Of course it's up to you if you want to watch it in pieces, but I would really recommend watching it in one go at least once as well. I find that something happens with my perception of time each time I do, hypnotyzing really. Seen it three times so far, gets better each time.
It's a seven hour, black and white film with minimal plot, little character development and very long blocks of silence. I get that it's a mood piece, but it came off as self indulgent to me.
Take the high rating on icheckmovies with a grain of salt. Very few people have committed 7 hours to this movie and most of them have taste very different from the mainstream.
"The structure of the film is based on that of the novel, which borrows, as its title suggests, from tango. That is, the film is broken into twelve parts, and does not necessarily move chronologically, as it follows the tango scheme of going six moves forward, then six back (hence 6 + 6 parts in total)."
First of all, I would like to mention that it took me several days to watch it because, ungratefully, I can't concentrate that much and I have a tendency to swift off. Well, I must admit it is not an easy one: it runs for more than 7 hours, there are only 150 shots, several parallel story-lines around different characters, the long takes (a very representative Tarr's trait) may be too long and arguably very slow. Unfocussed maybe and not very clear. As the camera moves that way, one may regard the film as motionless and boring. However, it is precisely that filming technique what make it powerful, a masterpiece.
On the first hand, what appealed the most to me was Tarr's ability to create such a gloomy, melancholic, burden-like atmosphere. I loved the music and the black-and-white photography. Oh, that cinematography... that was something beautiful. His work has been compared to Andrei Tarkovsky's and I understand why.
Some part are really brilliant. The best for me was "Comes Unstitched". I couldn't take my eyes away from the screen for a single moment. Yet the saddest one, but also the most beautiful somehow. The rest are really fine as well. But what remains and what it make this transcendent is the whole, the message, the simplicity of the story, the realism, the crudity, the tough side of earthy daily life. The metaphysical aspect regarding modern life.
The child decides to fade away,
something that is not very hard to understand for some people there, what to live for and why. The sense of uncertainty and unconformity, human beings unable to live a better life. Lack of amusement, inability to choose for own actions, impotence. There's not really much you can do.
If I am to rare this film I will give it 5 stars out of five. It is worthy. I got to love Béla's work with this watching. To finish with I just will add this quotation which I found very touching: "She felt peaceful inside and the trees, the road, the rain and the night all radiated peace."
The film is a pleasantly slow documentary (filmed in just two days in a style parodying 80s VHS arthouse) that revolves around some rural Hungarian alcoholics in the area of Gyula. A brilliant opening scene (8 minutes of newly released cows, no doubt the director's commentary of its audience), some excellent tableau(s) and, above all, hours and hours of Hungarian drunk ramblings, and some really nice electric organ, is what awaits the viewer.
As a big cat lover and softie I was ready to fast-forward the notorioua cat-torture scene. Turns out there was a big fuss about nothing. Sure, the cat might have felt some discomfort, and one might wonder if it was _really_ necessary. I would never call it torture though, honesly the filming of "Babe" must have caused tons more 'discomfort' to animals than these few minutes.
Aside from that, I'm not yet sure what to think. The movie is long, but rarely boring. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece either though, like I would Werckmeister Harmoniak. It's just what it is: a very long, well shot movie. A piece of art, definitely, but art is not always something to simply like or dislike. It just exists.
At first you think it's just an unfathomably tedious movie, until a little girl tortures a cat, then it becomes an unfathomably tedious and offensive movie.
Even when I *like* a movie, I prefer it either stays under 2.5 hours or formats itself as a serial meant to be watched in installments. Less is more.
Which can't fit in 2.5 hours max, it's not interesting and gonna lose many viewers. This movie, this bunch of pictures is a head-kick. I think it's art, but an awful way of self expression with ideas but Tarr Béla still thinks this way of storytelling works...but it's not. Some said it's a masterpiece, this sentence is on the back of the DVD: "I wish I could watch it again and again every day."
Hmmm...well, let me wish to this unknown person who said that: I'd really have a look on your face after a month :D
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 47
bathkuyp
Rehan
MMDan
I think it would have the same impact at four hours as it does with seven.Uruloki
Of course it's up to you if you want to watch it in pieces, but I would really recommend watching it in one go at least once as well. I find that something happens with my perception of time each time I do, hypnotyzing really. Seen it three times so far, gets better each time.TheGallopingGhost
It's a seven hour, black and white film with minimal plot, little character development and very long blocks of silence. I get that it's a mood piece, but it came off as self indulgent to me.Take the high rating on icheckmovies with a grain of salt. Very few people have committed 7 hours to this movie and most of them have taste very different from the mainstream.
Liv Ullmann
"The structure of the film is based on that of the novel, which borrows, as its title suggests, from tango. That is, the film is broken into twelve parts, and does not necessarily move chronologically, as it follows the tango scheme of going six moves forward, then six back (hence 6 + 6 parts in total)."First of all, I would like to mention that it took me several days to watch it because, ungratefully, I can't concentrate that much and I have a tendency to swift off. Well, I must admit it is not an easy one: it runs for more than 7 hours, there are only 150 shots, several parallel story-lines around different characters, the long takes (a very representative Tarr's trait) may be too long and arguably very slow. Unfocussed maybe and not very clear. As the camera moves that way, one may regard the film as motionless and boring. However, it is precisely that filming technique what make it powerful, a masterpiece.
On the first hand, what appealed the most to me was Tarr's ability to create such a gloomy, melancholic, burden-like atmosphere. I loved the music and the black-and-white photography. Oh, that cinematography... that was something beautiful. His work has been compared to Andrei Tarkovsky's and I understand why.
Some part are really brilliant. The best for me was "Comes Unstitched". I couldn't take my eyes away from the screen for a single moment. Yet the saddest one, but also the most beautiful somehow. The rest are really fine as well. But what remains and what it make this transcendent is the whole, the message, the simplicity of the story, the realism, the crudity, the tough side of earthy daily life. The metaphysical aspect regarding modern life.
If I am to rare this film I will give it 5 stars out of five. It is worthy. I got to love Béla's work with this watching. To finish with I just will add this quotation which I found very touching: "She felt peaceful inside and the trees, the road, the rain and the night all radiated peace."
TheMajor
The scene in the bar was terribly boring, the other 7 hours didn't bore me for a second.Dolwphin
The film is a pleasantly slow documentary (filmed in just two days in a style parodying 80s VHS arthouse) that revolves around some rural Hungarian alcoholics in the area of Gyula. A brilliant opening scene (8 minutes of newly released cows, no doubt the director's commentary of its audience), some excellent tableau(s) and, above all, hours and hours of Hungarian drunk ramblings, and some really nice electric organ, is what awaits the viewer.dopzihon
Outstanding.deckard.
an experimentation which tarr did not bother to try again. a perfect example of "style over substance".just fast forward. really. you won't lose anything. if i wanted to look at static images for 8 minutes, i'd go to an exhibition.
Litso
As a big cat lover and softie I was ready to fast-forward the notorioua cat-torture scene. Turns out there was a big fuss about nothing. Sure, the cat might have felt some discomfort, and one might wonder if it was _really_ necessary. I would never call it torture though, honesly the filming of "Babe" must have caused tons more 'discomfort' to animals than these few minutes.Aside from that, I'm not yet sure what to think. The movie is long, but rarely boring. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece either though, like I would Werckmeister Harmoniak. It's just what it is: a very long, well shot movie. A piece of art, definitely, but art is not always something to simply like or dislike. It just exists.
greenhorg
At first you think it's just an unfathomably tedious movie, until a little girl tortures a cat, then it becomes an unfathomably tedious and offensive movie.Even when I *like* a movie, I prefer it either stays under 2.5 hours or formats itself as a serial meant to be watched in installments. Less is more.
pitn
I was hooked from the sound of the bells in the beginning onwards. Absolutely loved it.I am Miami
Which can't fit in 2.5 hours max, it's not interesting and gonna lose many viewers. This movie, this bunch of pictures is a head-kick. I think it's art, but an awful way of self expression with ideas but Tarr Béla still thinks this way of storytelling works...but it's not. Some said it's a masterpiece, this sentence is on the back of the DVD: "I wish I could watch it again and again every day."Hmmm...well, let me wish to this unknown person who said that: I'd really have a look on your face after a month :D
George Bailey
Is 7.5 hours really worth it??Showing items 1 – 15 of 47