I’ve watched the movie Prometheus twice in as many
days. I did something the second time around which I’ve noticed doing before
while watching movies, and it struck me that the implications are pretty
interesting.
There is a scene in Prometheus in which the characters
attempt to outrun a giant sandstorm on an alien world. Toward the end of this
high-octane race against a lot of dust moving really fast (outrunning walls of
stuff moving fast is a staple of recent action movies), one of the central
characters drops a very important, probably fragile, specimen off the
back of the buggy she is riding (and since she had not been established as an
incredible klutz, I suppose it was simply a plot device to put her in more danger).
So, she jumps off the buggy, grabs the bag with the specimen in it, and gets
hit full on by the sandstorm. In the midst of people yelling and wind howling,
they rush to save her and get her inside the ship.
I didn’t see the CGI dust particles, or the stunt doubles
getting slammed against things, but it did not seem like missing anything to
miss those. I didn’t care about missing the action; I cared about missing the act
taken by one character in regard to another, because that sort of thing
furthers and constitutes the story.
And, really, that is the fundamentally interesting part of a movie.
Let’s assume that the scene with the sandstorm took 6
minutes (which may be a low estimate). That is roughly five percent of the movie. Five
percent of the whole movie spent to establish something like: “They were in
trouble, but then it was ok”. Now, consider that about thirty seconds of that
time was spent showing one character saving another. That is thirty seconds
spent establishing a serious relationship between two characters, revealing
something about the motivations and attitudes of the savior, and setting up
further revelations about the character saved (how will they respond?) and the
savior (why did they do it? Do they expect something in return?)
Thirty seconds. Now, you might say that this act
really took six minutes, because without the sandstorm, there would have been
no danger from which one character could save the other. True, but they could have done the same thing
with a collapsing floor, or a roof caving in. It needn’t have taken nearly so
long.
You might also accuse me of being stingy and a little
robotic about time in movies, breaking it down into percentages and what not.
This is art after all, damn it! Exactly, it’s art. We’re building these
little worlds and histories, and we’re presenting them in a fundamentally temporal
medium. The relative length of different parts of a film, the rhythm
established by the kinds and arrangement of the scenes, this all makes a
difference. And something that is mostly spectacle is just that, spectacle;
something to look at, not to think about.
And, in the case of Prometheus especially, this is a
disappointing misuse of an idea. The premise of this movie is
interesting, some of the relationships and characters are as well, but what it
needed was a film maker with the courage to make a movie about acts
rather than action, a movie where people investigate and talk and argue, help
and betray, plan and carry out. You know, human stuff. A movie like that has a
chance to show and tell us something about the mysteries of the world of the
movie, in the limited time we have to see and hear, rather than tantalizing us,
provoking us, and then having tentacle monsters jump out and say, “Boo!”, and
sandstorms bear down and go, “Woosh!”,
and characters run around doing more or less incomprehensible things,
leaving us frustrated in our attempt to understand.
Not that I object to tentacle monsters, they can be pretty
gross and awesome, but they should further a story at the same time.
© 2014 John Hiner III
Tweet
I often have a similar problem with kung fu movies. Speaking of which could you watch and write about a movie called Dynamite Warrior? I can't wrap my mind around it simply because of how confused the plot is along with the English voice overs and the strange feeling that the movie didn't leave me with anything coherent to think about.
ReplyDeleteIf you mean the Thai movie from 2006 that received very mediocre reviews, then I accept.
DeleteThat's exactly the one.
Delete