Visitors

I really liked the shot of the gorilla and also the buildings but I couldn't help but not care about the people so I went to write this review instead.

The pacing of the images adds up to a constant slow mo effect, which is nice but gets old quickly.

Being a Philip glass fan I can only like the music but to be fair I wouldn't put it on much by itself. I'd have rather liked to hear some crazy Einstein on the beach rhythms with these images, it might change the tempo and vibe a bit. Wait I can just listen to the album on my headphones and mute this.. later..

Godfrey Reggio first came to international prominence in 1982 with his extraordinary visual essay "Koyaanisqatsi", (I don't think of it as a documentary). This wordless account of 'life out of balance' was followed by "Powaqqatsi" and "Naqoyqatsi", all similarly looking at life on this planet as if seen perhaps by an outsider, an alien observing us but keeping their distance. These films were tone-poems in the most literal sense; wordless they may have been but all driven forward by the continuous, energizing scores of Philip Glass.

He made "Visitors" in 2014. The title alone alludes more to the concept of 'outside' observation although the second face we see, (of many, many faces; the first is that of a large gorilla), is of a young girl looking directly at the camera, followed by that of a man. Who, we find ourselves asking, are the visitors? The faces on the screen? Us, the audience in the auditorium? Are we watching or are we being watched? If "Koyaanisqatsi" was about 'life out of balance' then the measured pace of the shots in "Visitors" would seem to be very much about life in balance although gradually these 'still' images give way to movement, of people in slow motion, of clouds racing across the sky. Children are seen in close-up but they seem to be on a merry-go-round; the balance is being interrupted.

Of course, it's impossible to think of these images without Philip Glass' accompaniment. Perhaps never in the history of the movies has music and image been so conducive to one another than in the films of Godfrey Reggio. Lacking any kind of narrative structure I have often felt his films were more like video installations to be experienced projected onto the walls of an art gallery rather than to be seen in a cinema or on television. They are certainly the kind of films for which the term 'art-house' might have been invented.

"Visitors" is shot in black and white, making it perhaps the most 'art-house' of all his films. Is it boring? I'd be a liar if I didn't say yes but only because we are not used to seeing this kind of film-making, which is hypnotic if nothing else. Is it pretentious? Probably, but in relation to what since no-one else is doing this kind of stuff outside of the avant-garde. What's for certain is, you won't find its like elsewhere.

It's been a real privilege to have followed Godfrey Reggio's work from Koyaanisqatsi (1982) until his latest, Visitors, a bold and profound continuation of his cinematic vision and dialogue.

Some of the readers of the reviews of this movie will hopefully see the particularly relevant irony of those who lividly complain about this movie being "boring, "slow", "uninteresting", "pointless", "a waste of time", "worst movie ever", "watch in fast forward mode!". They may never appreciate that the long takes of people's faces, seemingly in trances, are simply reflections of their own faces in the Reggio mirror. They are looking at themselves as they spend most of their awake time - visually plugged into their Wide Screen TVs, computer screens, video games, movie screens, smart phones, etc.. Immediate gratification, exuberant sensory stimulation and simple short answers frustratingly pervade these commentators as it does our now screen-based civilization.

With the ubiquity of screen-based existence, humanity has changed drastically in only a few decades. It's up to you to decide if that's good or bad but if you are familiar with Reggio's work, it can pretty much be summed up as his artistic rendering of the impact industry and technology has had on us - our species - spiritually, culturally, socially, individually, artistically, commercially etc, and importantly, the parallel impacts these changes have had on nature. The continuous visual juxtaposition between humans and animals, between dead buildings and dead landscapes are pure Reggio, beautiful yet deeply dark, illustrating this parallel both literally and in layers of metaphor and symbolism. The inability to sense or comprehend these layers is, as always, a limitation of the viewer, not the artist.

The movie itself, is bold in a number of ways.

Style-wise, it is Reggio's first all black & white feature with all or much of the background transformed to black and foreground detail replaced with blown out whites - visually stunning. The underlying themes are so effectively brought out with this style. The complete lack of colour further emphasizes the addiction of our culture to sensory extremes which induce pleasing and intense moods/mental states that do not require physical motion (other than to actuate a mouse or remote control) and only require our eyes to be open and lock into the screen interface.

But the true boldness is that the focus of his "critique" is not generally towards modern human civilization (industry, war, human exploitation, environmental exploitation, poverty, etc..) as in his previous work but this time, there is a personal element mixed in with the more familiar artistic diatribe against technology. This time, you look into the Reggio mirror, and you see yourself staring, blankly, quasi-comatose, right back at yourself. You are watching yourself.. watch yourself, and it's not pretty. An unsettling realization for each and every one of us.

Relax, perhaps a glass of wine, settle down for an hour and a half, douse pre-expectations, open your mind and experience another Reggio masterpiece. Ask yourself what 'Visitor' means… Buddhists already know.

I'm not familiar with Godfrey Reggio's work, but looking him up, he's an acclaimed documentary filmmaker who likes to make movies that have no real plots and instead relies on silent videos and images, set to usually very haunting music. Visitors seems to continue that trend by making a movie that from a visual perspective is fascinating to look at, but from a sit down and watch perspective is a little harder to view. In many respects, this film is basically a challenge to watch, but I don't regret seeing it, because after watching this film, I'm more interested in looking up this man's work than I ever was before.

Visitors has no real plot. Instead it is a film that tries to reveal humanity's "trace-like" experience with technology, which, when commandeered by extreme emotional states, produces massive effects that are far beyond human reach. The film uses footage in black and white of people and places to try and get a particular feeling from the audience.

The films opening should be a warning for the audience. It features a shot of a gorilla played to dramatic music that slowly pans to a shot of what looks like the moon. The first ten or so minutes of the movie is shots of people, but they are very still. It's an impressive feat, considering these are real people, and not trained professional actors. Despite this they manage not to move a muscle, back or forth.

The film has recurring motifs. Shots of the outside of a building are shown ten times or more. The film also has interesting ways of shooting; a slow motion shot of a man yawning, a closeup of kids on what appears to be a merry go round, going back and fourth, a shot of just three heads and so on. There are a lot of fascinating things to watch from a film fan perspective.

The music can go from being slow and mystical, but then it becomes very overpowering, and in some ways, interrupts the film.

Visitors is an interesting experiment. Out of the all of the films I've seen this year, this is probably the most bizarre and surrealistic of all them all. No plot, but the film pulls me in, because of how it is made. I can't really recommended this film to everyone, but I can say, if you're interested in watching a movie that is basically images and music, then go right ahead.

I was fortunate enough to come out of a European premiere with Glass and Reggio doing a small Q&A after the screening, providing some insight in their scoring/filmmaking process.

Should you already be familiar with other Reggio/Glass collaborations, expect no surprises; the film takes gracefully advantage of modern cinematic techniques and some CGI, but in its core is using the same visual narrative introduced in Koyaanisqatsi, albeit using humans primarily as a focus.

Reggio does have an overarching vision and communicates it with deliberation, but that vision tries to capture expression and reaction predominantly around technology, in its spontaneity. Although most of the people depicted are indeed actors, they were given no script or instructions, merely captured after given certain stimuli. The nature/human relationship is once again explored, I feel however, to a lesser degree compared to his older material.

A lot of viewers would not find logical or coherent structure in it, but as Reggio pointed out, that was not the movie's goal. Rather, it is more of a collage of visual elements as for the viewer to experience, absorb and process as they will.