FrightFest

Hélène Cattet & Bruno Forzani were with us for the UK premiere of Amer. Alan's favourite film of the weekend, but do you agree?

Breathtakingly imaginative and deceptively simple - 'Amer' was the film of the weekend for me. I had my reservations going in but once it got going, I could not take my eyes of the screen for a single moment. I can honestly say that the I kept re-thinking about Amer not for the rest of the day but the entire weekend!

Sincerely yours

Voor

I managed to squeeze in a nap during this film, but when I woke up I couldnt take it and had to leave and I NEVER walk out of movies.

I wouldnt even call it a film, more a montage of fabrics and eyes - like a homage to a haberdashery and vision express.

UGH.

I'm with Voor, I loved this film. Whether it is a horror film at all is debatable, I don't think it is, it is an art movie borrowing the style and techniques of giallo to tell the story of a woman's sexuallity at three stages in her life. I appload Frightfest for programming a film so experimental and outside the norms of the genre.

Also I spent a good deal of time talking to the directors and the producer after the film. Not only are they trully lovely people in person, but although the thier film is in my opinion more of an art film than a genre film, they are genuine giallo fans, and they stayed on throughout the weekend watching the films and talking to fans. Great people.

rach wrote:I managed to squeeze in a nap during this film, but when I woke up I couldnt take it and had to leave and I NEVER walk out of movies.

I wouldnt even call it a film, more a montage of fabrics and eyes - like a homage to a haberdashery and vision express.

UGH.

Gotta agree... I just don't get Giallo films.. I did like the first sequence though with the grandfather. But I just don't get the attraction to Giallo, Airdog loves them but to me it was just a bunch of ambient sounds played overly loud to go with some pretty imagery.

I did actually enjoy this film and generally Giallo bores me. Not something i would watch over and over but very interesting and certainly worth a watch at least once. I did find I nearly physically felt some of the actions that were happening on screen, even after being sceptical when the film makers said you would experience the film with all 5 senses... (well maybe I didn't smell it..)

I thought this film was beautifully constructed. From the writing (or lack of) to the shots- to the edits. I couldn't take my eyes of the screen, it was almost hypnotic. I really enjoyed it, and loved the slow pace narrative ending with a dramatic climax. At times though I found the narrative a little bit confusing and found the story hard to follow. It was very much an internal film and sometimes it seemed to get lost in translation. I think however, that there was a definitive message that the protagonist had very little or no respect for men from the opening with the grandfather to the killing at the end. Overall a very imaginative film that I will def buy on DVD to watch again.

Really didn't like this one - pervy and pretentious IMO.

It seemed like three different, almost unconnected, stories - that had absolutely no plot whatsoever.

Really not my cuppa tea, and not really a Giallo either (a couple of shots of black gloves doth not make a Giallo!) - really enjoyed LIAWS though - which I was pleasantly surprised with )

I'm going to have to interject - whatever anyone thought of the film, I really have to defend its' definition as a 'giallo' because I think it could not be more of a giallo if it tried.

Leaving aside the plot and the lack of narrative - think of Amer as the purest distillation of the elements of giallo into 90 minutes.

From the psyche-shattering Lacanian/Freudian opening to the final Death and Ecstasy segment, each carefully constructed vignette demonstrated why Helene Cattett and Bruno Forzani understood the genre so well.

Some of you might disagree, but for me, one of the infinite fascinations with the film arose from its' desire to throw off the shackles of the third-rate narrative giallo films get saddled with. Don't get me wrong, I like solid and intelligent narrative as much as the next person - however most of the time the genre uses the narrative as merely front to explore issues with perversion, sexuality and psyche.
Even in 'A Lizard In A Woman's Skin' the murder of Julia Durrer and the subsequent investigation was merely an excuse to explore the repressed Mrs. Hammond - and if we were to look for further examples we could easily dig into many more: the Red Queen Kills 7 times, Bird With The Crystal Plumage, Death Walks On High Heels, Death Occured Last Night, Death Laid An Egg.

Of course, there are exceptions to the rule such as Footprints, Don't Torture A Duckling, The Short Night Of The Glass Dolls and The House With The Windows That Laughed.

[quote="voor"]I'm going to have to interject - whatever anyone thought of the film, I really have to defend its' definition as a 'giallo' because I think it could not be more of a giallo if it tried.
[quote]

I agree Voor, but I think Amer actually distills the "horror" out of the Giallo. In fact could you not argue that Giallo in general is more of a suspense/thriller genre than a horror one?

Anyways I defer to your superior knowledge (although this weekend has set me off on a massive giallo bender), but look forward to debating this at soime future event in person.

I can appreciate that Amer was very aesthically pleasing to look at, and Voor seems to have a pretty solid knowledge of Giallo's so I won't disagree on that count - for me it was just lacking too much in narrative (that's just a personal preference).

Having heard a lot about how brilliant it was before viewing, I can't help but feel it was over-hyped. It was rather amusing that in the Q and A, noone actually asked any question referring to the narrative - and I think it is too ignorant of us to just say 'it is about female sexuality' - that would never work as a pitch for a film (although the producer would clearly disagree).

I remember just coming out thinking - what on earth was that about??

Can anyone clear this up for me - what was the bit with the bath all about? are we to believe that the woman wet herself?.... enough to fill a bath???!!

I told you I didn't get it! )

If you come to the next Duke, we can talk about it at length!

Ah yes, will definitely be going to the next one - had to miss the last one unfortunately, but from what Alex was telling me, its gonna be a corker line up for the next one )

voor wrote:If you come to the next Duke, we can talk about it at length!

I shall definately make the effort, if not the next then soon. I live in Wood Green so I don't really have an excuse not to.

kimblebee wrote:Can anyone clear this up for me - what was the bit with the bath all about? are we to believe that the woman wet herself?.... enough to fill a bath???!!

I don't think that she wet herself... Think that was a representation of her orgasm.