A woman (A) travels through a Baroque mansion when she meets a man. She has a love affair with the man (X), as her husband (M) gets jealous. X tells A that they have met previously last year at Marienbad, but A cannot remember.
It took me a second viewing to understand 'Last Year at Marienbad'. While researching about Resnais's cinematographer Sacha Vierny, I came across a book describing the many different theories behind this film. What I first dismissed as pretentious twaddle, is actually one of the most mind bogglingly bizarre films I have seen. After watching it twice, the film still confuses me. There is a lot more to this film than the three line synopsis in the paragraph above... Let me try and explain.
One of the reasons why this film is so tough to decipher, is that there is no confirmed present. Whether the conversations or story is happening in the past, present or future is never confirmed. There is no way to seperate reality from fiction. Who says any of the film is real? One of the most believable theories is that the whole film is a dream, occurring in A's head, but believing that would be boring, wouldn't it? So there is no established time or reality, but atleast we know the characters are real... Well, they might not be either. One theory states only A is alive, M is not as masculine as portrayed on screen, and X is her subconscious. Another one says the film is occurring in M's mind after (SPOILER 1). (SPOILER 2). My favourite theory is that the characters are a part of a recurring film. The photographs in the drawer represent the amount of times the film has repeated. X is trying to break free of this repeating cycle, so he tries to escape with A. During the final scene, the camera (SPOILER 3). The last theory is a much simpler one and that is (SPOILER 4). It's quite easy to prefer one theory to the other, but the truth is, there is no true story. Alain Resnais and writer Alain Robbe-Grillet have no intention of a correct narrative and leaves the choice to the spectator. 'Last Year at Marienbad' is the most ambiguous film I have seen. The film could have a deep psychological storyline, or a simple one depending on what the spectator wants to believe.
Sacha Vierny, the film's cinematographer which I am currently writing an assignment about, shoots 'Last Year at Marienbad', quite beautifully. The endless corridors, matched with the intricate interior designs is something to be seen to be believed. The style Vierny creates has inspired music videos (To the End-Blur), to films ('The Draughtsman's Contract'), but the most notable imitator is 'The Shining' which also has long corridors, gliding steadicam shots and many interpretations.
On a psychological and visual level, this film is about as good as it gets. But is the film watchable? The film doesn't return the viewer with any answers, and it is possible to just gaze through the film, without taking any notice of what is going on. The characters stare into space and talk nonsense for much of the running time, and none of the characters are likeable at all. Despite this, 'Last Year at Marienbad' is a landmark in the French New Wave, and is instantly recognisable from any frame.
TO CONCLUDE
A film everyone has a different opinion about. It has Visual perfection, and a storyline that can be interpreted in many different ways.
SCORE
78
SPOILER 1 (highlight)-->He kills her<--
SPOILER 2 (highlight)--> consumed with guilt, he is unable to realize what he has done<--
SPOILER 3 (highlight)--> shows A and X walking off screen. The camera has no where to go, and thus turns to M on the staircase. They have escaped the clutches of Marienbad <--
SPOILER 4 (highlight)--> She is dead, and the events in the film is how she remembers them. She is lying on the floor as M has shot her, and her last few memories are flashing before her eyes<--
No comments:
Post a Comment