> There's a lovely page of wildly varying reactions to 'The Wild Blue
> Yonder'
> at http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the-wild-blue-yonder/
Yes, well, if you see the film, you would expect wild variance in reactions.
It is a _very_ different sort of approach to sci-fi. The film is, uh, homely
in appearance. I mean it really brings it home. There's a kind of
down-to-earthness about it that to some may simply look cheap. But that'd be
the dullards. I found it really very brilliant, at many points. Tremendously
poetical. It demands quite a bit of concentration to watch it properly. I
was too tired to view it properly and will have another more serious go at
it soon. But even in my decrepit state I could see it was really exceptional
work.
Blade-Runner is often cited as the best sci-fi film ever made. And that was
such a visually striking film. An urban future that in some ways looks like
the past but, in other ways, is very futuristic indeed. And sci-fi film is
steeped in the aesthetic of the special effect. Herzog's film has nothing
whatever to do with that aesthetic or industry. Still, there are special
effects, but in a different sense. They don't key on visual morphs and such.
They key on mental and conceptual shifts and interesting metaphors. He takes
plain footage and tells us it's actually showing something quite marvelous,
for instance, something very different than it simply appears. Rather
brilliant, I'd say. For instance, he shows us a closeup of just a man but we
understand he is an alien. And by Jove yes you can see that. A man makes a
perfect alien, really.
And all this is perfectly resonant with the mentalities of poets. Poets
don't typically spend a million dollars on special effects, but they are
known nonetheless for being seriously inventive and a little difficult
because the work demands some serious imaginative engagement.
ja
|