Ambition

After this, my second Hal Hartley venture, i'm quite impressed at how Hartley has crafted a unique style for himself, but start to think that that style is perhaps too eccentric and therefore gimmicky, and could begin to wear thin very quickly.

Hartley's style combines larger than life dialogue and performances, philosophising for comical purposes, a postmodern feeling of meaninglessness and random scenes of violence/disgust for shock purposes. All set to a synthesised piano score, which creates the same "can this be serious?" feeling in the viewer as the dialogue and performances.

Ambition is a succession of incredible scenes with a set of rules for reality all its own, as in many postmodern works like Lynch's Mulholland Dr.

In the end, though, its really just a sketch, a short story - but a fairly evocative one. Worth catching, if you can catch it for free, but i certainly wouldn't pay money to see it.

Look, the man is an artist. His job is to understand the limits what can be done while at the same time embossing the world with his own shape.

This is trivial, heavy. That's because he works with cinematic reduction. He knows how to work with sex, at least facial sex which is the movie version. The most common cinematic reductions include violence. And he tries that. But it it already so abstract there is no room for another Hartley layer.

Ted's Evaluation: 2 of 4: Has some interesting elements.

Ambition is one of those Hartley shorts that you can look back on and say "what's all that about?!". A series of one-off philosophical statements that are strung together to add a voice to the central character and his motivation to live as he is literally beaten-up by the world at large. Personally I loved it, but then again I have loved all of Hartley's work. I can understand however, why some people hate it. If you are fortunate enough to catch "Surviving Desire" I suggest you keep watching for this short tacked on the end.

We see some of Hartley's trademark themes emerge once more, most notably the existential absurdity of life and the relentless human pursuit of recognition.

This time he adopts a distinctly more expressionist style: the film is characterized by marked exaggeration in both performance and visual style. Overacting is employed as a deliberate tool, perhaps serving to underscore the heightened emotional landscapes of the characters and to communicate the intensity of their internal struggles.

Actions and dialogues are echoed throughout the film, creating a repeated sense of inevitability and stagnation that enhances the absurdist feel.

However, this amalgamation of exaggerated performances and repeated motifs results in a labored flow, thankfully relieved by the brevity of the piece.

I like Hal Hartley's stuff and this short film definitely has his signature on it but something's lacking. Basically it's a day in the life of this guy whom the whole world is literally against. Walking to work he must fight for survival against every passerby including one wielding an automatic weapon. Hartley plays with form; shots repeat themselves one after another and one scene has an actor mouthing but not actually saying his angry side of a conversation. Unfortunately there's no real meat to sink your teeth into with this film. It's very similar in style and theme to Hal Hartley's Theory Of Achievement which was made around the same time and is a much better short film.