I saw this first when I was 15-it was on BBC late night-well 10.30, which was late night then. I felt hypnotised. The images stayed with me for days then weeks and so on. I honestly think there is something extraordinary about this film but what that is exactly I have never grasped. It doesn't matter-I love it to bits
Deep Martin, a true intellectual of cinema ... Scorsese was compelled to represent explict violence to make money to survive but inside him, he is a genuine scientist of worldwide cinema
Scorcese could be a Great Director (like Coppola) but he limited himself being a Great Filmmaker, especially after the Goodfellas/Casino Period…He knows almost Everything around the medium of Cinema but….New Era (Blockbuster) Hollywood took over him…It’s a pity….
This year :2022. This movie forever. In Hungarian. CSODÁLATOS ,ÖRÖK. Monica Vitti meghalt 2022.02 02. A JóIsten legyen vele. Csodálatos színésznő volt.
compliments. the eclipse is a masterpiece. It's not easy you know. What's inside the films of Antonioni tell the inability to communicate, the difficulty of living the modern landscape and the biggest of them all: men and women are different and probably not be able to communicate with each other as it is explained in the last his films
This is from the time when persons could be alienated or existentially "lost" or whatever in a Mies van der Rohe modernist world of "Less is more" and such, before the devolution of postmodernism (Robert Venturi, etc.) with its celebration of decorating sheds and other kitsch/dreck ("Complexity and contradiction in architecture", "Learning from Las Vegas", etc.). A world we have lost, like Stefan Zweig describes the world we had previously lost in "The world of yesterday". I would like to live in the world of Edmund Husserl's 1935 "Vienna" lecture: "Philosophy and the crisis of European Humanity". We have never yet really been modern, or we were getting there and now no longer even trying.
But Scorcese missed a big point about this movie, no surprise here bc for American movie makers the space is a cliché, a container of bodies and things. Europeans came with a different perspective: the end of the movie, when the figures don't show up, put the space as a protagonist, as an invisible figure that is almost _here_, instead of there, or a mere background. But life is a blending of figure and background, we don't know our boundaries, at least since Picasso made it explicit. Now, when we need to live in bubbles, the perception of the local environment is crucial. And Disney had not discovered Picasso yet. d32dm0rphc51dk.cloudfront.net/Rgh7CxrtmPgLgKz2fC8g3Q/large.jpg
@@sanduceroable Respectfully, If you are replying to me (BMcC), I know zip-zero about "Scorsese". I do think Pablo Picasso was a sociopath and maybe neurologically damaged. He apparently hated women. If you are interested in chopping up a chopped up world there is a great book by Cornelius Castoradis "World in fragments". Could Picasso read? He was probably the greatest con artist since Socrates. Give me Matisse!
The dvd has a great commentary extra. I'd like to see a clip here on youtube of just the entire 2nd sequence of the stock exchange when the market is manipulated and everyone loses all their money. Incredible chaos in contrast to the rest of this haiku of a film.
Don't mean to doubt that he's correct, but rather to clarify what he meant for my own purposes. When Scorsese says that the ending is more than just "life goes on", what does he imply that the ending IS? What further implications does the ending of the film have than a cold, existential reflection on societal apathy and onward flow? The one image of the army of ants (an ignored world) was evidence towards this reading in my mind; which of the ants would notice the concerns of two individuals?
Than the sequence is about how love banishes little by little as time passes on from their hearts as they decide to finally not show up, rather than to say that "life goes on" they are into something else now, the music also emphasizes this as a moment of tension and loss
I cant help agreeing with Jacques Lourcelles who places Antonioni's films among the "classics of boredom". These films have no meaning, or rather have only "meaning", but no flesh, they are the painfully contrived and un-cinematographic expression of the pure concept of "incommunicability". But incommunicability of what? The characters look like empty puppets who have nothing to communicate to begin with, walking aimlessly in an artificial set and acting terribly. If one wants to stick with incommunicability (but real, embodied and painful, and mixed with many other feelings), beautifully framed black and white photography and slow pace, Ozu is the real genius.
1.44 like growing flowers through concrete? what the hell does he say here? the guy doesn't understand italian lifestyle. many people in italy love to live in blocks of flats. even rich people love such blocks with luxury shops on the groundfloor. if you are in a lowland, you need elevated reservoirs so that the running water can reach the last floors. such towers are massive cement towers supporting huge sweetwater tanks so to feed whatever tap in the blocks surrounding the area!
no one ever came close to succesfully imitating antonioni's style ; his films are unique, even today .
God, the cinematography in this film is fucking sublime.
I just watched this for the first time in many years to commemorate MV’s passing. Her performance is truly one of the greatest of all time.
I saw this first when I was 15-it was on BBC late night-well 10.30, which was late night then. I felt hypnotised. The images stayed with me for days then weeks and so on. I honestly think there is something extraordinary about this film but what that is exactly I have never grasped. It doesn't matter-I love it to bits
Mr Scorsese certainly talks eloquently about cinema.
Thanks for uploading this. Much appreciated.
Deep Martin, a true intellectual of cinema ...
Scorsese was compelled to represent explict violence to make money to survive
but inside him, he is a genuine scientist of worldwide cinema
Scorcese could be a Great Director (like Coppola) but he limited himself being a Great Filmmaker, especially after the Goodfellas/Casino Period…He knows almost Everything around the medium of Cinema but….New Era (Blockbuster) Hollywood took over him…It’s a pity….
This year :2022.
This movie forever.
In Hungarian.
CSODÁLATOS ,ÖRÖK.
Monica Vitti meghalt 2022.02 02.
A JóIsten legyen vele.
Csodálatos színésznő volt.
Antonioni's films are so full of meanings that they should be analysed like you do, great vid :)
compliments. the eclipse is a masterpiece.
It's not easy you know. What's inside the films of Antonioni tell the inability to communicate, the difficulty of living the modern landscape and the biggest of them all: men and women are different and probably not be able to communicate with each other as it is explained in the last his films
thank you for posting this, ! fab Scorsese on Antonioni
This is from the time when persons could be alienated or existentially "lost" or whatever in a Mies van der Rohe modernist world of "Less is more" and such, before the devolution of postmodernism (Robert Venturi, etc.) with its celebration of decorating sheds and other kitsch/dreck ("Complexity and contradiction in architecture", "Learning from Las Vegas", etc.). A world we have lost, like Stefan Zweig describes the world we had previously lost in "The world of yesterday". I would like to live in the world of Edmund Husserl's 1935 "Vienna" lecture: "Philosophy and the crisis of European Humanity". We have never yet really been modern, or we were getting there and now no longer even trying.
But Scorcese missed a big point about this movie, no surprise here bc for American movie makers the space is a cliché, a container of bodies and things. Europeans came with a different perspective: the end of the movie, when the figures don't show up, put the space as a protagonist, as an invisible figure that is almost _here_, instead of there, or a mere background. But life is a blending of figure and background, we don't know our boundaries, at least since Picasso made it explicit. Now, when we need to live in bubbles, the perception of the local environment is crucial. And Disney had not discovered Picasso yet. d32dm0rphc51dk.cloudfront.net/Rgh7CxrtmPgLgKz2fC8g3Q/large.jpg
Not almost but always...here
@@sanduceroable Respectfully, If you are replying to me (BMcC), I know zip-zero about "Scorsese". I do think Pablo Picasso was a sociopath and maybe neurologically damaged. He apparently hated women. If you are interested in chopping up a chopped up world there is a great book by Cornelius Castoradis "World in fragments". Could Picasso read? He was probably the greatest con artist since Socrates. Give me Matisse!
His films were deeply intellectual. We don't have the intellectuals and serious artists to make these types of films anymore.
The dvd has a great commentary extra. I'd like to see a clip here on youtube of just the entire 2nd sequence of the stock exchange when the market is manipulated and everyone loses all their money. Incredible chaos in contrast to the rest of this haiku of a film.
fantastic! where this clip from?a dvd?
A documentary by Scorseses, My Voyage to Italy.
Thanks
realitaly001 Scorsese was taking about the film's thesis, I don't know why are you talking about flats and towers.
peopje cannot see what is not within them to grasp
Very true!
Don't mean to doubt that he's correct, but rather to clarify what he meant for my own purposes. When Scorsese says that the ending is more than just "life goes on", what does he imply that the ending IS?
What further implications does the ending of the film have than a cold, existential reflection on societal apathy and onward flow? The one image of the army of ants (an ignored world) was evidence towards this reading in my mind; which of the ants would notice the concerns of two individuals?
Than the sequence is about how love banishes little by little as time passes on from their hearts as they decide to finally not show up, rather than to say that "life goes on" they are into something else now, the music also emphasizes this as a moment of tension and loss
I cant help agreeing with Jacques Lourcelles who places Antonioni's films among the "classics of boredom". These films have no meaning, or rather have only "meaning", but no flesh, they are the painfully contrived and un-cinematographic expression of the pure concept of "incommunicability". But incommunicability of what? The characters look like empty puppets who have nothing to communicate to begin with, walking aimlessly in an artificial set and acting terribly. If one wants to stick with incommunicability (but real, embodied and painful, and mixed with many other feelings), beautifully framed black and white photography and slow pace, Ozu is the real genius.
yeah, they are certainly boring.
just walk around and sit in any modern city to find all the counter-argument you need...my friend, eclisse is a documentary...
1.44 like growing flowers through concrete? what the hell does he say here?
the guy doesn't understand italian lifestyle. many people in italy love to live in
blocks of flats. even rich people love such blocks with luxury shops on the groundfloor.
if you are in a lowland, you need elevated reservoirs so that the running water can reach the last floors. such towers are massive cement towers supporting huge sweetwater tanks so to feed whatever tap in the blocks surrounding the area!
its an analogy.