VALUTAZIONE IMDb
7,1/10
1776
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua lingua92 BBC documentary-style shorts that record the lives of 92 victims of the VUE (Violent Unexplained Event), each with last names beginning with "Fall."92 BBC documentary-style shorts that record the lives of 92 victims of the VUE (Violent Unexplained Event), each with last names beginning with "Fall."92 BBC documentary-style shorts that record the lives of 92 victims of the VUE (Violent Unexplained Event), each with last names beginning with "Fall."
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 1 candidatura in totale
Hilarie Thompson
- Narrator
- (as Hilary Thompson)
Recensioni in evidenza
I reckon that The Falls has to go down as the best thing that director Peter Greenaway has ever did. It marks the end of his early years when his work mainly took the format of short films. In a way The Falls takes this form too, in that it is essentially made up of a multitude of self-contained short films, albeit ones with an overall theme and connection. More specifically, it takes the format of a mockumentary, one that mimics the dry BBC style. Set in the near future, it centres on the fallout of an unexplained occurrence known as the Violent Unknown Event, in which a large number of people experience certain changes, including physical mutations and the ability to speak a variety of new hitherto unknown languages. The cause of this phenomenon remains oblique but it is suggested that it may be in some way related to ornithology. The film is made up of a selection of 92 mini biographies of victims taken from an official catalogue, detailing only individuals whose names begin with the letters F-A-L-L.
The first thing that is apparent about this one is that it is considerably more light-hearted that Greenaway's later feature films. It's full to the brim with absurd humour and the tone remains quite playful much of the time. It really has more in common with his earlier shorts that his later feature films. For one thing, it feels more like an underground movie with much less of a budget. The later films had the cinematography of Sacha Vierney to make them look visually immaculate, yet the more lo-fi approach here kind of feels somewhat more interesting for me. The format overall makes much better use of Greenaway's talents in that it allows for him to try many different things. Each mini-bio allows for a different approach and for a highly experimental film-maker such as Greenaway this lets him flex his avant-garde muscles quite freely. Of course, some parts are more interesting than others and there are some sections that are somewhat tedious. But pleasingly often he hits home with some genuinely fascinating left-field oddity and, in any case, if one part isn't grabbing your attention it will soon be followed by something else. There are many moments of visual invention of various kinds; Greenaway is able to dabble in differing types of avant-garde film-making. Helping matters considerably at times is the score from Michael Nyman, which is often very good; in particular the title theme 'Bird List' is especially wonderful.
Many of Greenaway's peculiarities can be seen here such as the creation of an almost fantasy world of sorts, replete with characters with names so bizarre as to have no connection with our world. Characters do things that go well beyond realism and the tone in general is one of absurdity throughout. There are also characters and events that both refer back to his earlier shorts and which will be used later in his subsequent features. It very much feels like this, along with many of his other films exist within their own little fantasy universe. And of course, his obsessions with list making, numerology, fine art and birds - amongst other things – are consistently adhered to. It is admittedly of an epic length but Greenaway himself has actively encouraged people to watch it in stages or in any order they wish. It's less cold and unpleasant than much of his more famous works and this makes for quite a refreshing change. For me, while it is challenging in many ways, it is the most interesting and enjoyable film he has ever directed and remains one of the best avant-garde films out there.
The first thing that is apparent about this one is that it is considerably more light-hearted that Greenaway's later feature films. It's full to the brim with absurd humour and the tone remains quite playful much of the time. It really has more in common with his earlier shorts that his later feature films. For one thing, it feels more like an underground movie with much less of a budget. The later films had the cinematography of Sacha Vierney to make them look visually immaculate, yet the more lo-fi approach here kind of feels somewhat more interesting for me. The format overall makes much better use of Greenaway's talents in that it allows for him to try many different things. Each mini-bio allows for a different approach and for a highly experimental film-maker such as Greenaway this lets him flex his avant-garde muscles quite freely. Of course, some parts are more interesting than others and there are some sections that are somewhat tedious. But pleasingly often he hits home with some genuinely fascinating left-field oddity and, in any case, if one part isn't grabbing your attention it will soon be followed by something else. There are many moments of visual invention of various kinds; Greenaway is able to dabble in differing types of avant-garde film-making. Helping matters considerably at times is the score from Michael Nyman, which is often very good; in particular the title theme 'Bird List' is especially wonderful.
Many of Greenaway's peculiarities can be seen here such as the creation of an almost fantasy world of sorts, replete with characters with names so bizarre as to have no connection with our world. Characters do things that go well beyond realism and the tone in general is one of absurdity throughout. There are also characters and events that both refer back to his earlier shorts and which will be used later in his subsequent features. It very much feels like this, along with many of his other films exist within their own little fantasy universe. And of course, his obsessions with list making, numerology, fine art and birds - amongst other things – are consistently adhered to. It is admittedly of an epic length but Greenaway himself has actively encouraged people to watch it in stages or in any order they wish. It's less cold and unpleasant than much of his more famous works and this makes for quite a refreshing change. For me, while it is challenging in many ways, it is the most interesting and enjoyable film he has ever directed and remains one of the best avant-garde films out there.
I'm pleased to see so many positive reviews of this unique film. I entirely agree that it needs to be seen in a cinema to get the full relentless effect. It's also worth persevering to the end as Greenaway lightens up a bit and gives you a few more clues. In a way it's a shame that he got drawn into narrative cinema after this because The Falls seems a much more original and appropriate vehicle for his talents.
As with his earlier short films, various bits of disparate footage, old photos and other assorted nonsense are woven together with an elaborate cover story, in this case the Violent Unknown Event, which among other things is a metaphor for nuclear calamity (92 is the atomic number of uranium, "Fall" can refer to the fall of man).
Along the way we find a cornucopia of references to Greenaway films past and still to be made - principally A Zed and Two Noughts and Drowning by Numbers - running gags, in-jokes, academic pastiche, whimsical storytelling, different film techniques and ways of constructing reality. Where the average video artwork concentrates on form and style, Greenaway gives us an overdose of content.
It's worth noting that the 92 biographies in the film represent only those victims of the VUE whose names begin with the letters FALL. If you take the whole alphabet into account there are 19 million cases. You get the feeling he really, really wanted to show all 19 million.
Greenaway's new project "The Tulse Luper Suitcase" is apparently a remake or extension of "The Falls" using more modern technology. A definite must-see but it will be hard to top this for sheer demented monomaniacal verve.
As with his earlier short films, various bits of disparate footage, old photos and other assorted nonsense are woven together with an elaborate cover story, in this case the Violent Unknown Event, which among other things is a metaphor for nuclear calamity (92 is the atomic number of uranium, "Fall" can refer to the fall of man).
Along the way we find a cornucopia of references to Greenaway films past and still to be made - principally A Zed and Two Noughts and Drowning by Numbers - running gags, in-jokes, academic pastiche, whimsical storytelling, different film techniques and ways of constructing reality. Where the average video artwork concentrates on form and style, Greenaway gives us an overdose of content.
It's worth noting that the 92 biographies in the film represent only those victims of the VUE whose names begin with the letters FALL. If you take the whole alphabet into account there are 19 million cases. You get the feeling he really, really wanted to show all 19 million.
Greenaway's new project "The Tulse Luper Suitcase" is apparently a remake or extension of "The Falls" using more modern technology. A definite must-see but it will be hard to top this for sheer demented monomaniacal verve.
This is the pinnacle (some might think nadir) of Greenaway's obsession with lists and catalogues (at least so far). An obsessive film about obsession.
The film comprises ninety-two mini-documentaries of a random sample of people who have suffered as a result of the mysterious (and unexplained) "Violent Unknown Event" (or "VUE" for short). Though the VUE produces varying results, there are some common themes, such as bowel problems, skin conditions, and an obsession with birds. Some of the VUE victims even seem to be turning into birds. Though we never find out, it seems clear that "the responsibility of birds" was a key factor in the VUE.
I love this bizarre film. Despite its three hour duration it rarely drags and is witty and urbane. Greenaway uses the space to indulge in some wonderful running gags (especially the tendency of the VUE sufferers to go around in circles), and to make interesting points about the absurdity of statistics and the way in which science dehumanises its subjects by "categorising" them. This last point is subverted by the odd biographical details which Greenaway supplies us with, helping us to see the victims as individuals.
Greenaway has said that one way of viewing the film is as ninety-two different ways to make a documentary. I see it more as a cinematic equivalent of experimental music. It's like minimalism, with a strict repetitive structure which builds towards a dramatic climax. Nyman's score helps immeasurably in this development, beginning as isolated notes and chords, and finishing as an oratorio. The theme he wrote for the opening credits, "The Boulder Orchard", is fabulous.
All the old Greenaway obsessions are here: sex, death, sex and death, water, birds, calligraphy, etc. The Falls is a catalogue of Peter Greenaway as much as anything else.
The film comprises ninety-two mini-documentaries of a random sample of people who have suffered as a result of the mysterious (and unexplained) "Violent Unknown Event" (or "VUE" for short). Though the VUE produces varying results, there are some common themes, such as bowel problems, skin conditions, and an obsession with birds. Some of the VUE victims even seem to be turning into birds. Though we never find out, it seems clear that "the responsibility of birds" was a key factor in the VUE.
I love this bizarre film. Despite its three hour duration it rarely drags and is witty and urbane. Greenaway uses the space to indulge in some wonderful running gags (especially the tendency of the VUE sufferers to go around in circles), and to make interesting points about the absurdity of statistics and the way in which science dehumanises its subjects by "categorising" them. This last point is subverted by the odd biographical details which Greenaway supplies us with, helping us to see the victims as individuals.
Greenaway has said that one way of viewing the film is as ninety-two different ways to make a documentary. I see it more as a cinematic equivalent of experimental music. It's like minimalism, with a strict repetitive structure which builds towards a dramatic climax. Nyman's score helps immeasurably in this development, beginning as isolated notes and chords, and finishing as an oratorio. The theme he wrote for the opening credits, "The Boulder Orchard", is fabulous.
All the old Greenaway obsessions are here: sex, death, sex and death, water, birds, calligraphy, etc. The Falls is a catalogue of Peter Greenaway as much as anything else.
10srepka
"The Falls" is an extraordinary piece of work. Nothing else comes close. The biographies of 92 victims of the "VUE" ("Violent Unexplained Event") whose surnames begin with the letters f-a-l-l, Greenaway's film is a mixture of the encyclopedic, the sinister, the silly and the plain mad. At 3h30, mad as Monty Python and as rambling as Laurence Sterne, shot and narrated in public television documentary-style, "The Falls" is designed to be exhaustive and wear you out; Greenaway himself has on occasion stated that nothing forces you to sit through, and that the film might actually work better if you just dip into it at random - "browse" was the word he used.
When I saw it, there were only myself and two other friends still in the cinema by the time the lights came up. All three of us were absolutely delighted, exhilarated in the manner of kids coming back from the Science Museum. Words like "mesmeric", "entrancing" and "fascinating" were used to discuss it afterwards, as well as "plain daft" (meant as a compliment, of course.)
Not sure if you'll enjoy "The Falls." It depends on what you want from your filmed entertainment, I guess. If you don't really think cinema should do anything other than tell stories that are easy on the brain, don't bother. If you love lists, however, and think intellectual challenge is entertaining, on the other hand, you're in for a treat.
One final note - whoever thought of recommending "Titanic" to fans of "The Falls" is obviously on some really heavy drug I've never heard about. What is it, and what other side effects does it have?
When I saw it, there were only myself and two other friends still in the cinema by the time the lights came up. All three of us were absolutely delighted, exhilarated in the manner of kids coming back from the Science Museum. Words like "mesmeric", "entrancing" and "fascinating" were used to discuss it afterwards, as well as "plain daft" (meant as a compliment, of course.)
Not sure if you'll enjoy "The Falls." It depends on what you want from your filmed entertainment, I guess. If you don't really think cinema should do anything other than tell stories that are easy on the brain, don't bother. If you love lists, however, and think intellectual challenge is entertaining, on the other hand, you're in for a treat.
One final note - whoever thought of recommending "Titanic" to fans of "The Falls" is obviously on some really heavy drug I've never heard about. What is it, and what other side effects does it have?
How Greenaway surprises. Here is an early work that is rich in ways that in later works seem submerged.
The concept: A 'Violent Unexplained Event' occurs at 11:41 PM GMT, 14 June, People experience physical changes, often transitioning to birds. 92 new languages appear, and 92 birdnames are embossed in some minds. Four new genders are created; survivors appear immortal. Birds are the apparent cause, perhaps the Australian flightless rattite. The survivors are catalogued by competing societies (together with the detracting Society for Ornitological Extermination, FOX). This film is from the catalogued biographies from the primary society, of those whose names start with `fall.' There are 92 of them.
Some elements are familiar to later Greenaway viewers. Already Nyman creates an apt score. There is a magical surrealism. We have counting and other overlapping synthetic laws that restructure a slightly askew reality. We have a layering, so that many scenes add to or annotate others. Later, Greenaway does this with simultaneous images. Here the device is linear. Much harder, as one must not only create the alternative world, but also it's linear unfolding. Hence, this seems his most intelligent work.
The big shocker: In his later, much more commercial works, one can always count on lush painterly images, and often on elaborate panning shots. None of that here, in fact a practiced complement. All the attention is on the narrative, with many narrators, all filmed doing their work.
This film is self-referential in all the ordinary ways, plus the idea that the creator of the film is responsible for the radical change in reality. Of course, I do believe great artists do change the world; isn't that the only workable definition of art? Does Greenaway come up to this measure or is he like everyone else, a mere spectator?
Spectating here, but we do see something that retrospectively alters my recent experience with `Drowning by Numbers.' Biography 27 is of the three Cissy Colpitts, who live in Goole and establish an experimental film repository in the watertower. This is administered from a room in the nearby maternity hospital, one of the primary epicenters of the VUE (view). The three Cissys and the watertower reappear in `Drowning by Numbers,' and their collective mission is to have a child after eliminating husbands. Fits the Prospero role of replacing God with a new logic.
Love it.
The concept: A 'Violent Unexplained Event' occurs at 11:41 PM GMT, 14 June, People experience physical changes, often transitioning to birds. 92 new languages appear, and 92 birdnames are embossed in some minds. Four new genders are created; survivors appear immortal. Birds are the apparent cause, perhaps the Australian flightless rattite. The survivors are catalogued by competing societies (together with the detracting Society for Ornitological Extermination, FOX). This film is from the catalogued biographies from the primary society, of those whose names start with `fall.' There are 92 of them.
Some elements are familiar to later Greenaway viewers. Already Nyman creates an apt score. There is a magical surrealism. We have counting and other overlapping synthetic laws that restructure a slightly askew reality. We have a layering, so that many scenes add to or annotate others. Later, Greenaway does this with simultaneous images. Here the device is linear. Much harder, as one must not only create the alternative world, but also it's linear unfolding. Hence, this seems his most intelligent work.
The big shocker: In his later, much more commercial works, one can always count on lush painterly images, and often on elaborate panning shots. None of that here, in fact a practiced complement. All the attention is on the narrative, with many narrators, all filmed doing their work.
This film is self-referential in all the ordinary ways, plus the idea that the creator of the film is responsible for the radical change in reality. Of course, I do believe great artists do change the world; isn't that the only workable definition of art? Does Greenaway come up to this measure or is he like everyone else, a mere spectator?
Spectating here, but we do see something that retrospectively alters my recent experience with `Drowning by Numbers.' Biography 27 is of the three Cissy Colpitts, who live in Goole and establish an experimental film repository in the watertower. This is administered from a room in the nearby maternity hospital, one of the primary epicenters of the VUE (view). The three Cissys and the watertower reappear in `Drowning by Numbers,' and their collective mission is to have a child after eliminating husbands. Fits the Prospero role of replacing God with a new logic.
Love it.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe recurrences of the number 92 throughout the film (the number of VUE victims, the number of artificial languages, etc.) was partly intended as a homage to composer John Cage's "Indeterminacy", which Greenaway believed contained 92 stories. Cage later informed the director that there were only 90 sections and was much amused by Greenaway's error.
- ConnessioniFeatured in L'alfabeto di Peter Greenaway (2017)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Falls?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti