Eeee! So exciting!
Thanks to the power of BitTorrent, I'm finally going to watch Dancer in the Dark, the movie whose soundtrack CD is Björk's "Selmasongs." For some strange reason, I've had the album since like late 2000/early 2001, but never actually seen the movie.
Brief review to follow once it's over!
Hmm.
This was a frustrating film to watch.
Not because it was terrible, but precisely because portions which I could have seen being so effective basically fell flat. In the hands of another director, another cinematographer, this premise could have turned into a masterpiece of a film.
The main character is Selma (played by Björk), who lives a hard life but escapes from her drudgery by imagining life as a musical. The fantastical element was done alright, with everybody dancing spontaneously, but the actual way that the camera work was done makes it all look shoddy and low-budget (it probably was, but...) My point is that if real painstaking work had been done to distinguish the mundane from the extraordinary, along the lines of: using muted colors vs. vibrant ones, generally giving a gritty vs. glamorous feel, making the character of Cathy more brought out, her true personality only freed in the musical sections, changing Selma's would-be boyfriend Jeff to be a stronger character... all of these things would have lent the movie a higher level of artistry, and made it more enjoyable.
Also, the version of "I've Seen It All" in the movie is really mediocre. Whoever the male singer was on the song from Selmasongs, if *he* had been in place of Jeff, it would have worked as a duet, but the actor who did play him really couldn't sing (and would have looked out of character if he could, he's balding, middle-aged, not really a "catch" -- that was the director's intent, but I really don't care for this approach.) That was maybe the biggest disappointment, since the arrangement wasn't even remotely up to the level of the CD version which I was expecting.
I think one scene in particular merits a comparison of how it was done in the movie and how I would have gone about it.
(Beware! Here there be spoilers!)
Movie Version:
Bill has already stolen the money Selma saved for her operation. She goes over to his house, and his wife accuses her of trying to seduce him (she has seen him going over to take it, and he lied to protect himself). She goes upstairs and gets the money; he threatens her with his gun and tries to take it back from her forcibly; she shoots him by accident, he then begs her to kill him, and she shoots erratically towards him (at this point, she has gone completely blind.) Overcome with emotion, she starts bashing his head in with a metal box, and the music for Scatterheart comes in (the lyrics in the movie are different, about asking him to forgive her.) He gets up, covered in blood, and tells her that she is forgiven, and she is suddenly outside, then wading into the river, after which she is picked up by Jeff who seemingly does not yet know what has occurred (he's just arrived).
My Version:
Bill has stolen the money just as before, although we aren't shown that he finds out where it is as in the movie. Selma discovers it is missing, then walks over intending to find out if someone has robbed her trailer (Bill is a policeman in the movie.) She asks him innocently, and he is overcome with guilt, but out of fear he hysterically threatens to kill her if she tells anyone he's taken it. She begins to tear up, and asks simply, "Why?" He is overcome, and hands her the gun, insisting that she shoot him. (He had earlier contemplated suicide in the movie, so this has a logical precedent.) Shaking, she slowly raises up the gun, and fires a single shot, still weeping. She drops it and everything around her fades to black, leaving just her illuminated in a void. The CD version of Scatterheart starts, and her son appears before her. She goes to him and embraces him tearfully, caressing his hair and singing...
Scatterheart
Black night is falling
The sun is gone to bed
The innocent are dreaming
As you should sleepy-head
Sleepy-head, sleepy-head
All the love above
I send into you
Comfort and protection
I'll watch over you
But don't ask me
What's gonna happen next
I know the future
I'd love to lead you the way
Just to make it easier on you
You are gonna have to find out for yourself...
My
dearest
scatterheart...
There is comfort
Right in the eye
Of the hurricane
Just to make it easier on you
All the hurt in the world
You know
There's nothing I'd love to do more
Than spare you from that burden
It's gonna be hard
If I only could
Shelter you
From that pain
Just to make it easier on you
--
Now *that* would have been a great scene, and not an anti-climatic "oh, I guess I'll have to kill him now or something."
All this brings up an interesting point: if the movie itself is mediocre, but the ideas behind it are unique and have merit, might it be praised on the strength of what it should have been? I leave it as an exercise to the reader, due to my irresponsibility towards that heretofore ignored guided reading assignment on the French Revolution (sadly, one of the only areas of history that I am interested in -- doubly poignant since I haven't done it!).
Brief review to follow once it's over!
Hmm.
This was a frustrating film to watch.
Not because it was terrible, but precisely because portions which I could have seen being so effective basically fell flat. In the hands of another director, another cinematographer, this premise could have turned into a masterpiece of a film.
The main character is Selma (played by Björk), who lives a hard life but escapes from her drudgery by imagining life as a musical. The fantastical element was done alright, with everybody dancing spontaneously, but the actual way that the camera work was done makes it all look shoddy and low-budget (it probably was, but...) My point is that if real painstaking work had been done to distinguish the mundane from the extraordinary, along the lines of: using muted colors vs. vibrant ones, generally giving a gritty vs. glamorous feel, making the character of Cathy more brought out, her true personality only freed in the musical sections, changing Selma's would-be boyfriend Jeff to be a stronger character... all of these things would have lent the movie a higher level of artistry, and made it more enjoyable.
Also, the version of "I've Seen It All" in the movie is really mediocre. Whoever the male singer was on the song from Selmasongs, if *he* had been in place of Jeff, it would have worked as a duet, but the actor who did play him really couldn't sing (and would have looked out of character if he could, he's balding, middle-aged, not really a "catch" -- that was the director's intent, but I really don't care for this approach.) That was maybe the biggest disappointment, since the arrangement wasn't even remotely up to the level of the CD version which I was expecting.
I think one scene in particular merits a comparison of how it was done in the movie and how I would have gone about it.
(Beware! Here there be spoilers!)
Movie Version:
Bill has already stolen the money Selma saved for her operation. She goes over to his house, and his wife accuses her of trying to seduce him (she has seen him going over to take it, and he lied to protect himself). She goes upstairs and gets the money; he threatens her with his gun and tries to take it back from her forcibly; she shoots him by accident, he then begs her to kill him, and she shoots erratically towards him (at this point, she has gone completely blind.) Overcome with emotion, she starts bashing his head in with a metal box, and the music for Scatterheart comes in (the lyrics in the movie are different, about asking him to forgive her.) He gets up, covered in blood, and tells her that she is forgiven, and she is suddenly outside, then wading into the river, after which she is picked up by Jeff who seemingly does not yet know what has occurred (he's just arrived).
My Version:
Bill has stolen the money just as before, although we aren't shown that he finds out where it is as in the movie. Selma discovers it is missing, then walks over intending to find out if someone has robbed her trailer (Bill is a policeman in the movie.) She asks him innocently, and he is overcome with guilt, but out of fear he hysterically threatens to kill her if she tells anyone he's taken it. She begins to tear up, and asks simply, "Why?" He is overcome, and hands her the gun, insisting that she shoot him. (He had earlier contemplated suicide in the movie, so this has a logical precedent.) Shaking, she slowly raises up the gun, and fires a single shot, still weeping. She drops it and everything around her fades to black, leaving just her illuminated in a void. The CD version of Scatterheart starts, and her son appears before her. She goes to him and embraces him tearfully, caressing his hair and singing...
Scatterheart
Black night is falling
The sun is gone to bed
The innocent are dreaming
As you should sleepy-head
Sleepy-head, sleepy-head
All the love above
I send into you
Comfort and protection
I'll watch over you
But don't ask me
What's gonna happen next
I know the future
I'd love to lead you the way
Just to make it easier on you
You are gonna have to find out for yourself...
My
dearest
scatterheart...
There is comfort
Right in the eye
Of the hurricane
Just to make it easier on you
All the hurt in the world
You know
There's nothing I'd love to do more
Than spare you from that burden
It's gonna be hard
If I only could
Shelter you
From that pain
Just to make it easier on you
--
Now *that* would have been a great scene, and not an anti-climatic "oh, I guess I'll have to kill him now or something."
All this brings up an interesting point: if the movie itself is mediocre, but the ideas behind it are unique and have merit, might it be praised on the strength of what it should have been? I leave it as an exercise to the reader, due to my irresponsibility towards that heretofore ignored guided reading assignment on the French Revolution (sadly, one of the only areas of history that I am interested in -- doubly poignant since I haven't done it!).