Think about what was shown, especially in the beginning (images cropped, scale, value, contrast)
as an example that relates to research/archiving
The beginning of the movie was strange, but it felt as though it was necessary to make the viewer seem off balanced, or just plain uncomfortable. There was not really a rhyme or reason for the imagery, but it completely succeeded in making me confused. Welding tools are the first think that come into screen, and they add an overly bright contrast to the pitch black that encompasses it. The penis is an extremely quick shot (if someone blinked, they would have missed it). The cartoon which is after that is strangely serene, but eventually skips which makes it seem like it is out of place, just like everything else involved. It's mostly a high contrast first seen; everything is clearly different that its surroundings. The archiving is shown through the cartoon, which is something that has already been made, but is changed drastically by the filmmaker, giving it a new, erie life.
- What do these images have to do with the narrative of the film
Now that i think about it, these images all seem to be a precursor to the entire story of the film. Bright interaction at first, becoming comfortable (cartoon), them having some sort of altercation (when she finds the letter), the spider that is moving slowly and being cautious (awkward time between the letting and confrontation), bleeding out the sheep (confronting her about the horrible letter), and the crucifixion (her making the patient feel bad about her past).
- Why is "art especially good for those who have problems"?- What does this mean?
It's a creative outlet for people to get some emotions or problems that they have out into the public, so they can try to cope or overcome the problem. (Obviously worked for Van Gogh, Caravaggio, Pollock, Rothko, Basquiat...)
- Are artists the most problematic people?
Not always, some are normal people who just have a knack for making things that people find appealing. On the other hand, there are artist like the ones on the list up there, those people are problematic. It's really a question of personality, there could be an scientist who is stubborn or a problematic teacher, it's just the luck of the draw.
- Or are artists the most open to deal with problems?
Artists seem to deal with problems. Picasso made Guernica to let his pain ease. Postal workers have reputation for killing people. Maybe it's because postal workers don't paint or confront their problems, maybe they were just SUPER ANGRY that day.
- Or do artists simply hide behind the notion that they are "open" while remaining hidden behind the mask of art?
An artist like Van Gogh was very up open about his problems. He made self portraits of himself while he was bandaged from his ear "surgery." I feel like it is difficult to use something that created by the hands with the feelings to hide the problems that are controlling the hands.
- Do artists only "talk" when they are "afraid of death"?
I don't think so. Dying is something that most artists (or at least some of the ones I mentioned) were not afraid of dying. That is why they could dig so deeply into their person to find out what is happening and to have the courage to put it onto a canvas. Their works are their talking, and they don't really avoid death, they just incorporate it into their works.
- Explain your poisitions
Death is feared by those who think ahead. NONE of those artists lived anywhere but in the moment. Caravaggio: killed someone and painted his way out of trouble, died of malaria trying to find his salvation. Van Gogh painted (and did not successfully sell a painting to anyone but his brother) until he didn't want to live anymore, so he shot himself. Pollock did his own thing. He was an alcoholic pretty much for his entire life besides the pinnacle of his fame, after that, he went drunk driving with his mistress and died. Rothko made some of the most moving pieces in the art world, with such depth, but decided that he wanted to die (was it related to the commission that he did not finish?) Basquiat was covering New York with graffiti, then he became famous via Warhol, and died a heroine overdose.
None of them really cared, they did what they loved and felt for.
I think that Elizabeth was playing a role. She wasn't unstable, she was just tired of what was happening, and needed some inspiration or a different scene, like a lot of artists. - Is Alma the nurse Elizabet's soul? Vice versa? Are they metaphorically the same person?
Elizabeth seems like a journal for Alma. Alma has no where to go with her different feelings, but Elizabeth is a blank slate where Alma can pour all of her emotions without any remorse. Alma was tortured, and Elizabeth was the escape, sort of like Elizabeth wanting to flee her life. - What do you make of Elizabet's husband conversation with Alma?
Elizabeth just needed someone to love unconditionally. Her lover was unfaithful, and she felt badly about that. Elizabeth's husband was someone who was completely devoted to her. There was no question about how he felt towards his wife. Alma was jealous.
- What do you think about the juxtapositions of opposites in the film (inside/outside, city/seaside, light/dark)?
It was very interesting; the constant changing created an environment of shock. If there was no constant, then the viewer would need to be attentive throughout the entire piece. Contrast is one of the most beautiful things about any kind of art. Without contrast, an audience would quickly lose interest. Nobody wants to see the same thing over and over again. - Why is the end conversation repeated from different angles? What do you make of when their faces converge?
It seemed as that the conversation was completely different when it was shown from the different angles. It allowed the viewer to feel what the characters felt. How it was to be talked to so harshly, and how it felt to throw such terrible words into the face of someone who has angered you. It made it feel personal, getting to see how the characters felt if you were them. An odd, but cool take on how people perceive a fixed outcome.
- What happens when you are in utter silence, alone with your thoughts? do they judge you, or complement you, do you find peace in them, do you find that you have to expose them in order to find peace?
- how do you expose them and make something with it
I usually just think too much about stuff that I probably shouldn't think about. I try to ride my bike while I am quiet so I can do something that doesn't involve me thinking about the future. I wish I would make something with my thoughts, but they all usually turn into procrastination.
Damn, this was a long post! ENJOY IT!
