After taking six years to make
the mammoth, often inspiring The Story of Film: An Odyssey, film critic
and filmmaker Mark Cousins was in the mood to make something quick and scrappy.
This he named What Is This Film Called Love?
With three days to kill thanks to
a scheduling cock-up, Cousins finds himself in Mexico City with absolutely
nothing to do. Exhausted from the production and now the promotion of The
Story of Film, he suddenly gets the urge to make a film with an inexpensive
flip camera, no crew and no planning. He walks around the city for three days,
filming and making notes. He takes along a photograph of Sergei Eisenstein,
another filmmaker who found himself in Mexico with a film to make – ¡Que
Viva Mexico! Cousins talks to the photograph about the state of cinema and
of Mexico City today. This loose style leads to a series of ruminations through
art, landscape, life and memory.
The key cinematic forebear here
is so obvious that it seems trite to mention it, but Cousins’ film is heavily
indebted to Chris Marker’s Sans Soleil almost to a fault. Cousins, in
voiceover, repeatedly reminds us that the film is an improvisation – the film
even has a subtitle: ‘An Ad-Lib.’ Cousins merely filmed whatever caught his
eye, making notes as he did so and, later, found the film in the editing.
However, the film is much too self-conscious and much too aware of its debt to
Marker that it is hard to believe that Cousins didn’t at the very least cobble
together some kind of framework for the film before he left his hotel room each
day. Chris Marker did not pretend to merely stumble upon his films and Cousins’
assertion that his filmmaking instincts, much in evidence, are solely
responsible for the cohesion of his visuals is slightly disingenuous.
That said, the film is not
without worth. Indeed, if more films were to be made like this, the cinema
would be a much more interesting, and dangerous, place to spend time. Films
ought to challenge the ways we see and understand cinema, to innovate. A
Story of Film is full of talk of the innovations in world cinema – from
Godard’s jump cuts to Ozu’s evocative ambiguities – yet it remains free of its
own. And because films like Sans Soleil are such a rarity, a film like What
Is This Film Called Love? might feel innovative, if not radical, when it
really isn’t. However, Cousins is a charming and interesting guide, if a touch
exhibitionist. His film is funny and full of ideas, his conversations with
Sergei Eisenstein work remarkably well as a framework, the disparate elements,
the ‘improvs’, hanging off it successfully regardless of their individual
quality. We get the idea, one probably not planned, of a filmmaker still in
their early phase, searching through cinema, looking for the key methods and
inspirations that will make up his next film, the one that will be truly his.
The film is infectious in its love of filmmaking, almost inciting the audience
to grab a camera and film their own wanderings and ruminations.
What Is This Film Called Love?
is deeply personal, almost self-consciously so – Cousins tells us things
that he thinks we should know, without the film asking for it – but it is not
Cousins’ film. It is Sergei Eisenstein’s and Chris Marker’s. In an awkward
ending, it becomes the work of Virginia Woolf. Twice the film stops and is
usurped entirely by PJ Harvey’s music – one track written exclusively for this
film. Even the landscapes will take over. Monument Valley and the area around
San Quentin are fascinating but, arguably, not because of how Cousins films
them, but simply because of their existence. Sometimes, the film even falls
into the habits of someone with nothing to do – people watching – as if Cousins
really is just waiting for his flight out of the city and back to his real
work. Cousins will merely film a street and comment on the people who pass by
his lenses or just give the camera to some children. Worst of all, he films a
fly. Cousins wants the world to express itself through his camera, but denies
himself any editorial control beyond a navel-gazing voiceover. Some of the
above instances are successful (Eisenstein, Marker, Monument Valley, the
children) but there is a lack of editorial or quality control – as if the fact
of its existence is enough. The so-called auteur theory was useful for
recommendations (how else would you see a film as good as A Man Escaped again
if you didn’t know Robert Bresson subsequently made Pickpocket?), but
reductive elsewhere. Nonetheless, What Is This Film Called Love? needs
more of an authorial presence, one that knows what the film called love
actually is and one that is less open to the vagaries of chance.
What Is This Film Called Love? is a visual essay with a philosophical voiceover, made
with a willingness to allow chance to influence the production. All admirable
features and frequently successful in themselves, yet the film remains haphazard
and a minor work. It is a throwaway film when it should be one that rewards
multiple viewings, it should be brimming with good ideas, not just any idea. It
is inspiring and a fascinating work, open to life and in love with the world,
infectious in its love for the acting of making films, but it is slight and,
ultimately, hit and miss.
See also: La Jetée
See also: La Jetée
No comments:
Post a Comment