Hmyz
Director:
Jan ŠvankmajerReparto:
Jan Budař, Jaromír Dulava, Jiří Lábus, Norbert Lichý, Kamila Magálová, Ivana Uhlířová, Pavel NovýSinopsis(1)
A pub in a small town. Pub is closed, the chairs upturned on tables. On a coat-stand hang various insect costumes: a crêpe-paper skirt, cardboard butterfly-wings, and gleaming black and iridescent beetleshells. The six amateur thespians at the table are: the Director, Rose, William, mr. Forrest, Nettle, miss Jilly. Tramp is at home, laid up with sciatica. Mrs Dung-Beetle and Mayfly have not yet turned up. During the rehearsal the amateur actors’ own stories interweave with those of the Čapek brothers’ characters. The Director/Cricket bullies William, his wife’s lover, literally to death. Nettle, in the role of Parasite, devours Miss Jilly the Larva. Mr Forrest is so convincing as the Dung-Beetle that he actually morphs into an insect. As the rehearsal progresses characters are born and die without regard to time. All this happens against the background of the Čapek brothers’ drama, in which insects behave like humans and humans like insects. (texto oficial de la distribuidora)
(más)Videos (1)
Reseñas (2)
Es sintomático que Švankmajer inicialmente explique que escribió el guion de una vez, niega que tenga sentido y no tiene idea de que trata. El resultado es un ejercicio increíble de subversión narrativa con actores deliberadamente vergonzosos, no hay continuidad del tiempo ni de la edición y con frecuencia se notan las inserciones, donde se nota que Švankmajer dirige y comanda al equipo, o los actores hablan de los sueños que tienen. En cualquier caso, realmente no tiene sentido, y tampoco tiene un significado más profundo, es más un experimento que pone todas las reglas narrativas sobre los hombros. A veces es extremadamente divertido, pero otras veces es adormecedor y deprimente. Y en algunos momentos, lamentablemente, no es posible descifrar cuando la subversión y la no continuidad es todavía una intención creativa y cuando ya es un error no deseado.
()
A friend of mine once told me a story from our college days. During the final exams, the university elder was present, who had suffered from Alzheimer's disease. No one dared to question the professor's intellectual performance, although senility was clearly evident. I realize that I am not as considerate or sentimental. Švankmajer accompanied me on my film education and meant a lot to me, but his previous film already seemed tired to me, and that feeling was multiplied here. Considering the way it was financed, the final result is truly disappointing. If I were one of the fans who contributed to the project, I would consider this investment a perfect waste of money. I do not blame the old man for his desire to play with film material one last time, but a dignified farewell in cinema should be better. For those who want to explore Švankmajer's work, I recommend avoiding his last two films and finishing with Lunacy. Out of respect for Švankmajer's former merits, my overall impression is 30%.
()
Anuncio