IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,4/10
2158
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuIn a village on the French Opal Coast, a drifter engages in a perplexing relationship with a young woman who has suffered abuse.In a village on the French Opal Coast, a drifter engages in a perplexing relationship with a young woman who has suffered abuse.In a village on the French Opal Coast, a drifter engages in a perplexing relationship with a young woman who has suffered abuse.
- Auszeichnungen
- 2 Gewinne & 3 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Much has been written about the role of the environment in this film. Rarely can natural (and outwardly naturalistic) settings have been so crucial to the action and ambiance of a movie. Manhattan springs to mind as another work in which the setting functions almost a key character (bet you didn't expect to see a comparison with Woody Allen in this review).
The director forces the audience to see something explicitly religious (and in the case of the guy, Christ-like) in the two leads, by depicting overt religious symbolism in their actions and gestures. There is nothing simplistic in this portrayal, however: the characters' actions are always underpinned by a faint whiff of shamanism, nature-worship or even downright satanism, bringing a delicious - and potentially controversial - complexity to the film.
The action appears to take place outside the modern world, or at the very least parallel with it (I referred to the "medieval" atmosphere evoked by Dumont's work in another review, and Hors Satan is a little like that too). In this strange parallel world, the police, for example, don't act as expected - in fact, nobody acts as expected. Despite the slow pace, however, I never got the feeling that the story was not moving forward (and I'm baffled by the failure of one reviewer to identify any storyline at all).
Much of the tension lies in the audience's fear - of what the characters will do to one another and to the landscape, of what the consequences of their actions may or may not be, and of what the movie's ultimate outcome will be. It is this elemental drama that drives the film forward - in a slow-burn movie in which death accounts for an amazingly high proportion of the "action" that actually does take place, life and death are in the balance in an extremely immediate and terrifying way. The central Christ-like character can be violent, and his actions incomprehensible, perhaps reminding us that Christ was himself capable of unexpected violence (for example when throwing the money-lenders out of the temple). Although of course the director also leads us towards a view of the lead character as a Satanic figure, particularly in one almost unwatchably horrible scene.
Perhaps the central achievement of this film - by an apparently atheist director, remember - is to have created a powerful drama with a complex Christ-like figure who reflects the mysticality and profound unknowability and yet the intangible magnetism of the original biblical Christ, while incorporating elements of the satanic into the character too. A difficult comparison for Christians to swallow, though.
The director forces the audience to see something explicitly religious (and in the case of the guy, Christ-like) in the two leads, by depicting overt religious symbolism in their actions and gestures. There is nothing simplistic in this portrayal, however: the characters' actions are always underpinned by a faint whiff of shamanism, nature-worship or even downright satanism, bringing a delicious - and potentially controversial - complexity to the film.
The action appears to take place outside the modern world, or at the very least parallel with it (I referred to the "medieval" atmosphere evoked by Dumont's work in another review, and Hors Satan is a little like that too). In this strange parallel world, the police, for example, don't act as expected - in fact, nobody acts as expected. Despite the slow pace, however, I never got the feeling that the story was not moving forward (and I'm baffled by the failure of one reviewer to identify any storyline at all).
Much of the tension lies in the audience's fear - of what the characters will do to one another and to the landscape, of what the consequences of their actions may or may not be, and of what the movie's ultimate outcome will be. It is this elemental drama that drives the film forward - in a slow-burn movie in which death accounts for an amazingly high proportion of the "action" that actually does take place, life and death are in the balance in an extremely immediate and terrifying way. The central Christ-like character can be violent, and his actions incomprehensible, perhaps reminding us that Christ was himself capable of unexpected violence (for example when throwing the money-lenders out of the temple). Although of course the director also leads us towards a view of the lead character as a Satanic figure, particularly in one almost unwatchably horrible scene.
Perhaps the central achievement of this film - by an apparently atheist director, remember - is to have created a powerful drama with a complex Christ-like figure who reflects the mysticality and profound unknowability and yet the intangible magnetism of the original biblical Christ, while incorporating elements of the satanic into the character too. A difficult comparison for Christians to swallow, though.
10pswier
I am not going to write a summary about this film or explain what it is about.
This is a film where you have to let go the concept of 'story'. Don't search for a narrative structure. This film is all about 'feeling' and 'experiencing'. In my opinion something that is harder and harder to find in modern cinema, that is mainly there to 'entertain' audiences.
This is a film that redefines the concept of 'interpretation'
I would like to give a short explanation why...
The moment I started the movie and watched the first images I was immediately absorbed by the sheer beauty of the landscape and how this landscape is framed (done by the fine French cinematographer Ives Cape). I learned in these first few minutes that the framing is key in this picture. In 'Hors Satan' it is not merely the framing (observing) of a composited shot. It is much more...
What happens in 'Hors Satan' is the constant shift between the objective view and the subjective view of an image. We (as an audience) see two figures, traveling trough a desolate landscape. Through forests, plains of sand, a small quiet village (the center point in this landscape). They don't talk much. They just walk along. Their facial expressions tells enough.
This is the objective side of 'Hors Satan'. The camera and the spectators 'observe' But in 'Horse Satan' one will also find a high amount of subjectivity. In this film the two protagonists are constantly 'watching', and we see them doing just that! We see what they see. A meadow, branches of a tree poking into the air. This brings us closer to the projected image. It seems as if Bruno Dumont literally places the camera on the exact spot of the eyes of the watching actors. By doing just that, we observe the characters watching and then we too are able to observe what they see. In fact that doesn't seem to be a lot for the observing audience, but at the same time there is a lot of information within these frames. Part of the message of the film, of the subtext, is hidden. This 'watching' of the landscape trough the eyes of the protagonists makes the film much more of a subjective experience.
It seems that this alternative form of film making, of a different film language is very rare these days. There are few authors who do it. And if you liked 'Hors Satan', you should definitely have a look at the rest of Dumont's oeuvre (the films: La vie de Jesus, L'Humanité, Twentynine Palms, Flanders, Hadewijch) and also check out film makers like Bela Tarr, Leos Carax, Terrence Malick, Aleksandr Sokurov and Matthew Barney.
You, as a spectator (I include myself as well) has to create a different way of 'reading' films like this. Let the story structure go, except questions that will not be answered, and again, don't search for a narrative safety line. Just let it roll over you.
This is a film where you have to let go the concept of 'story'. Don't search for a narrative structure. This film is all about 'feeling' and 'experiencing'. In my opinion something that is harder and harder to find in modern cinema, that is mainly there to 'entertain' audiences.
This is a film that redefines the concept of 'interpretation'
I would like to give a short explanation why...
The moment I started the movie and watched the first images I was immediately absorbed by the sheer beauty of the landscape and how this landscape is framed (done by the fine French cinematographer Ives Cape). I learned in these first few minutes that the framing is key in this picture. In 'Hors Satan' it is not merely the framing (observing) of a composited shot. It is much more...
What happens in 'Hors Satan' is the constant shift between the objective view and the subjective view of an image. We (as an audience) see two figures, traveling trough a desolate landscape. Through forests, plains of sand, a small quiet village (the center point in this landscape). They don't talk much. They just walk along. Their facial expressions tells enough.
This is the objective side of 'Hors Satan'. The camera and the spectators 'observe' But in 'Horse Satan' one will also find a high amount of subjectivity. In this film the two protagonists are constantly 'watching', and we see them doing just that! We see what they see. A meadow, branches of a tree poking into the air. This brings us closer to the projected image. It seems as if Bruno Dumont literally places the camera on the exact spot of the eyes of the watching actors. By doing just that, we observe the characters watching and then we too are able to observe what they see. In fact that doesn't seem to be a lot for the observing audience, but at the same time there is a lot of information within these frames. Part of the message of the film, of the subtext, is hidden. This 'watching' of the landscape trough the eyes of the protagonists makes the film much more of a subjective experience.
It seems that this alternative form of film making, of a different film language is very rare these days. There are few authors who do it. And if you liked 'Hors Satan', you should definitely have a look at the rest of Dumont's oeuvre (the films: La vie de Jesus, L'Humanité, Twentynine Palms, Flanders, Hadewijch) and also check out film makers like Bela Tarr, Leos Carax, Terrence Malick, Aleksandr Sokurov and Matthew Barney.
You, as a spectator (I include myself as well) has to create a different way of 'reading' films like this. Let the story structure go, except questions that will not be answered, and again, don't search for a narrative safety line. Just let it roll over you.
This film is not going to go down well with the "I don't like slow films" crowd. Similarly, there is no music soundtrack, little dialogue, and many scenes are deliberately extended while "nothing much" goes on.
However, gradually a picture emerges of what might be happening, as the strange drifter affects the small community in various ways, and intervenes in an often-brutal manner.
Most striking for me was the combination of cinematography and sound design, where many of the scenes played out in long shot against the impressive landscape, while (for example) even the footsteps on the sand came through clearly. Maybe that's why it felt so involving?
Different.
However, gradually a picture emerges of what might be happening, as the strange drifter affects the small community in various ways, and intervenes in an often-brutal manner.
Most striking for me was the combination of cinematography and sound design, where many of the scenes played out in long shot against the impressive landscape, while (for example) even the footsteps on the sand came through clearly. Maybe that's why it felt so involving?
Different.
Avant-garde movie exploring issues of good and evil, their interdependency, and transformation of one into the other. The pace is extremely slow and script mostly uneventful, so that viewer could focus on the truly meaningful scenes. Landscapes of Northern France along with visual and sound techniques are intended to capture viewer's attention during long scenes of walking amidst green scenery that take large part of the running time. Yet movie's overall slowness, which could be an allegory for mundane daily life of an average person, provides good counter-balance to several naturalistic scenes that are intense, and even shocking. The dialogue is scarce, which also serves to illuminate important plot twists. It is obvious why general public might not like the movie, however I enjoyed it at TIFF11 and my biggest regret is not being able to stay for the Q&A session with director Bruno Dumont after the screening.
People in a rural French village believe a mysterious drifter possesses healing powers and one troubled young girl in particular has embraced the stranger as a deliverer to ease her sufferings. The stranger spends most of his time walking and meditating like some Old Testament prophet in the desert. When he does speak it is only in terms of banalities. As we watch Bruno Dumont's "Outside Satan" we are drawn to this mystical figure. Is he an ascetic on retreat from the world? Is he a cult leader seeking gullible apprentices? Does he possess powers that transcend this world and if so what is the source of that power: good or evil? His behavior defies easy classification. I've never seen anything quite like this film and there will inevitably be numerous interpretations. David Dewaele is mesmerizing as the enigmatic protagonist. Alexandra Lematre is the sensitive young girl who travels from Goth rebelliousness to faithful acolyte. "Outside Satan" moves at a slow tempo punctuated with some jarring moments resembling the natural course of life and this is enhanced by the purely naturalistic soundtrack completely devoid of any musical accompaniment. This is avant-garde cinema and won't appeal to all tastes but if you're looking for something unique this certainly qualifies. It's been said that the notion of a devil provides religions with the means to reconcile the existence of evil with a world governed by a benevolent God. Perhaps it is this idea that Dumont is probing in "Outside Satan". What if there were no opposing forces and instead there was just one mysterious all-encompassing creation that offered no easy answers?
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe French film magazine 'Cahiers du cinéma' included Hors Satan (2011) in their Top 10 list for 2011 as No.4.
- VerbindungenReferenced in Le fracas des pattes de l'araignée (2012)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Outside Satan?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Outside Satan
- Drehorte
- Ambleteuse, Pas-de-Calais, Frankreich(town and sea side)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 7.226 $
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 50 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen