Jeanne Dielman... was recently named Greatest Movie of all time by Sight & Sound (in a poll of more than 1600 people that knows movies). So for a movie afficionado this is a must see.
Be prepared that this will be a different experience. Running at over 3 hrs this is an extremely slow movie. It is about the title character Jeanne Dilman, a widow with a teenage son and her everyday life. Mostly cooking, eating the food and then doing the dishes. Cleaning the apartment. And a bit prostitution (rarely shown) for extra money. Going to the post-office. One of the more dramatic scenes is when Jeanne discovers there isn't enough potatoes when she prepares dinner. Other scenes include: Doing the dishes (a scene lasting about 3 minutes), sitting in an armchair (also about 3 minutes)... and so on. So when they say Slow cinema they really mean Slow.
The camera is extremely static, it doesn't change even if Jeanne or her son is talking with their backs to the camera, or walks out of frame. I don't think I saw one pan at all. Most cuts are just done when they literally need to move the camera to another room. Most scenes are long, lasting several minutes. It is a movie so different from most everything you have seen. It is interesting in a technical way, I'll give it that. Perhaps it is also a way to emphasize the mindset of Jeanne and her life, slow and boxed in. I'll also admit is brave to make a movie so different. For this the movie has received great praise.
But for me it lacks one of the most important part of a movie. An interesting, engaging narrative. Simply put; a story. As it is it almost becomes a fictional documentary, even if there is a small development after about 100 minutes and actually ends with a bit of surprise. I get that a select few, most probably with some sort of connection with film making or academic studies of film, will find it interesting. But the broader audience will most probably find it dull. Mind numbingly so.
So, best film ever? Not by a longshot.
Be prepared that this will be a different experience. Running at over 3 hrs this is an extremely slow movie. It is about the title character Jeanne Dilman, a widow with a teenage son and her everyday life. Mostly cooking, eating the food and then doing the dishes. Cleaning the apartment. And a bit prostitution (rarely shown) for extra money. Going to the post-office. One of the more dramatic scenes is when Jeanne discovers there isn't enough potatoes when she prepares dinner. Other scenes include: Doing the dishes (a scene lasting about 3 minutes), sitting in an armchair (also about 3 minutes)... and so on. So when they say Slow cinema they really mean Slow.
The camera is extremely static, it doesn't change even if Jeanne or her son is talking with their backs to the camera, or walks out of frame. I don't think I saw one pan at all. Most cuts are just done when they literally need to move the camera to another room. Most scenes are long, lasting several minutes. It is a movie so different from most everything you have seen. It is interesting in a technical way, I'll give it that. Perhaps it is also a way to emphasize the mindset of Jeanne and her life, slow and boxed in. I'll also admit is brave to make a movie so different. For this the movie has received great praise.
But for me it lacks one of the most important part of a movie. An interesting, engaging narrative. Simply put; a story. As it is it almost becomes a fictional documentary, even if there is a small development after about 100 minutes and actually ends with a bit of surprise. I get that a select few, most probably with some sort of connection with film making or academic studies of film, will find it interesting. But the broader audience will most probably find it dull. Mind numbingly so.
So, best film ever? Not by a longshot.
Tell Your Friends