LAist: LAist Movie Review: Tarsem's The Fall

Ross A. Lincoln

Fri, 09 May 2008 19:35:39 -0800

That's really interesting, and actually makes a lot of sense having seen the finished product. I don't believe in giving art an A for effort - I either like something or I don't - but having read about the amount of effort and sacrifice he put into the thing, my respect for the guy is extremely high and honestly, I'm inclined to give his next film a chance too. I tried to convey that in the review, but then, like Tarsem, I have a hard time getting to the point too.

teresaelectro

Fri, 09 May 2008 18:10:30 -0800

I actually liked this movie, but I can get how it sorta doesn't make sense. I basically went with Tarsem's flow, didn't worry about plot/logic and loved it. Then, during the Q&A Tarsem totally explained why the plot didn't flow so well. Basically he had this idea like 23 years ago, started collecting location shots, and then just started shooting until the money ran out. So when he found Catinca, she couldn't speak english, so they kinda just started shooting the movie as a documentary since she didn't really understand what was goin on. After hearing that, I'd say the final product isn't too bad. Granted it's pretty crazy to film a fantasy movie like that and keep changing the plot every week, but it worked out really well imo. Basically, walk in with no expectations or ideas about the movie and it's cool. Check my write-up of the Q&A on my blog: http://teresaelectro.blogspot.com/2008/04/tarsems-fall.html

Ross A. Lincoln

Fri, 09 May 2008 16:28:31 -0800

Hindinwood, I do in fact like The Straight Sotry and The Elephant Man. I think they're proof that somewhere in his OHSHIT9/11CONSERVATIVE/ART! brain is an actual artist. But I don't buy into the idea that he's experimenting. I thik he's just dicking around and hoping noone notices he just likes pushing buttons. My problem isn't his rejection of the linear part of storytelling, it's his rejection of the "narrative" part. Plenty of great films do away with linear narrative. His stories, in my humble opinion, are actually quite linear: something happens, followed by something else, followed by something else, then reverse, and repeat. The problem is that they don't, in my opinion, mean anything. Stuff happens, but it's just cloudy and weird with no point. Even he admits he doesn't know what they're about. If he wants to make pretty, disjointed images, there's a medium he could be working in. It's called painting. Or, he could stop directing and become a cinematographer. But that said, thank you for actually reading down to the footnotes.

Hindinwood

Fri, 09 May 2008 16:15:43 -0800

"Movies are a storytelling art and Lynch wouldn’t know how to tell a story if..." He wouldn't? Have you seen The Straight Story or The Elephant Man - to name two of his more traditional narrative films? I think he is interested in going beyond the notion that a film just has to "tell a story". He frequently discards the linear narrative structure and uses film as a medium that can establish an atmosphere/mood or provoke emotion, and I think he should be applauded for venturing into uncertain territory, even if it isn't always successful. Sorry, I know that's not the point of this review, but that criticism always bothers me...