Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
-
sir_luke
- Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:55 pm
Re: The Films of 2016
In case anyone is interested (I certainly am), Miguel Gomes Arabian Nights will be available to stream on Fandor on 2/5. I'm not sure where else it's been released in North America but this will be the first (and probably only) opportunity I'll have to see it in my sad, sad neck of the woods.
-
Vlogler
- Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2015 1:58 pm
Re: The Films of 2016
It's at the Gene Siskel Film Center in Chicago next week.sir_luke wrote:In case anyone is interested (I certainly am), Miguel Gomes Arabian Nights will be available to stream on Fandor on 2/5. I'm not sure where else it's been released in North America but this will be the first (and probably only) opportunity I'll have to see it in my sad, sad neck of the woods.
-
ianthemovie
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:51 am
- Location: Boston, MA
- Contact:
Re: The Films of 2016
It played here in Cambridge, Mass, a couple of weeks ago at the Harvard Film Archive. The logistics of seeing it were difficult, but I figured it would probably be the only opportunity I'd have to see it screened theatrically, so I made it a priority to attend three screenings over three consecutive nights. I found it extremely uneven and inferior to Tabu--an ambitious, often very interesting failure, but a failure nonetheless.
-
jmj713
- Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:47 pm
Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
The three-part epic is now on Netflix:
The Restless One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060056" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Desolate One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060057" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Enchanted One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060058" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And a three-part Q&A from six months ago, if you didn't see it:
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6-3lUXN8CA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yQhgbxz2JE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGe7tP24MHM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Restless One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060056" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Desolate One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060057" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Enchanted One: https://www.netflix.com/title/80060058" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And a three-part Q&A from six months ago, if you didn't see it:
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6-3lUXN8CA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yQhgbxz2JE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGe7tP24MHM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
Manny Karp
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 5:22 am
Re: Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
How does the dental work in this film compare to that in Pasolini's?
-
kidc85
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:15 pm
Re: Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
Mubi UK has just put the first part up for streaming, so it will be available for the next month.
-
knives
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Re: Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
It's rather disappointing that there's no real discussion here on this film as it really impresses and fits with our general MO quite well.
The opening 25 minutes to the first volume (hopefully I'll get to the next two soon) alone gives an immense worth to the whole project and makes it easily my favorite Gomes film. If futzing around with letterist cinema recently has taught me anything it is how insanely difficult it is to present philosophy filmicly. Gomes has done a perfect job though unpacking decades of questions in an engaging fashion that appropriately weighs every aspect without faulting to an arrogant pose or exposing cheap insecurities. Instead Gomes has a perfectly valid question, "can I have a film that is both a fantastic entertainment and deals with the current political situation," and sincerely explores that. The subsequent 100 minutes (and presumably next two volumes) serves as something like an answer.
Given that staging and the overall premise it's impossible to not think of Pasolini when writing this though it is to Gomes' credit that the thought not once passed my mind when I was actually watching the movie. It's a uniquely Portuguese rendering though the first (and strongest) story is something that translate well to a lot of other weak EU nations like Greece. As the use of ancient story telling probably best exemplifies Gomes' answer could be summed up by the phrase tradition. It's traditional for Iberia descended from Arabia to use the fantastic to explain the mundane. It's almost like a joke wherein the power of being included in understanding it gives one a more powerful reaction. It doesn't hurt either that the prologue makes things quite clear that reality is fantastic enough with killer EU wasps eating worked to death Portuguese bees.
The opening 25 minutes to the first volume (hopefully I'll get to the next two soon) alone gives an immense worth to the whole project and makes it easily my favorite Gomes film. If futzing around with letterist cinema recently has taught me anything it is how insanely difficult it is to present philosophy filmicly. Gomes has done a perfect job though unpacking decades of questions in an engaging fashion that appropriately weighs every aspect without faulting to an arrogant pose or exposing cheap insecurities. Instead Gomes has a perfectly valid question, "can I have a film that is both a fantastic entertainment and deals with the current political situation," and sincerely explores that. The subsequent 100 minutes (and presumably next two volumes) serves as something like an answer.
Given that staging and the overall premise it's impossible to not think of Pasolini when writing this though it is to Gomes' credit that the thought not once passed my mind when I was actually watching the movie. It's a uniquely Portuguese rendering though the first (and strongest) story is something that translate well to a lot of other weak EU nations like Greece. As the use of ancient story telling probably best exemplifies Gomes' answer could be summed up by the phrase tradition. It's traditional for Iberia descended from Arabia to use the fantastic to explain the mundane. It's almost like a joke wherein the power of being included in understanding it gives one a more powerful reaction. It doesn't hurt either that the prologue makes things quite clear that reality is fantastic enough with killer EU wasps eating worked to death Portuguese bees.
-
knives
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Re: Arabian Nights (Miguel Gomes, 2015)
Got to the exciting conclusion. The second part is pure stories and thus is probably not as essential as the other two, but I absolutely loved the trial which is probably the best of the stories in entertainment value and theme.
This conclusion satisfyingly returns to the central question of if allegory is a worthwhile method by changing the structure slightly. First we have a return to the interior framing device as we get a sense of her motivations and how they compare to Gomes'. She is fighting for survival and is limited by her own ignorance. She doesn't know the life of the daily people and thus needs genies and exploding fish. Can Gomes claim the same? Why does he need allegory when a presentation of fact could be more effective. Who is his king that he is effectively staying the hand of? It's a nice self reflective piece that nicely curtails with the change of method the song bird story presents.
It and subsequent stories in universe represent Scheherazade integrating and using her experiences in the outside world to bring truth to her story though for Gomes in seems a way to move an experiment he was growing uncomfortable with. The subsequent stories get less and less fantastic to the point where Scheherazade's narration is for the song birds rendered merely text to supplement the images. It almost seems a Godardian response to Pedro Costa's use of the poor trying to understand if such a method of representing poverty and development works or if the allegory is necessary for communication.
The Hot Forest seems like a real apex to the film and makes me curious as to why Gomes felt compelled to continue beyond it. We get a narration, but this time freed of allegory and documentary images of a union protest. They seem fairly disconnected at first, but as emotions swell and we arrive at that final clarifying image everything becomes clear that allegory need not be fantastical, but rather clashing. So we have two tales taken from real life (I wouldn't be surprised if the narration was inspired by a newspaper article) and each story is equally worthwhile, but the fact that image can't hear sound and sound can't see image presents a tragedy of the human condition as well as a reversal since reality is now the allegory for the intangible rather than vice versa. That would have been a most breath taking conclusion. The one we get though is understandable from a philosophical point of view given that an idea is worth much if it is used only once.
Also I was tempted to claim Gomes as too didactic, but then I encountered Mike D'Angelo's comments on the second part which show the level of density that should be expected.
This conclusion satisfyingly returns to the central question of if allegory is a worthwhile method by changing the structure slightly. First we have a return to the interior framing device as we get a sense of her motivations and how they compare to Gomes'. She is fighting for survival and is limited by her own ignorance. She doesn't know the life of the daily people and thus needs genies and exploding fish. Can Gomes claim the same? Why does he need allegory when a presentation of fact could be more effective. Who is his king that he is effectively staying the hand of? It's a nice self reflective piece that nicely curtails with the change of method the song bird story presents.
It and subsequent stories in universe represent Scheherazade integrating and using her experiences in the outside world to bring truth to her story though for Gomes in seems a way to move an experiment he was growing uncomfortable with. The subsequent stories get less and less fantastic to the point where Scheherazade's narration is for the song birds rendered merely text to supplement the images. It almost seems a Godardian response to Pedro Costa's use of the poor trying to understand if such a method of representing poverty and development works or if the allegory is necessary for communication.
The Hot Forest seems like a real apex to the film and makes me curious as to why Gomes felt compelled to continue beyond it. We get a narration, but this time freed of allegory and documentary images of a union protest. They seem fairly disconnected at first, but as emotions swell and we arrive at that final clarifying image everything becomes clear that allegory need not be fantastical, but rather clashing. So we have two tales taken from real life (I wouldn't be surprised if the narration was inspired by a newspaper article) and each story is equally worthwhile, but the fact that image can't hear sound and sound can't see image presents a tragedy of the human condition as well as a reversal since reality is now the allegory for the intangible rather than vice versa. That would have been a most breath taking conclusion. The one we get though is understandable from a philosophical point of view given that an idea is worth much if it is used only once.
Also I was tempted to claim Gomes as too didactic, but then I encountered Mike D'Angelo's comments on the second part which show the level of density that should be expected.