Climax (Gaspar Noé)

[Grouchy]

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/cinemania-cdn/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/06140458/climax_poster.jpeg

[Grouchy]

I love how Noé seems to exist forever on the verge of making a completely pretentious, morbid, unwatchable film yet he always manages to bring something new to his collection of director's trademarks - crazy titles, reverse narrative, non-actor performers, acts of extreme violence, and so on. Love was a bit of a transitional work into this one in my opinion. This film, while far less explicit, channels the same demographic of drug-fueled characters. It's not random that IMDb refers to it as a Horror movie - the first half hour works a lot like a slasher film where we get to know some people, despise them, and then attend the spectacle of their gruesome murders. Except that instead of Jason or Mike Myers the monster is themselves once the walls of inhibition fall down.

I did think it was a bit ridiculous how almost every character had violent tendencies, though. But I think it was justified by the lynch mob mentality depicted and the nightmarish atmosphere which was very well accomplished - the camerawork and cinematography deserve every award ever created.

And at the very least, Noé taught me that Eraserhead was renamed Labyrinth Man in France.

[Ivan Drago]

Through some divine miracle, my city is getting a private screening of this movie, of all things.

Now I'm crossing my fingers that I'm able to attend it and then write a review, because I can't wait to see it.

[Ivan Drago]

I can confirm that I'm going, but my review is embargoed until March 15th. Either way, I can't wait!

[Ezee E]

I was told it's coming to my local Alamo too. So I'll get to see on the big screen.

[Ivan Drago]

I want to talk about this so bad.

[baby doll]

Well, that was an experience. Not a particularly pleasant experience, and I couldn't always keep track of which character was which (I still don't know who it is that's running in the snow in the opening sequence), but it certainly did unsettle me. As in Irréversible and Enter the Void, the film's real subject is Noé's flashy technique (evidently he no longer has any interest in character or dramatic structure), but while this is considerably less disciplined than the former or Seul contre tous (probably still his best film), it's less repetitive than, and not quite as stupid as, the latter. At the very least, it's not boring.

Also, what's the deal with the ironic(?), ungrammatical nationalist sentiments ("A film made in France and proud of it")? Does this have anything to do with anything or is Noé just trolling des libs?

[Grouchy]

(I still don't know who it is that's running in the snow in the opening sequence)
That was clearly the pregnant lady, right?

[baby doll]

That was clearly the pregnant lady, right?I guess it has to be, since I can't think of who else it might be.

[Yxklyx]

Well, that was an experience. Not a particularly pleasant experience, and I couldn't always keep track of which character was which (I still don't know who it is that's running in the snow in the opening sequence), but it certainly did unsettle me. As in Irréversible and Enter the Void, the film's real subject is Noé's flashy technique (evidently he no longer has any interest in character or dramatic structure), but while this is considerably less disciplined than the former or Seul contre tous (probably still his best film), it's less repetitive than, and not quite as stupid as, the latter. At the very least, it's not boring.

Also, what's the deal with the ironic(?), ungrammatical nationalist sentiments ("A film made in France and proud of it")? Does this have anything to do with anything or is Noé just trolling des libs?

This sounds.... positive?

Can't wait to see this! Sure, Enter the Void is all "flashy technique" but that's precisely why I love it! Style over substance to the nth degree.

[Spinal]

I really like the idea of this film, and the opening dance sequence is extraordinary in the way it lets us get to know the characters through their physicality and not just their words. However ... I don't know. For me, it doesn't really soar because it doesn't succeed in making us care about the lives that are impacted. The consequences these characters face are kind of arbitrary and generic. Most of Noe's camera and editing stunts are things we've seen in his previous films. And during a large chunk of the film's ending, it's really just kind of hard to tell what's happening to which character. It's probably still worth seeing and better than Love, to be sure.

[baby doll]

For me, it doesn't really soar because it doesn't succeed in making us care about the lives that are impacted. The consequences these characters face are kind of arbitrary and generic.Given all the terrible things that happen to the characters in this film, I'm not sure why you would want to care about them more. Personally, I found myself yearning the sort of misanthropic black humour that makes Lars von Trier's films bearable.

[Spinal]

Personally, I found myself yearning the sort of misanthropic black humour that makes Lars von Trier's films bearable.

I don't think these things are mutually exclusive. I didn't need to like the characters. I just needed to have a better understanding of why their consequences mattered. When a character suffers in a Lars von Trier film, I understand how it is tragic or related to some kind of cosmic cruelty that punishes the good and turns a blind eye to the wicked. At the end of this film, I have no idea why the punch was spiked, why it matters, or what any of the characters' fates means beyond being random. I can contrast this with something like Battle Royale which does a good job of tying the consequences of each bit of suffering to the film's overall mission.

[baby doll]

I don't think these things are mutually exclusive. I didn't need to like the characters. I just needed to have a better understanding of why their consequences mattered. When a character suffers in a Lars von Trier film, I understand how it is tragic or related to some kind of cosmic cruelty that punishes the good and turns a blind eye to the wicked. At the end of this film, I have no idea why the punch was spiked, why it matters, or what any of the characters' fates means beyond being random. I can contrast this with something like Battle Royale which does a good job of tying the consequences of each bit of suffering to the film's overall mission.It's not clear to me whether you're describing the necessary conditions for you to feel compassion for the characters' suffering or whether you're describing the conditions that would make their suffering meaningful (assuming, that is, you believe the two can be cleanly disentangled). On the former point, I think what makes Climax so painful to watch is not only that we feel the characters' suffering is serious but also that it is undeserved, and moreover, we're forced to consider the idea of something similar happening to us. In other words, the sheer randomness of the characters' fates is a large part of what makes the film so distressing. (On the other hand, my reaction to Battle Royale was one of bored indifference as the large number of characters means that no one is on screen long enough to make even as much of an impression as the dancers in Noé's films, much less for me to take them into the sphere of my eudaimonistic concern, and their suffering isn't especially prolonged.) The question for me is not whether Climax succeeds in eliciting the spectator's sympathy for its characters, but does it do this to any purpose or did Noé spike the punch simply to put the audience through the wringer.

[Spinal]

It's not clear to me whether you're describing the necessary conditions for you to feel compassion for the characters' suffering or whether you're describing the conditions that would make their suffering meaningful.

The second one.



The question for me is not whether Climax succeeds in eliciting the spectator's sympathy for its characters, but does it do this to any purpose or did Noé spike the punch simply to put the audience through the wringer.

That is the same question I'm asking. I don't need to like them. But, just like any other movie, I'd like to think their experiences have purpose. My reaction was that I didn't see much.

[Ivan Drago]

FINALLY I can talk about how much I love this demented work of cinema. (http://www.foxforcefivenews.com/climax-is-a-stylish-terrifying-drug-trip-into-the-horrors-of-humanity-review/)

[Spinal]

I may have to give this one another try when it gets to streaming, see if I get more out of it on a second go.

[Ezee E]

Of course one goes to a Noe movie for his technique, and unpredictability of what will happen. In Irreversible, I feel like I saw a story and anger that has maybe never been done before and never done since. Enter the Void had moments of truly feeling the mindset of the character in more ways than just the first-person camera approach. Love... I sadly cannot remember a moment from. Climax seems to try and go for in between Irreversible's rage while also adding in a confused and dizzying mindset. Unfortunately, I don't feel any of the acting gets me there to care enough, so when it gets hard to physically see what's even going on, I just wanted it to be over.

I enjoyed the approach of getting to know the group with the opening number. Afterwards, the interview sessions were just way too long, and then ANOTHER dancing number just got tiresome... There's a few effective moments when everyone goes mad, but again, once the lights go out, and without any true interest in the remaining characters... I kind of just wanted to walk off.

Bad laugh, but when the power goes out, and someone yells out what they believe had happened, I loled.

[Peng]

Didn't wholly love this. But man, it's just so magnificently staged and sensorially overpowering that it's hard not to get swept away again just as some more conventional drama bits start to drag it down. And that first dance is one for the ages. 7.5/10