An image from the film this blog is named after.

An image from the film this blog is named after.

Sunday, August 9, 2020

BFI Top 50: Ordet, Released in 1955, Directed by Carl Theodore Dreyer

What I know before going in

Not much, I know the plot of concerns religious value, but beyond, I don’t know any specifics. I have seen on other Dreyer film, Gertrud, as a part of this marathon. I found Gertrud interesting and enjoyed thinking about, but did not find it particularly engaging. Maybe Ordetwill be different?

 

Immediate Reaction

Ordetfeels like a film out of time. I cannot think of any predecessor’s to the film’s style and it is very difficult for me to list any that are influenced by it. I imagine if you went back in time to the beginning of the 1800’s and handed someone a camera, the results would resemble Ordet. The film could almost take place during any time and the inclusion of telephone and cars feels slightly off. The film’s characters move slowly through sparse environments, expound dryly about religion, and rarely face each other when speaking. It’s a similar effect to the one in Gertrud and it is similarly distancing. It creates an odd barrier that I honestly have trouble overcoming in order to engage with Dreyer’s films.

 

The one aspect I did pick up on that I might have missed in Gertrud is the subtle way Dreyer moves his actors around in the frame. Dreyer’s compositions rarely call attention to themselves, although they do have a calming, graceful simplicity, so character movement is one of the few ways he can create action or draw the viewer’s attention somewhere. In most films an explosion or shootout counts as exciting. In Dreyer’s films a character standing up too quickly and induce gasps or seat-gripping.  A similar approach is taken by Akira Kurosawa in the first section of High and Low where he uses the slight re-positioning of his players to underline that film’s themes regarding class.

 

The main thrust of Ordetconcerns the feud between the Borgen and the Peterson clans about whether their two children will marry, and the contrasting viewpoints each member of the Borgen family has regarding religion.All this messiness comes to a head when Inger dies after a miscarriage. This tragic event causes Morten and Peter to put aside their differences and allow their children to marry. Finally, the film comes to a stunning conclusion where the existence of God is explicitly acknowledged. Johannes walks into Inger’s burial room (supposedly cured), accuses everyone of not having strong enough faith, and then seemingly uses the blind faith of a child TO RAISE INGER FROM THE DEAD! It is an insane, inspiring, and breathless way to cap the film. I’m honestly not even sure what Dreyer is trying to suggest with this move, my best guess is that he is pleading with people to stop fighting over minor differences in religion, but nevertheless, it is a memorable note to end on.

 

Further thoughts

Argh, I have now gone through a few other reviews and words like hypnotic, emotional, and spiritual keep coming up. I realize that Ordetis technically supposed to inspire all of these emotions and thoughts, but it just did not work for me. I was disengaged from the film for most of its running time. I just worry that I am not fully synthesizing the intent of Dreyer’s style. I am positive that everything from spare surroundings, the artificial way the characters move, and their awkward manner of talking to each other is in service of some purpose. Unfortunately, I am incapable of divining that purpose. Perhaps the dryness of the majority of the film is meant as a contrast to the sensuality of the ending. I swear I saw a string of saliva extend from Inger’s mouth after kissing Mikkel, a moment that seems so out of place compared to the rest of the film. Perhaps Dreyer is suggesting that true faith lies in the realm of human warmth, not in esoteric arguing?

 

No comments:

Post a Comment