207.67.53.106
This Post Has Been Edited by the Author
In Reply to: RE: "Dark City:" why, oh why, did I waste my time on this? Sewell looks like he wandered in posted by tinear on December 09, 2009 at 16:20:11
I LOVE Dark City, a film which sharply divides a lot of movie fans. Most people love it or hate it - indifference is not a typical reaction. Dark City was not a hit on its initial release, but it has picked up a legion of fans since and it has influenced several higher profile hits, The Matrix series included.
I remember a reviewer calling it "nightmare sci-fi film noir", which underscores some of the problems for the naysayers. Ebert says it's a mixture of existential dread and action - he feels it's a masterpiece (he did a famous shot by shot analysis of the film, much of which is included as a DVD commentary track). Dark City almost overfows with invention, imagination and visual detail. Perfect it's not, but if you can't be seduced by the stunning visuals it you can't. But for those willing to be seduced, Dark City offers up rich rewards upon repeated veiwings. (I should also say here that I much prefer Proyas' director's cut version, which dispenses with the intro VO narration, over the theatrical release, which includes it. If you have not seen DC, DO NOT rent the theatrical. Go straight to the DC!)
I think the key terms concerning this film are "nightmare" and "sci-fi fantasy", with emphasis on the nightmare and not much on the sci-fi. (I tend to think of DC as a sci-fi fairy tale myself.) To my utter unsurprise, the film is based on a childhood dream of director Proyas'. The film owes as much to dream logic as it does to its visual influences and literary/pop culture touchstones (vast and myriad, noir and Kafka being only the most obvious ones). More David Lynch than to Gilliam. There are many familiar elemnets to be sure, but the way Proyas recombines and reimagines them is fresh and compelling.
I also cherish the way the film plunges you straight into Murdoch's nightmare, no explanation, no leading by the hand. We search as he searches, we learn as he learns - except that we are shown just a bit more, only increasing our dread for the protagonist. It's up to us to puzzle things out. I truly appreciate a filmmaker who trusts to the intelligence of the audience - an approach that risks much, including having your film misunderstood. I don't want the filmmakers to spell things out. Dark City demands one be an active participant in the film.
As for the performances, Sewell can do little wrong in my book, and he makes a fine and sympathetic Everyman. Connelly has never been lovelier and Hurt is drily amusing. The tone of the performances are purposefully low key and alienated (pun intended), the "why" of which should be abundantly clear. (Hint" these people are supposed to be numb.) Ian Richardson is impressive as "Mr. Book" and Richard O'Brien (Rocky Horror) is a hoot as Mr. Hand. Several small roles and cameos are capably filled by veteran Aussie and Kiwi actors.
That said, Dark City isn't a conventional or "actor-ly" movie. So I accept it may not be everyone's cuppa. But it is mine.
This guy's apparently too: http://flipsidemovies.com/darkcity.html
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Go Green ]
[ Take5 ]