Saturday, June 17, 2006

Last night, Sarah and I went to see a movie at Cinematheque Ontario, Love Streams.

I must say, although a night out with Sarah is always fantastic, it was likely the worst movie that I've ever paid money to see. I just didn't get it. And the best part was when I was waiting for the streetcar and a couple asked me if I'd seen the movie too.

"Did you hate it as much as I did?"

I try to keep an open mind about things. I do. I told the man that I figured that there was something I was missing; some sort of underlying principle that I wasn't aware of that would make everything make sense.

He laughed. "That's what they want you to think. It's like the Emperor's New Clothes. They want you to believe there's something wrong with you, not the film. They need to maintain the snooty artiste reputation of the film. But no," he said, "It's not you. It was the movie."

But I was determined to do some reading about the movie, since Cinematheque usually chooses quality artsy movies.

I'm really confused by this review of the film. And actually, all of these reviews as well.

This NY Times review tells it well, I think.

The explanation of love as a stream - a stream that never ends - is one that I can reflect on and have been thinking about lately. But other than that, and the well-played Jim the dog, I was left confused.

I just didn't get it.

Maybe it was a really great, border-breaking film for its time? I don't understand the context. If you have any idea what makes this a film that people rave about, let me know.

1 comment:

sarah said...

not the worst movie i have paid money to see but certainly up there. i kept thinking to myself "but whats the point of this?!?!?" i felt like i had been plopped down in the middle of a madhouse. its a too bad that it was cassavettes last film and it was so shambolic. that was his real house! can you believe it?