Nathan Dorsky's Devotional Cinema was an interesting read. My feelings about it are a little mixed. I don't think he ever clearly made his point about what constitutes devotional cinema, though I think I understood what he was getting at. When it comes to movies, there seems to be a special few that really draw me in and capture my imagination completely; movies that at their core mean something while also having no explicit meaning at all. There's something about film; it has this special element that is uniquely its own, that is also very hard to describe.
One example of something that bothered me about Dorsky's writing is his repeated use of the term "nowness," which was how he described the movies that were to be considered devotional cinema. I think I know what he was getting at with "nowness," but he never really defines it. The whole essay, or I guess speech, while inspired and interesting, has the same pitfall as the term "nowness." It's too vague. Though I guess the point of this blog post is not to criticize the essay but to note my thoughts on it and how it inspired me.
Nathan Dorsky is clearly inspired by film. It shines through in his writing, which is in turn inspiring. It got me thinking about the films I've watched that had the "nowness" that Dorsky describes. The first thing that came to my mind was No Country For Old Men. I was totally immersed in that film the first time I saw it. It beautifully balanced meaning with ambiguity in a way that I have rarely seen any other movies do. I thought of Gus Van Sant's Elephant and Bela Tarr's Werkmeister Harmonies. There's just something to those movies and describing that something in words wouldn't do them justice. There's a relatability to great films that other art forms can't replicate. There are small moments in movies that can be incredibly powerful to one person while to another they mean nothing.
It makes me want to be part of making something that will inspire someone just like I was inspired.
No comments:
Post a Comment