The picture is quite tolerable ordinary postmodern. The other day, cinematographer Christian Berger, who works with Michael Haneke starting with “benny’s Video” in an interview about his profession, said:
“When I see a good fighter, I respect the creators for their work, but this is still too much load from the point of view of drama: I don’t have time to understand the subtext, ambiguity and the metaphors used in the scene. I like it when the audience are given the chance to fill the film its sense and not cut off his feelings until the very end”.
And this is a very accurate description of the Hollywood approach, primitive wrapper condottieri from the movie manage to load a large number heatreflecting material, which inevitably touches the sharp realities of the current situation. As you know, Hollywood camera not tolerate static, it is dynamic even in the most static of scenes, the AIDS-installation leaves no chance for the lovers of meditation, camera missing a lot of information and never busy, it is set up destructive to his own creation, every seconds ruthlessly with the previous one, that produces the effect of reflexive freedom.
The European chamber is quite another matter, as Deleuze wrote in his “Cinema” in the limit French static camera can shoot over water (marine consciousness of the camera), this camera against rheumatism showed (from the Greek. reuma over): “consciousness-the camera turned in “against rheumatism showed that” because it aktualizovano in fluid perception, thereby achieving material entanglement, material-blend”. And according to Berger this camera “gives the viewer the chance to fill the film its sense” yeah, that’s utopianism, where the camera you want to make invisible, to produce the effect of absence of mediator, so that the viewer was looking at life itself, the flow of life, it’s too excessive spectator freedom, which can induce to failure even from the effect of absence from the movie at all.
However, I for example, still prefer the artifice of mastery, techne, visibility “done by labour”, the product as a hierarchy of privileged moments, selection and processing of which bears the stamp of large and heavy costs of collective work. To go through a reduction process, clearing the way for the positive gap that will make me fill it “for its meaning”, and by induction, a complete immersion in all these tiring “subtexts, double entendres and metaphors” voluntarily-involuntarily otheriwse surface action.
Here I am not a total dismantle and build something individually, capricious, risking to fall into against rheumatism showed that consciousness, and navozhu order in cash “chaos”. My audience’s job is to have time to notice, then link noticed, and ultimately to see associated, while in European cinema (in extreme forms) is the essence of the bypass, such as water, the following open paths in the boundless deep of the lake, blinking the eyelid to the eye without century, new vision.
“The mummy” is just such neuroelectronic chaos, there need to have time to notice and be linked and connected will identify the lighthouses that will invigorate in the right direction. Yes, from a formal point of view, this is not a perfect picture, i.e. not beating on receptive registers the viewer adequately, some registers remain intact, and therefore erogenous unsatisfied, but in terms of a meaningful load (it is important to understand that “content” is not synonymous with “value” in accordance with any ethical and aesthetic standards, it’s just the contents) it nezapravlenny is replete with references not only to its genre but also to the events of recent years.
In this sense, Hollywood is sverhpredelna Godzilla, which is reality snap off large chunks and swallows them without chewing, and what is not digested is spit up, the task of the viewer, if it pulls to the right, of course, is to explore the monstrous digestive process. Martsynovska “the Mummy”, as opposed to, say, the second “Guardians of the galaxy” the appetite is not interrupted and it has to this study. But without spoilers of things to do just not interested.
If you just want to enjoy the view, it is unlikely that the film will deliver in full, perhaps even lead to disappointment and sometimes to the irritation, the expectations are not justified, but if you want to dig, you are welcome.