Berberian Sound Studio is being lauded by critics as a masterpiece. An homage to the horror thrillers of the 70's and 80's known as Giallo. It has quietly become the one film you're not allowed to say anything negative about, because it was inspired by the genre, you're not allowed to dislike and keep your credibility in good standing. Sounds a little too Williamsburg/coffee shop/college radio for you? Well it is.
Here's the great thing. It's not gaillo or anything even close. It's also not really a good movie, in any way. The acting is shoddy, the script is poor and the lighting is abysmal. Here's the main problem with these factors...this might simply be what the writer/director Peter Strickland thinks are the main components of giallo. Here is where I differ from all the glowing reviews and high praise; I think he knew exactly what he was doing. I think he was poking fun at the whole ridiculous praise of the giallo genre. What we know as giallo is simply Harlequin whodunits, with beautiful women, often naked, being chased, tortured and killed. They are the quintessential b-movies we all love. Argento, Fulci, Bava, etc all play into this genre and the results are almost always the same. Very boring, poorly lit and even more poorly acted films with absolutely incredible atmospheric sound, which makes for a good romp. Somewhere along the line the Gen-X gang decided that these movies were pure art. I guess it makes sense that the same people who hem and haw over a soup can, would think Tenebre is high art.
So where does Berberian Sound Studio go wrong? Giallo, for all it's silliness and admitted charm, was simple and there was a beginning, middle and end. You left feeling satisfied that pretty much everyone was disposed of or revealed and you walked away happy. This film leaves you with such an ambiguous ending, it makes the viewer feel as if the director's personal tug of war between homage and mockery finally came to a standstill. Reviewers will cite numerous similar films, but none of them attempted to distract us from a lack of plot, which this was one does. What I find so interesting in professional reviews is each writer's ability to draw from films that in no way hold a connection to this film. Classics like Psycho, Peeping Tom and Blow Out are so precise in their vision, whereas this one is purposely and from the director's own admission, more surreal. Surreal only works, when we have something mentally tangible to draw from, but this fails in that. Gimmicks galore might be an homage to some, but I kept getting this creeping suspicion that everyone involved in this film truly enjoyed knowing that this film would be taken literally. I guess my disdain proves that I simply didn't get it, which in today's world of Internet trolls, is as successful as actually being a good movie.
Here's the great thing. It's not gaillo or anything even close. It's also not really a good movie, in any way. The acting is shoddy, the script is poor and the lighting is abysmal. Here's the main problem with these factors...this might simply be what the writer/director Peter Strickland thinks are the main components of giallo. Here is where I differ from all the glowing reviews and high praise; I think he knew exactly what he was doing. I think he was poking fun at the whole ridiculous praise of the giallo genre. What we know as giallo is simply Harlequin whodunits, with beautiful women, often naked, being chased, tortured and killed. They are the quintessential b-movies we all love. Argento, Fulci, Bava, etc all play into this genre and the results are almost always the same. Very boring, poorly lit and even more poorly acted films with absolutely incredible atmospheric sound, which makes for a good romp. Somewhere along the line the Gen-X gang decided that these movies were pure art. I guess it makes sense that the same people who hem and haw over a soup can, would think Tenebre is high art.
So where does Berberian Sound Studio go wrong? Giallo, for all it's silliness and admitted charm, was simple and there was a beginning, middle and end. You left feeling satisfied that pretty much everyone was disposed of or revealed and you walked away happy. This film leaves you with such an ambiguous ending, it makes the viewer feel as if the director's personal tug of war between homage and mockery finally came to a standstill. Reviewers will cite numerous similar films, but none of them attempted to distract us from a lack of plot, which this was one does. What I find so interesting in professional reviews is each writer's ability to draw from films that in no way hold a connection to this film. Classics like Psycho, Peeping Tom and Blow Out are so precise in their vision, whereas this one is purposely and from the director's own admission, more surreal. Surreal only works, when we have something mentally tangible to draw from, but this fails in that. Gimmicks galore might be an homage to some, but I kept getting this creeping suspicion that everyone involved in this film truly enjoyed knowing that this film would be taken literally. I guess my disdain proves that I simply didn't get it, which in today's world of Internet trolls, is as successful as actually being a good movie.
Comments
Post a Comment