renant
12-12-2003, 01:31 AM
While I was watching 'The Night Porter'(1974), the question of what makes for an "extreme" film, of what constitutes "sleaziness" in a film, once again came to my mind. For Liliana Cavani's film isn't really as "sleazy" as most people repute it to be. Is there really a sensationalizing of the decadent and tormented relationship between the victim and the aggresor? Have the horrors of Nazism been recklessly trivialized? Is 'The Night Porter' another stinking trash in a self-important disguise?
I don't think so(and I hope that doesn't put me in the league of the "students of the sleazy", does it, Mr. Maltin?).
Helped immensely by Dirk Bogarde's(as the former Gestapo doctor Max;the mood of his role here is similar to that of his role in Visconti's 'Death in Venice')and Charlotte Rampling's(as the former concentration camp sex slave Lucia)understated performances(watching them evoking through their faces, without a single word, their inner demons is enough reason to sit through the entire film), the film is in fact a careful probing of two dark souls trapped within their horrible past--what links them can't be completely cut off for they're merely occupying the far ends of the same boat.
If ever there's a graphic demonstration of the sadomasochistic relationship of Max and Lucia(and to say "graphic" is even to overstate the matter), it's because that's what's INSTIGATED by their re-encounter in a Vienna hotel, years after their grim camp experience, when each one thought that he/she had already moved on. That they "relived" what transpired in the Nazi camp(this time around, in a more "intimate" apartment)is a tragic proof that the past won't readily leave them behind, that, whether they like it or not, they'll always be tied to it(this should already be discernible in those instances where Max's and Lucia's present decadent trysts are intercut with their ritualistic sessions in the camp). Rather than the acts themselves, what should actually qualify as a "shocker"(again, this is an overstatement)is the fact that the "rituals" would unthinkably evolve into--or, perhaps aptly, are throughout motivated by--a perverse affection, wherein Lucia will always be the "little girl" to her "guardian" Max.
If a film like 'The Night Porter', that aims to disquiet in as understated a manner as possible, is to be regarded as "sleazy", then what else could NOT qualify as one? 'In the Realm of the Senses'? 'Sweet Movie'? 'Caligula'? Why make a fiery blaze out of a tiny spark?
Anyway, allow me to raise the torch further:this is only the 2nd Liliana Cavani film that I've seen(the other one is the saint biography 'Francesco', featuring Mickey Rourke and Helena Bonham Carter)but I observe that she's also adept at handling character studies. It isn't "sleazy", is it?
:)
I don't think so(and I hope that doesn't put me in the league of the "students of the sleazy", does it, Mr. Maltin?).
Helped immensely by Dirk Bogarde's(as the former Gestapo doctor Max;the mood of his role here is similar to that of his role in Visconti's 'Death in Venice')and Charlotte Rampling's(as the former concentration camp sex slave Lucia)understated performances(watching them evoking through their faces, without a single word, their inner demons is enough reason to sit through the entire film), the film is in fact a careful probing of two dark souls trapped within their horrible past--what links them can't be completely cut off for they're merely occupying the far ends of the same boat.
If ever there's a graphic demonstration of the sadomasochistic relationship of Max and Lucia(and to say "graphic" is even to overstate the matter), it's because that's what's INSTIGATED by their re-encounter in a Vienna hotel, years after their grim camp experience, when each one thought that he/she had already moved on. That they "relived" what transpired in the Nazi camp(this time around, in a more "intimate" apartment)is a tragic proof that the past won't readily leave them behind, that, whether they like it or not, they'll always be tied to it(this should already be discernible in those instances where Max's and Lucia's present decadent trysts are intercut with their ritualistic sessions in the camp). Rather than the acts themselves, what should actually qualify as a "shocker"(again, this is an overstatement)is the fact that the "rituals" would unthinkably evolve into--or, perhaps aptly, are throughout motivated by--a perverse affection, wherein Lucia will always be the "little girl" to her "guardian" Max.
If a film like 'The Night Porter', that aims to disquiet in as understated a manner as possible, is to be regarded as "sleazy", then what else could NOT qualify as one? 'In the Realm of the Senses'? 'Sweet Movie'? 'Caligula'? Why make a fiery blaze out of a tiny spark?
Anyway, allow me to raise the torch further:this is only the 2nd Liliana Cavani film that I've seen(the other one is the saint biography 'Francesco', featuring Mickey Rourke and Helena Bonham Carter)but I observe that she's also adept at handling character studies. It isn't "sleazy", is it?
:)