In the 25th century, a time when people have designations instead of names, a man, THX 1138, and a woman, LUH 3417, rebel against their rigidly-controlled society.In the 25th century, a time when people have designations instead of names, a man, THX 1138, and a woman, LUH 3417, rebel against their rigidly-controlled society.In the 25th century, a time when people have designations instead of names, a man, THX 1138, and a woman, LUH 3417, rebel against their rigidly-controlled society.
I have a growing list of filmmakers with whom I have this relationship. I have another list of filmmakers with whom I never will. These may be folks who have had significant critical and financial success. They even make competent movies sometimes. But they are not interesting people, and have nothing interesting to say. They have no elegant twist on the universe, no value, no art. They make confections, adornments, amusements that are useless.
Lucas is one of these for me.
I can point to any of his films and show that anything that seems to have value is borrowed. Its clear here: a film school project with a Kubrick cinematic sensibility, but with no cosmos to back him up. Contrast this with Tarkovsky's "Solaris" a horrible failure as a film, but a remarkable experience non-the-less because it has hefty ideas behind it.
What we have are three elements. We have a future world drawn in typical 60's scifi fashion, where one thing is emphasized to the exclusion of all else, and that exclusion written as sterility.
We have a story, such as it is: two, three or four characters depending on how you count them. There is folding in the sense of watchers in the storyworld, but strictly speaking the story is captureable in 20 words.
And we have the cinematic expression of these two things. It consists of three film-making decisions: whiteness, observation and some editing that was thought to be edgy. All these are borrowed from Kubrick. But if you know Kubrick, you will see this as a copy of a first rate intuitive by a third rate enthusiast.
I was captivated by the actress who I understand disappeared for thirty years after this her first film. She's fantastic except when she is asked to just stand in the background when something happens. But that's just weak direction. She's bald but a redhead. I wish we had more of her.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
- Jun 15, 2008