Fragments of Antonin Gabriel Bomin
This is a surprising debut. Films about war is a separate genre. Whether Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, etc., is always in the thick of the action that the director tries to convey the absurdity of these large collective butchers. Apprehension direct, immediate and front actions on the battlefield gives these films an epic dimension, and makes almost photogenic event characterized by its unbearable horror. The reef who watched the film of Gabriel Bomin was different, because his starting point was different from that of the classical genre of war films. It's in the consciousness of the character that the author search, trying to pick up the scattered fragments of the traumatic memories that shake his character and dehumanize, making a wreck unable to watch the other side, and shunning any event of reality in the footsteps of the past overwhelming horror. When taking the first contact with Antonin, it is in the hospital where the care of a psychiatrist who dedicated his life to fully understand the trauma psychological warfare and out patients in this paralyzing grip of the past. Antonin is totally absent. His universe is reduced to 5 names spoken tirelessly and compulsive gestures, each referring to a specific recollection of the war-backs Flachs filmed by the filmmaker.
The challenge was very difficult, unlike literature, which can realize a dramatic dive in the consciousness of a character, by transmitting the character at times delusional and fragmentary in an immediate manner, the film interposed between this consciousness and his description of objective reality, visual, its images. A gap may arise between the tortured face of the character, haunted by the traumatic images, and updating of these same images, which seems to indicate too clearly the intervention of the director. This difficulty seems to be coupled with substantial difficulty stylistic: the uncontrollable shaking of Antoninus in this deal seems a very great mastery in the staging of the past. The filmmaker himself between her character and her memories, making more palpable the presence of the omniscient view, overlooking and dominating the camera.
But if the film succeeds in spite of this side too neat and lyrical staging of the past, we share this experience of human suffering, and we make the character of Antoninus so close is that the director establishes a bridge between the traumatic past and this dislocated through multiple sensory sensations and very concrete: the sound of the camera that turns evokes in his mind that machine guns, the sound of a metal object raises memories of metal collars (all soldiers wear the medallions with a number to be identified in case of death or injury) that hard to soldiers dying and thrown into a container bloodied, the touch of a pigeon (in his hands by the doctor) which raises the images of pigeons he stood to deliver operational information to the Staff the French army, etc..
But what makes this film so poignant, it is especially the attention paid by the director for inclusion of mental and psychological suffering in the body of her character and expressive gestures. Antonin is like a disjointed puppet, his body obeys him and seems more driven by the reproduction of compulsive actions of the past. His tremors are continuing as the actualization of all these terrible moments of fear and trembling before the fear of death. His hand caresses also reproduced on the face of a beloved hand, the Madeleine, the nurse of the Red Cross. Wide-eyed seem to face a world of death and horror, the director films in a very fair, without pathos. The idea of the most beautiful film is this: to convey through this disjointed body, trembling, and these gestures horribly reduced by the breviary of suffering the density of images and experiences of a man immersed in the heart of the great human folly, institutionalized and delusional, that the war be put across the character's physical and mental trauma experienced. Between the poignant and painful pantomime of Antoninus and the soldier who has been dead to face the miles and miles absurdities of war, the filmmaker builds bridges, returning gradually to control character's past, and So his body. It grows mercy on his way back to his beloved, Madeleine, who, recaressant his face, finally managed to escape the spell of the past.
But it's also a film on consciousness, not only that, exploded and fragmentary character, but also that of the viewer, which can only remain puzzled by the slow and inexorable emergence of the memory of the war and beyond, all the wars that have crippled humanity. The images are generic images of documentaries, which draw on those who are shot in a psychiatric hospital in the 20s, and show the faces and bodies of some soldiers twisted psychological distress. These images from the past haunt our memory as the images of the war the character's consciousness. The filmmaker and forces us to confront our own memory, and we examine the mechanisms of forgetting and repression of the consequences of war. The film also seems to emanate from an ethical question as one of the secondary characters of the film and form: what shall we do with our minds once the war is over.
We will long remember these so the eyes open to the horror of that body trembling, these repetitive and sterile as a metaphor for deep and dense of these wars that grind man. Sometimes the beauty of a film down to its ability to embody abstract ideas. His face contorted with pain Harriet Andersson in Cries and Whispers, to represent the death of Alex hallucinatory expression and his eyes opened by the pincers in A Clockwork Orange to say the violence of the modern world, we must now add the body trembling and eyes inordinately wide open to Antonin, to embody the horror of war, which fragmented consciousness.
This is a surprising debut. Films about war is a separate genre. Whether Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, etc., is always in the thick of the action that the director tries to convey the absurdity of these large collective butchers. Apprehension direct, immediate and front actions on the battlefield gives these films an epic dimension, and makes almost photogenic event characterized by its unbearable horror. The reef who watched the film of Gabriel Bomin was different, because his starting point was different from that of the classical genre of war films. It's in the consciousness of the character that the author search, trying to pick up the scattered fragments of the traumatic memories that shake his character and dehumanize, making a wreck unable to watch the other side, and shunning any event of reality in the footsteps of the past overwhelming horror. When taking the first contact with Antonin, it is in the hospital where the care of a psychiatrist who dedicated his life to fully understand the trauma psychological warfare and out patients in this paralyzing grip of the past. Antonin is totally absent. His universe is reduced to 5 names spoken tirelessly and compulsive gestures, each referring to a specific recollection of the war-backs Flachs filmed by the filmmaker.
The challenge was very difficult, unlike literature, which can realize a dramatic dive in the consciousness of a character, by transmitting the character at times delusional and fragmentary in an immediate manner, the film interposed between this consciousness and his description of objective reality, visual, its images. A gap may arise between the tortured face of the character, haunted by the traumatic images, and updating of these same images, which seems to indicate too clearly the intervention of the director. This difficulty seems to be coupled with substantial difficulty stylistic: the uncontrollable shaking of Antoninus in this deal seems a very great mastery in the staging of the past. The filmmaker himself between her character and her memories, making more palpable the presence of the omniscient view, overlooking and dominating the camera.
But if the film succeeds in spite of this side too neat and lyrical staging of the past, we share this experience of human suffering, and we make the character of Antoninus so close is that the director establishes a bridge between the traumatic past and this dislocated through multiple sensory sensations and very concrete: the sound of the camera that turns evokes in his mind that machine guns, the sound of a metal object raises memories of metal collars (all soldiers wear the medallions with a number to be identified in case of death or injury) that hard to soldiers dying and thrown into a container bloodied, the touch of a pigeon (in his hands by the doctor) which raises the images of pigeons he stood to deliver operational information to the Staff the French army, etc..
But what makes this film so poignant, it is especially the attention paid by the director for inclusion of mental and psychological suffering in the body of her character and expressive gestures. Antonin is like a disjointed puppet, his body obeys him and seems more driven by the reproduction of compulsive actions of the past. His tremors are continuing as the actualization of all these terrible moments of fear and trembling before the fear of death. His hand caresses also reproduced on the face of a beloved hand, the Madeleine, the nurse of the Red Cross. Wide-eyed seem to face a world of death and horror, the director films in a very fair, without pathos. The idea of the most beautiful film is this: to convey through this disjointed body, trembling, and these gestures horribly reduced by the breviary of suffering the density of images and experiences of a man immersed in the heart of the great human folly, institutionalized and delusional, that the war be put across the character's physical and mental trauma experienced. Between the poignant and painful pantomime of Antoninus and the soldier who has been dead to face the miles and miles absurdities of war, the filmmaker builds bridges, returning gradually to control character's past, and So his body. It grows mercy on his way back to his beloved, Madeleine, who, recaressant his face, finally managed to escape the spell of the past.
But it's also a film on consciousness, not only that, exploded and fragmentary character, but also that of the viewer, which can only remain puzzled by the slow and inexorable emergence of the memory of the war and beyond, all the wars that have crippled humanity. The images are generic images of documentaries, which draw on those who are shot in a psychiatric hospital in the 20s, and show the faces and bodies of some soldiers twisted psychological distress. These images from the past haunt our memory as the images of the war the character's consciousness. The filmmaker and forces us to confront our own memory, and we examine the mechanisms of forgetting and repression of the consequences of war. The film also seems to emanate from an ethical question as one of the secondary characters of the film and form: what shall we do with our minds once the war is over.
We will long remember these so the eyes open to the horror of that body trembling, these repetitive and sterile as a metaphor for deep and dense of these wars that grind man. Sometimes the beauty of a film down to its ability to embody abstract ideas. His face contorted with pain Harriet Andersson in Cries and Whispers, to represent the death of Alex hallucinatory expression and his eyes opened by the pincers in A Clockwork Orange to say the violence of the modern world, we must now add the body trembling and eyes inordinately wide open to Antonin, to embody the horror of war, which fragmented consciousness.
0 comments:
Post a Comment