Travel..........

 

The Hateful Eight :- "The" movie experience

     Film making is an art. Watching more so. But, watching as an art is the result of watching what is on offer. Is watching an art? How so? Well, It is the immersion of one's conscience for a certain amount of time in the film maker's conscience. Film makers cannot put constraints on the audience to come with a certain frame of mind. The film should mold the watchers mind from inception of the movie and kick start that exact frame of mind. Many film makers do this by adapting a style of film making. So, when an audience who knows the style of making, there is already a certain frame of mind ready for the make to start with. It is like the make has created a small world which the audience is already familiar with. This makes the job of the maker much simpler. This allows the maker to take certain things as known. This allows the audience who knows a little about the universe to jump right in. So, should a maker continue to weaver stories in that universe? Maybe, until the universe is the same, the pacing, the style stays, the maker can still make plenty of stories in that universe or a time frame in that universe. He can expand the universe and travel in time in that universe as per the story he wants to tell.

    Well, what do I know about film making, nothing. Watching, yes, a little bit. Let me be clear as to my kind of films. Let me start with what kind I am not. I dont like the Tree of life. I liked the Thin Red line. There you have it. Now, you know where we are headed. Would I have liked the maker of the Thin red line to continue in the same line. No, what if he had made the thin red line and then stayed in that universe. I might have loved it. But, what if the maker only that much. He didnt want to prod that universe further. No mistake of his. But, I did not like the Tree of life, which wanted to encompass "everything", which is impossible. There is not theory of everything, not yet. Now, what I am telling is I did not like the Tree of life. I did not tell that it is bad. Let us not get into good and bad.

    I like film makers who dont make this distinction between good and bad. The film maker should tell a story. The characters can make their own reasons for all their actions. But, the film maker should stay clear of offering judgement regarding good and bad. This makes for an independent view for the viewer. Re-Watching The Hateful eight after watching it when it was released, is the reason this post is created. The characters, the music score, the premise, the execution transformed me to wyoming, again. This is a grand success for a film maker. Transforming the viewer, again, to the same place is a major win. I take a bow to the maker, Quentin Tarantino. Here is a maker who has been consistent in his style, but still making stories in varied setups. 

    But did I like Once upon a time in Hollywood, No, Please. I want to forget that I did watch this movie. It is not in the Tarantino universe, which he has built painstakingly and has been digested by the viewers, effortlessly. So should the viewers complain when shown a complex plot. Should we put on our Science and Mathematics cap before we watch a movie. Hell, No. That will not be a movie, but a glorified documentary. It is better to watch a documentary which explains the concepts well, than an attempt by the filmmaker to take a part of the concept and pour plenty of fiction to cook the movie up. How about shooting a movie linearly and then editing the film non-linearly. It can be entertaining with the awe factor. But, still the non-linearity should be simple enough so that you still have the audience with you.

    The Hateful eight has all the ingredients to be played out as a play, live, in a theater. I would love to watch one, if anybody tried it. Maybe Quentin might try it after he finishes the films which he wants to make. The lines are well written. The non-linearity comes in the dialogues. Very interesting. The viewer is frequently taken back in time on occassions and also made to extrapolate in time just by the characters talking. All the characters talk their linog, their thoughts, their limitations. No character is God like. No character is an all-know. Every characters stays that very character. This give the viewer a consistent interface. This does not cheat the viewer. The heightening of tension, the hallmark of Quentin's writings is intact. 

    The drama is heightened by the music score. There are very rare occasions, wherein the music score elevates the movie experience. Satya, a Hindi movie, comes to the mind. The camera work is not jarring. The film is laid back in its execution, but makes the audience blood to race, an unusual combination. The pace of the movie and the blood rate surge have been equal, on very rare times, like watching the Matrix. The artists are at home. Their attire, their accent, is consistent. Every character has the mix of survival and ego, going together, while situationally, only one of them comes on top. It is a text book movie for film-making. It is a text book movie, for movie watchers. With movie makers creating huge structures for making one, this movie gives a complex to all those elaborate setups.

    The Hateful eight is one more example of the cohesiveness which can be achieved when the story creator and the executor are the same. There is that tight grip on characters and what they speak, how they re-act. All these things cannot be written by the writer and fully transferred to the director. Such well written characters can only be justified if the director also is the same person. The hateful eight is a movie, which made me think, "what a time to be alive".

    Once upon a time in Hollywood is the movie made by the same director, but, which has been passed on to this dimension of the universe from a parallel one, which does not have the tag line "what a time to be alive"

Orlando by Virginal Woolf

 Orlando is a mind bending, time bending, beliefs bending saga. There is no stone un-turned which questions traditions, the societal setup. The entire societal setup from the way the poor static people, to poor nomads, to rich static people, to rich nomads the books attempt at gathering the entire gamut of the societal setup is unprecedented in all the books I have read to date. Time flies in seconds and at times it does not move at all. Time is tamed by the author. She moves it at her own will. The poor and the rich are contrasted. None are spared. Orlando gets bored with the lives of the poor as much as the lives of the rich. Yes, there are times that the author finds it difficult to move along and in that situation she move the character to the ancestral home. It is like a launchpad to launch the character to the next chapter/level.

Gender is played with. Gender which plays a main character in our societal setup is toyed with. The chairs, the tables, the animals, wild and domesticated all find their place in the novel. All find their place and time. Man, woman, boy, girl, animals, plants all are living beings. The human societal setup with the clear distinction between the male and female functions are made fun of. The stereotypes are made fun of. The various issues in the stereotypes are brought out beautifully. How the male dominated society has bound the female capabilities are elucidated beautifully by just comparing the dress each one wears.

Sometimes it appears that she wants the answers to many of her queries very fast. Sometimes she answers but does not explain further. Sometimes she explains many of the situations a bit more. This might be intentional. The evolution of the society in over 300 years is also a character in the novel. There are places of rapid ascent and reaching a crescendo. But, she does not loosen the grip on the reader. She gradually loosens her grip as any musician would do after reaching a crescendo.

A recommended read when the reader wants his time to go slow. Not recommended for speed reading.