Twenty Cigarettes

I loved the subtleties and nuance in their expressions. When I view portraits in the form of a painting or photograph, I can appreciate it for it's technical qualities, like lighting, brush strokes, foreground/background, etc. but it's still just a moment frozen in time. The film adds lengthy minutes of watching a person close up; no selection, no editing allowed. The character in each scene had a choice to react to the camera's presence, which the director made no effort in concealing. I found it hilarious how some of the characters had such an issue with looking at it, one even turning their head more than 90 degrees away haha. This added a layer of complexity. This does make me wonder how the portraits would be different if they had not known they were being filmed. I must say though, some of the most powerful shots were when the person decided to look right into the lens..it's like they were staring into your soul. I found myself thinking all sorts of things in those moments: Why am I watching them? Am I violating their privacy and dignity? They knew back then that a future me was watching them right now! Which of the characters might have put on a front or a defense to their true expressions, knowing they were being watched?

I also found myself wondering whether or not the cigarettes were needed at all. In keeping with the realistic portrayal, why not just have them stand for a set period of time? On further thought though, it seems the physical act of having a task to perform was a great way in bringing out more natural expressions. There are so many choices to make: How long to drag, when to exhale, shaping the smoke, etc. And let's not forget the chemical relaxation of nicotine - each person grew noticeably less tense, and therefore more revealing, as time went on. There is also definitely something to be said about the atmospheric effect of swirling smoke around a head.

The younger male expressions were very different from the older ones, in that they seemed to harbor less worry, and were instead more jumpy, almost impatient, filled with a potential energy that seemed more depleted in the aged. Or perhaps the aged simply had something substantive to reminisce about.

I found myself wondering about my own projections of emotion onto the smokers. The fact is, they could very well be wrong. Without narration or dialogue, there is no knowing whether what I think they just thought, in a fleeting expression, is actually what they thought..I found this concept fascinating. Hell even with narration or dialogue, I still might not know for certain.

I watched this film sucking on a sugary lollipop the whole time. I found the act of engaging in something addictive while watching the smokers served both as an ironic amusement and a functional way to stay awake.

James Benning's Twenty Cigarettes is an interesting endurance test for even the most hardened cinephile. Benning, a known rebel in cinema, making films about whatever he wants, has made a film featuring twenty subjects, most of whom are personal friends of Bennings, smoking a cigarette for an extended period of time. Some people smoke longer than others, others smoke rather quickly. Benning fixates the camera on the subject's bust, watches them smoke a cigarette, before cutting to black and moving onto the next person. The subjects almost always stand still as statues, with their eyes wandering and facial expressions largely remaining blank.

I call this film an "endurance test" because there is no dialog, no characters, no narration, no title cards even profiling the people when they are first seen, and there's no surface takeaway. Benning has stated he made the film so he could "look at people for an extended period of time without making excuses." This is an interesting statement because what Benning has essentially done is strip everything cinematic and personal about this particular film down to its bare minimum inclusions of people. With each person, we are forced to look at their subtleties, be their facial expressions, their gestures, their eye movements, the way they hold the cigarette, and so forth.

Benning stripping down the workings of a film, right down to getting us to pay attention to details, helps us reveal something about ourselves as film-watchers and people that may have otherwise went unsung or unnoticed. Whatever you focus on for extended periods of time or pay attention to in this film shows reveals what you look for in movies. As someone who loves richly painted characters and biting, conversational dialog in films, I found my eyes looking at the eyes of the people in this film. Some looked wide awake, some looked tired, some looked focused (the film's first smoker, a clear first-timer, seemed nothing but content on properly smoking his cigarette), some looked contemplative (the older male smoker, who turns out to be a British critical thinker, took sporadic drags and seemed to be during his fair share of thinking throughout his scene), and some looked entirely blank. When you deprive a film of dialog, character, plot progression, and a wide variety of shots, you're left to the human soul, who proves he or she can still be just as interesting.

However, I won't pretend like I sat completely still during Twenty Cigarettes. No doubt this is one of the most restless sits I've had with a film in a long time. Inevitably for most people, your mind will begin to wander, your thoughts will get the best of you, and some level of boredom will settle in. It is said Benning made this film whilst teaching a class on how to pay attention, which only fits for a film like this. Twenty Cigarettes really makes you look at yourself introspectively as not only a movie-water, but a person, and also works to exploit your level of patience while watching a film; like most of Benning's works, as well, it questions just what a film is. It's unique and frustrating, as most great experimental films are.

Directed by: James Benning.