-fi, melodrama, horror, and romance, the film accentuates the intense loneliness and disconnection that has become a fixture of contemporary life, which is especially prominent in the English-speaking Los Angeles section, meeting at a retro-themed disco that changes musical styles by specifically chosen years, where Gabrielle is a model and aspiring actress house-sitting in a thoroughly modern glass mansion in the Hollywood Hills, while Louis is an angry man, a 30-year old virgin who only has sex in his dreams, consumed by an unrelenting hatred of women.  We see him literally stalking Gabriella from his car, planning a home invasion while broadcasting his misogynist manifesto live on YouTube, promising to punish women for not having sex with him, claiming he is “the perfect gentleman,” and that women who deny him sex are committing “reverse rape,” views that are so absurdly extreme they carry a bleak hilarity in their mocking commentary, yet his grandiloquent pronouncements are chillingly real.  The 2014 incel version of Louis, Incels (Involuntary celibates), is based on Eliot Rodger (Elliot Rodger: How misogynist killer became 'incel hero'), who killed six people and injured 14 others near the Santa Barbara campus of the University of California on May 23, 2014 before shooting himself in his own car.  Even the shattering experience of an earthquake fails to bridge the divide, as our young protagonists are brought together on the street afterwards, but there remains an eerie underlying discomfort, Clip: The Beast (Janus Films, Sideshow Films) YouTube (1:25), giving rise to scenes that resemble the car slasher mode of David Fincher’s ZODIAC (2007).  Whenever they encounter each other, a disquieting passion lingers between them, as she’s drawn to a version of him that seems to exist only in her head, yet the transformation of Louis is especially fascinating, unexpected, and highly disturbing.  In their initial encounter at the beginning of the film, he remarks, “Fulfillment lies in the lack of passion,” an astute observation that seems to accurately describe a sentiment felt throughout this film.  Even in 1910, when offered the opportunity to be painted by a Lucian Freud-like artist, she declines, claiming “I don’t want to lose my soul.”  And in the future, when contemplating an erasure of her most precious memories, she values her capacity to be moved and react authentically.  While there are ominous signs from the recurring appearance of pigeons, a pair of digital psychics, a computer malware infestation, and a connecting leitmotif from Puccini’s tragic opera Madame Butterfly, the strongest metaphor running throughout the film comes from a variety of dolls, an artificial model for what it is to be human, and a prototype for the possible replacement for the human race.  At the turn of the century, Gabrielle’s husband owns a doll factory, which she tours with Louis, who comments on their expressionless faces, designed “to appeal to everybody.”  One of the most haunting images in the film is her imitation of that “neutral” facial expression void of emotion that she holds, a look that lingers long afterwards (Is that our future?).  In 2044 after her DNA cleanse, an AI robot named Kelly (Guslagie Malanda from Alice Diop’s 2023 Top Ten List #3 Saint Omer) offers help and support, even planting a kiss while inviting her to have sex, but Gabrielle dismisses her as merely a doll.  Another weird doll sits on her desk during the LA house-sit making odd noises, as if having a life of its own, like an alter-ego of her character.  The film is an exploration of the existential, of what it means to be human, as Gabrielle is haunted by a lingering sense of dread, by her fear of “The Beast,” a metaphor for death and the fear of death, an experience only humans on this planet can comprehend, as Gabrielle fears “obliteration.”  The shocking red curtain finale is an overt reference to David Lynch, right down to the strains of Roy Orbison drawing a tear, Roy Orbison ~ Evergreen (Stereo) YouTube (2:51).  A final credit sequence without any listing of names, just a QR code, puts the final stamp on where the coldness of technology can finally take us in the future, a world with no feelings at all, where love is actually an impediment to personal fulfillment.  Whatever you may think of this film, it is uncompromising, resulting in a dizzying, often spellbinding experience, where the ambiguities are intentional and purposeful, as a film with this depth and magnitude is a constant reminder that the malaise of the present, surrounded by invisible forces we cannot control, is a harbinger for the future, where the decisions we make actually matter, leaving behind our human imprint.  

Bertrand Bonello on The Beast - Film Comment  Devika Girish interview podcast (35:22)