review by Robert Beksinski Patron
The Turin Horse 2011
Watched Aug 13, 2012
Robert Beksinski’s review:
I guess I am still not a Bela Tarr fan. I actually did (with low expectations) hope this would be the film to change that for me and urge me on to explore more of his work. So far I have only seen one of his films I truly enjoyed but even that film (Damnation) was not great enough to persuade me to dig deeper after being severely disappointed with both Werckmeister Harmonies and Satantango (Which I could not even stomach to finish). I did however finish The Turin Horse and without fast-forwarding which has become accustomed to Tarr films and his excruciatingly long takes. One thing I have to give him in all of his films but certainly more so in The Turin Horse is his keen eye for visuals and setting up shots (he just needs to make them shorter in length). The cinematography here is crisp black and white and absolutely beautiful amongst the deary and harsh landscape. But the film fails because it becomes overlong and too repetitious and pointless. We see a 6 day repetition inside the lives of poor peasants and the bleak surroundings they must endure. Eventually towards the end certain events very subtly change the lives of these two individuals for the worse as if being punished in a way for their crimes (the titular horse whipping). The story could have come across like a powerful retelling similar to the Book of Job but instead drug on and settled for pointless examination of mundane tasks. Tarr I would consider to be the one director who I wished I did like if their were someway to overcome all of these obstacles. I still rate The Turin Horse 6/10 for even the lack of story, the visual aspect and direction were superbly well executed as is usually the case with Tarr.
You've seen about everything. Pre-Damnation Tarr is like (worse) pre-Blind Chance Kieslowski and later Tarr is all alike, brilliant as I think it is.
I've been looking forward for this one. I have it here for months but I'm waiting for something to watch, don't really know what. However, I did like Werckmeister Harmonies and I have a crush for long and slow takes. :P I might enjoy this one.
Mark you are forgetting one very powerful film from Kieslowski's canon that is pre-Blind Chance and that is Camera Buff. Just had to add that in there.
As far as Tarr, the only newer film of his I have not seen is The Man From London and yes his early films which I have heard are not necessarily worse but drastically different in style compared to his newer films.
Walter I know you are a big admirer of Tarkovsky and he is known for long slow takes as well but I have a friend who considers Tarkovsky to be the greatest director of all time and even he still could not get into Tarr's films at all. Same with me as I like Tarkovsky too. I hope you do like Tarr as I said I wish I did. Before watching a single film of his I was so hyped and as if I already knew this guy was going to be one of my favorites. Reading about his style and his films and the man is called The Hungarian Miserablist for fuck's sake. lol, My favorite director Bergman is what many would call a miserablist. But sadly I did not feel the same way about Tarr. I think you should certainly give him a try but just do not raise your expectations high in the beginning. Even disliking his films I cannot bring myself to rate them too low because I know from a technical standpoint they are supremely well crafted and done by a master filmmaker.
I like early Kieslowski and I like early Tarr. I meant that in overall look and feel, they have a surprising amount in common (though perhaps not that surprising given that both were working through the social and economic collapse of their respective countries, as well as that of their respective communist governments).
Yes, Robert, I indeed adore Tarkovsky, but Tarkovsky's shots aren't as slow and long as Tarr's. Tarr, as far as I remember, tries to depict a real perception of time trough these long/slow takes. It's understandable that one doesn't like him, perception of time is something very personal. The difference is that Tarkovsky's poetic imagination always give you a lot to think about what is in the frame; Tarr, in the other hand, probably tries to make you think in what is not in the frame, so his contemplation is far more empty of solid substance, instead it is filled with subjective substance. At least I think so. I'll try to keep that in mind when watching The Turin Horse. :D