I wanted to write a short review, but it turned out to be more than the length of the short review, so I simply wrote a short film review.
This is a very film-based work, the lines are very concise, and a lot of space is left for the image to express. Aside from the perception, the footage of the donkey Batsa throughout the film made me touch some characteristics of the essence of the image language: that is, no matter how natural the non-human existence of the donkey as the protagonist is in daily life, when it enters the camera editing In an instant, it will be anthropomorphic and metaphorical, sprouted from the creator's inner world, and accepted by the audience's projected past self-emotions.
The feature of discovering the language of images comes from the urge to personify the donkey Batsa himself or his emotions that I can clearly feel while watching the film. Several close-ups of Batsa's eyes have given me complex and rich emotions. After thinking about it for a long time after reading it, I came to the preliminary conclusion that this kind of "communication" with Batsa's eyes should originate from the essence of lens editing - time and space fragments with fixed angles after being screened by people. Whether it is still life, non-human animals or people, the fragments of time and space that are photographed and screened are ultimately controlled by those who try to use the language of images. The process of shooting and screening is the beginning of expression, germinating in the creator’s inner world that is about to burst out, and finally dispersing in the assembled lens fragments. So aside from the choice of still life or people as protagonists/characters to discuss, when a non-human animal, a cute donkey is selected to enter the camera, it is no longer a simple donkey, but a donkey Batsa, a person who takes on the inner world of people metaphorical carrier. And because language (including video language) itself is unavoidably human-centered, then the non-human animal as a carrier cannot insinuate its body as an animal, but two possibilities: a complete human character (anthropomorphic cartoon) , such as the animals in The Lion King), as a completely anthropomorphic "person" exists in the image; or as an interface that intervenes in a set of thought concepts (such as Batsa the donkey in this film), as an interface to a richer consciousness The reality/inner world of images and creators. So in general, no matter how "natural" the non-human animals that enter the film lens are, they only have a similar appearance, but their gods come from elsewhere.
The above feeling is actually nothing special, and it can even be said that we can reason it out with common sense. But without the "seduction" of a film with a strong sense of experimentation by Bresson today, my common sense would not have emerged. In addition to making the natural donkey the protagonist of the whole film, Bresson is very restrained from the shots of the human actors, especially their lines and expressions, and the soundtrack is even more streamlined, and all these combine to make Batsa the existence of the protagonist of the image. The feeling is doubled and magnified, making the donkey who doesn't know how to "act" become a well-deserved protagonist. But to be honest, these exquisite visual language actually contains rich religious consciousness, so apart from the high point that Batsa fell into the flock at the end, I felt that I was really connected, other times I can only be like this. Look, you can't get all its benefits, so the viewing experience is not enjoyable. But even so, Bresson's highly expressive profile shots (such as the use of many close-ups of feet and hands to express subtle emotions and rich possibilities), and finally Batsa and the flock, this highly symbolic , and the idea of using a donkey to "naturally" access the Christian consciousness in the whole film (it's called the Passion of a Donkey, haha), I should also give the film five stars based on my not-so-good impression. After all, I don’t think a good movie has to have a good look and feel. The most important thing is the awareness of its image media. The “Ass Battha” I watched today is a poor look and feel, but it made me deeply appreciate the image language itself. good movie.
View more about Au hasard Balthazar reviews
