Piano Tuner of Earthquakes

[Tommaso]

You gave a great description of the effect of "Piano Tuner", John, but I'm not sure whether I can agree with your point-of-view, although I see where you're coming from.

Piano Tuner can't pull that off because we never have enough of a sense of what's going on. The drama is melancholic, sure, and is grounded on its own particular dream logic but all of that, and the source from which the melancholy comes, is so remote and inaccessible as to make it essentially a futile effort.

But that goes for all of their films, not just "Piano Tuner". I tend to see their films in a very 'objective' way, it's like walking through a museum (one of their favourite metaphors, of course) of the obscure and the arcane, like watching an exhibition or a circus show rather than something that engages our emotions (although admittedly, their works often create a strong feeling of unease). But that is precisely the difference to Lynch. Lynch always wants to tell a story, say something about society or the personal nightmares of his characters, whereas the Quays intentionally it seems live in their own 'bubble', which the viewer is invited to step into, but which is like a closed-off land of their own. And if you like that closed-off country, you'll enjoy the films, if not, well, you're left outside.

"Piano Tuner", thus, for me is far closer to a self-sufficient purely artistic realm than Lynch's films, and if I looked for a comparison, I would perhaps name Powell/Pressburger's "Tales of Hoffmann" as something which comes close to it in its complete unity of visuals, music, decors etc.
They don't want to 'tell a story' in the usual way, but rather produce a hallucinatory work of enchantment (that's why, for instance, the dialogue in "Piano Tuner" is almost not understandable, intentionally so). In Lynch's films, you always 'wake up' after the viewing experience, whereas the Quays ideally want you to remain in that dream state.

But they may need to cut their natural instincts with a greater regard for those not directly in the know.

In the know about what? Do you mean all their references to obscure arts and writings? I would say knowing about 17th/18th century Central European arts only adds another layer of understanding, but I don't think it's necessary to feel engaged or hypnotized by their films.

[Bajaja]

Unfortunately, I have not seen the film yet and so I do not know if Adolfo Bioy Casares is officially acknowledged in the film, but I would like to reveal another possible literary connection - to the Uruguayan writer Felisberto Hernandez (just a coincidence? I doubt it). He slightly preceded Casares and Borges, and apparently, enjoyed their esteem. He used to work as a pianist and his short story collection Piano Stories contains a marvelous melancholy/phantasmagorical story "The Daisy Dolls" - about a man gradually sealing himself off in the world of inanimate dolls/automata. The book is out of print, but I strongly recommend it to anyone who cares about Borges/Casares/Quays.

[Barmy]

This is a film that needs to be seen twice. The first time I was lost. Obviously it helps to see it in a theater.

[leo goldsmith]

I have much to say on the relative merits on this film (some of which can be found in my -- ahem! -- review), but for now I'll at least say that impenetrability and obscurity -- in the sense of literally making things difficult to see -- are consistent throughout the Quays' work.

[Barmy]

Nice review, thanks. I found this film to be far more entrancing than their shorts.

[John Cope]

Piano Tuner can't pull that off because we never have enough of a sense of what's going on. The drama is melancholic, sure, and is grounded on its own particular dream logic but all of that, and the source from which the melancholy comes, is so remote and inaccessible as to make it essentially a futile effort.

But that goes for all of their films, not just "Piano Tuner". I tend to see their films in a very 'objective' way, it's like walking through a museum (one of their favourite metaphors, of course) of the obscure and the arcane, like watching an exhibition or a circus show rather than something that engages our emotions (although admittedly, their works often create a strong feeling of unease). But that is precisely the difference to Lynch. Lynch always wants to tell a story, say something about society or the personal nightmares of his characters, whereas the Quays intentionally it seems live in their own 'bubble', which the viewer is invited to step into, but which is like a closed-off land of their own. And if you like that closed-off country, you'll enjoy the films, if not, well, you're left outside.

Astute observations, as always, Tommaso. I don't disagree with you here and I think that the agenda you're describing is a perfectly fine one in theory. It simply doesn't work for me as well as I'd like. I will admit to a preference for invention within more standard narrative form but that doesn't always preclude me from being absorbed by work of the other kind. I love the Quays' shorter films because the intents that drive them seem much more coherently conveyed and less over-extended than in the features. Ultimately, I guess, the self contained world all this exists in comes across as less of a self-indulgence and more pointed in its impact. Oddly, perhaps, I also loved Barney's Cremaster films, though they must strain the patience of many as they perpetuate a similar insular aesthetic to the Quays. I'm not sure why something like Cremaster 3 feels more involving to me; perhaps simply because I sympathize more with what can be made of Barney's grand design--in other words, I think his purposes are more significant and thus they justify his methods. His work comes across as less about fetishistic arcana for its own sake and more of a unified series of signifiers at the service of an intelligible whole, though the comprehension of that whole is strictly limited. But this kind of appreciation is a subjective call.

They don't want to 'tell a story' in the usual way, but rather produce a hallucinatory work of enchantment (that's why, for instance, the dialogue in "Piano Tuner" is almost not understandable, intentionally so). In Lynch's films, you always 'wake up' after the viewing experience, whereas the Quays ideally want you to remain in that dream state.

And they certainly achieve that and I respect that but I can't pretend that I am compelled by it. Also, with work like this I always question whether the act of presenting the artists' personal cryptography sans any larger context is not an exercise in solipsism inadequately qualified. Is it easier or less valuable than an attempt to make sense of it? It's true that to pursue a kind of systematic reading may unavoidably lead to a narrative ghetto but that doesn't have to be so. Besides, I tend to embrace blatant narrative form more because to employ it feels like an acknowledgment of inherent human limitations, with the ideas articulated attributable to imagination and speculative reasoning.

But they may need to cut their natural instincts with a greater regard for those not directly in the know.

In the know about what? Do you mean all their references to obscure arts and writings? I would say knowing about 17th/18th century Central European arts only adds another layer of understanding, but I don't think it's necessary to feel engaged or hypnotized by their films.

You're right. I guess what I meant there was just that I found this particular foray into obscurantism to be less productive, and that perhaps the methods employed may have been counter-productive. But that is, once again, subjective.

BTW, thanks for the recommendation Bajaja. I am ashamed to say that I'm unfamiliar with Hernandez but I will set about to rectify that immediately!

[patrick]

Has anyone heard anything odd about the release of this DVD in Region 1? We haven't been able to get it at the video store (even the copies we pre-ordered) and all of our distributors have pulled it from their catalogs.

[foggy eyes]

Beaver review of Zeitgeist R1. Looks very similar to the AE R2 to me. A fascinating, oblique and enigmatic film.

[Rich Malloy]

Beaver review of Zeitgeist R1. Looks very similar to the AE R2 to me. A fascinating, oblique and enigmatic film.

Oddly, it's not touched upon in the review, but am I to presume that Zeitgeist is still delivering second-rate transfers, most likely a non-preconverted PAL>NTSC port?