Would you call this a Sci-Fi film? - Il deserto rosso (1965) Discussion

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thao 15 years ago

I mean Sci-Fi like Stalker or Alphaville are Sci-Fi. It deals with how people can't cope with industrial change and Antonioni does exaggerate the colors and the look of our earth. He has in a way painted how the future could be and how some might not fit into it, by using what is already in place.

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] Tchoutoye 15 years ago

The alteration of colours has more to do with showing the altered perception of Giuliana due to her mental illness, rather than conveying a sense of the future. On the other hand, her mental illness is caused precisely by not being able to cope with the changing times.

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

The answer is no, it has nothing whatsoever to do with science fiction.

reply

[–] thao 15 years ago

It is about alienation of people in the age of technology. Is that not Sci-Fi? This is just as much Sci-Fi as Stalker.

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

It's about the alienation of one person, which has nothing to do with science fiction. Yes, Antonioni added colours to accentuate and highlight Giuliana's increasingly disturbed state, but that is not science fiction. You should reread Tchoutoye's comments, because s/he had it spot on.

Antonioni's comment (as quoted in Wikipedia) is "I want to paint the film as one paints the canvas; I want to invent the colour relationships, and not limit myself to photographing only natural colours.”

The director made a point of painting trees and grass white or grey in order to highlight unnaturalness of urban landscape. The red colour was used to highlight Giuliana's emotional anguish and sexual longing, so that Andrew Sarris referred to the red-painted pipes and railings as "the architecture of anxiety: the reds and blues exclaim as much as they explain".

Do you get any feeling still that this is science fiction, when it is such a (relatively) common part of disassociation on the part of a disturbed person? If so, and you still believe it is science fiction, how would you set about treating her condition?

reply

[–] thao 15 years ago

There is a reason why the film starts at a huge industrial site. I think the film is saying something about how difficult it is for some people to live in modern society, industrial society (which was modern at the time it was made). It is therefore about human beings vs technology. I know I'm not the only one who understands the film like that. This interpretation is discussed at the Blu-Ray edition of the film.

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

It is certainly about Giuliana's inability to accept modern industrial life, and deals with her reactions to that inability, starting from after her failed suicide attempt. It is a film about existential angst.

Quite what that has to do with science fiction - in any of its myriad disguises - completely escapes me. There is more science fiction in The Simpsons.

If you can give me one example of a proper review, by someone who knows what he is talking about when it comes to film, then I'd love to hear it or read it. In the meantime I have to say that in the 45 years since this film was made I have never heard of such an interpretation.

reply

[–] thao 15 years ago

Well, then tell me this, is Stalker a Sci-fi film or not?

I just googled it for two minutes and found this (I'm sure there is much more):

The soundscape of Red Desert borrows from two genres—thriller and sci-fi—employing eerie and suspenseful sound tropes reminiscent of classical thrillers as well as outer-space sound effects in addition to the undercurrent of industrial noise. For a modernist work, this borrowing out of context foreshadows post-modern developments, situating it more as a late modernist work. The fact that Red Desert, a drama, is stylized by the sonic staples of genres it does not conform to in regards to content, provides a subtle cue to reassess the manner in which story and plot function. The thriller aspects can be seen functioning within the plotline of Giuliana trying to cope in the aftermath of nervous breakdown. The sci-fi element can be seen in the exploration of the resulting dislocation.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/articles/redesert3.htm

Antonioni's Red Desert is the closest the Italian director ever came to making a science fiction film, the impersonal futuristic nature of its strangely beautiful industrial environment emphasized by the film's electronic score. We have already noted parallels between Red Desert and Arnold's Incredible Shrinking Man. Both films chronicle a character's growing isolation from the Modern World. Both communicate the characters' alienation in purely visual terms — Arnold through his oversized sets and props, Antonioni by framing Red Desert's Guiliana (Vitti, again) in sharp focus while the foregrounds and backgrounds are softened and blurred. However, I pair Red Desert with Arnold's Space Children due to the role of children in both films, embodying a tentative hope for the future.

http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/55/jackandmike.htm

And as I said, there is also some on the commentary track on the Blu-Ray edition (in Europe).

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

Yes, Stalker has strong science fiction elements. Tarkovsky, by the way, had no time at all for Antonioni.

Your second 'review' is partly true and partly pretentious cock. The focusing elements express Giuliana's lack of clarity when it comes to things closest to her. Nowhere does this review (or at least the part you have quoted) mention the fact that Antonioni spent a lot of his budget on painting the scenery - buildings, roads, beach, sludge etc. "Strangely beautiful industrial environment"? Anything but beautiful, I would have thought. Ravenna is a beautiful part of Italy, containing eight World Heritage sites, but you'd never know it from this.

"...the closest the Italian director ever came to making a science fiction film." A bit like saying Blade Runner is the closest Ridley Scott ever came to making a stoner comedy.

From the DVDBeaver (that well-known repository of knowledge of the visual arts) offering: "The sci-fi element can be seen in the exploration of the resulting dislocation." What does that actually mean in plain English? What is science fiction-like about the exploration of the aftermath of a nervous breakdown?

Sorry, but these two don't cut it as authoritative reviews. If you read, just for one, the New York Times review written when the film was released you will find no mention of science fiction. I have never seen this mentioned in any history of film, or biography of Antonioni. And, most important, Antonioni himself, who has quite a lot to say about the film, makes no mention of such a device.

That's it for me. I have no intention of spending any more time discussing somebody's fantasy supposedly contained within a film which, to be honest, I detest. It's clever, but it's nihilistic; very trendy in the 1960s but less interesting now.

Throughout history there's been a strong component of 'those who can't do, teach'. And this is so representative of that fixation. So-called critics look at a painting, a sculpture, a book, a film and because anything relevant or contributory has already been said they feel it necessary to strap on a new layer of meaning.

I'm not buying it.

reply

[–] thao 15 years ago

Good for you. If it was not thought of the first year the film came out, or if someone you respect has not said it then it just can't be. Also, of course films about angst and alienation can't be sci-fi. I thought so, before you put me on the right track. Your methodology is awesome. Thanks for clearing it our for me. I'll be sure to ask you next time I need a view on something.

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

No problem. Always happy to help those with learning difficulties.

reply

[–] tomsakic 15 years ago

Well, with all the alienation, polution, robot-toys (her kid's room), big machines in the factories, and landscapes (plus the soundtrack), this film surely has a science-fiction touch, and it's no wonder that it resembles Kubrick's (later) 2001. The lack of any emotional communication adds to that feeling. Somebody can make a joke of it, but that's what best science fiction is about - people trying to cope with the outside reality - i.e. Kubrick, Stanislaw Lem (Solaris) and, yes, Stalker - the adaptation of science fiction novel by Strugatski brothers. Not to mention that Tarkovsky's last movie "Ofret" is also science fiction (his third) - of course, science fiction closer to Deserto Rosso than to Star Wars (which in any case is not science fiction, but fairy tale).

Btw, Antonioni surely did go back to this "science fiction feeling" - his 1982 movie "Identificazione di una donna" is actually the closest he got to the science fiction, although it's completely in "reality". Its main character is the film director who's trying to finish his science fiction movie script. At one point he tells the story - similar way-put of his troubles as Vitti's character does in this movie - and it's a dreamlike science-fiction sequence about the space ship.

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

This is all well and good, but my whole point is that we are adding overlays of what we know now and have experienced since the film was made.

Antonioni had no intention of making this film with a science fiction perpective; it is something we have overlaid after the fact.

This is a classic example of the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logical fallacy. You have to look at it from a 1964 perspective and try to decide what was in the man's mind. As we have no way of accurately second-guessing his intentions (it now being 2009) we have to go by his writings. And nowehere in his writings or expositions of this film will you find the words "science fiction".

QED.

reply

[–] tomsakic 15 years ago

Of course that it's not a science fiction movie in terms of the genre and particularly not as the author's intention is in question.

But it depends on your theory of science fiction (is Stalker sci-fi?). For me this film has some kind of mood which I can connect to the "science fiction feel".

Vitti says in one moment: "There's something terrible about reality... and I don't know what." - for me, as long time SF reader (and Antonioni fan as well) this is the core of best science fiction: coming to terms with reality.

I also think that was in man's mind in 1964, although it's hard to talk about author's intentions and mostly not important. Author's intention aren't usually connected with the produced work, and the work speaks for itself.

But I wouldn't say it's sci-fi genre, although I can see why this was asked. Anyhow, I don't think that "genre" itself can be attached to Antonioni at all, even "thriller" as though most of his movies do have a thriller structure.

reply

[–] bogwart-1 15 years ago

That was what the thread was about, and why I replied as I did. Stalker is certainly science fiction, and just as certainly this isn't.

I don't know how old you are but the world was very different in 1964. There was much more hope around, and there was excitement as well as dread about what the future held for us. There was a feeling that we could change things, but for someone over-sensitive like Vitti's character there was the dichotomy of that awful industrial landscape which (for her) overcame the natural beauty of Ravenna itself.

"...this is the core of best science fiction: coming to terms with reality." I quite like that. Science fiction could also be represented as our efforts to make an unknowable (to a large extent) future fit our present reality. Or our idea of our present reality, which are often two completely different things.

reply

[–] mark_wilks_x 15 years ago

How can this be considered a science fiction film? It so clearly isn't.

reply

[–] St_Anus 14 years ago

there are some elements--such as the eerie electronic score, the man vs technology theme(dehumanisation/depersonalisation), the vivid splashes of colour, the cold and sterile interiors(esp the connection between the factory space and the domestic space) that appear sci-fi and were later popularised in the genre during the 70's but while this isn't technically sci-fi, it feels ahead of its time because of it.

i still can't believe this film was made in 1964. it feels like the early 70's, maybe later.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] timmy_501 12 years ago

Well, it has something to do with science and it's fiction. It has nothing to do with the established genre known as science fiction (sci-fi). Any comparison to a well established work of science fiction can help illustrate this. Stalker, for instance, is set in the future. In this future, things are notably different-there are zones where the normal rules of science don't apply. Also, people have special talents. I can't think of anything that strongly suggests that The Red Desert isn't set in the normal world of 1964.

This post brought to you by The Yoyodyne Corporation

reply

[–] PilgrimRoad7 12 years ago

Post film theories are very valid Bogwarts. To only examine a film from the perspective of the time in which it was made cuts off what could be layers more of great insight and information.

For example. Film Noir was not named film noir at the time of making the films in the 40s and 50s not were the writers and directors of the "genre" even aware that they were working in a new genre. Only after was this interpretation put on.

The same goes for a Director I recently started getting interested into: Douglas Sirk. At the time he was thought to have made frivolous Hollywood melodramas. Now, many years later when examined, it is seen that he had a keen eye for irony and his "simple" films are packed with meaning.

I do think there is an element of sci-fi in The Red Desert. I don't think it's nearly as obvious as Stalker, 2001, or some of the other films that have been tossed around here.

The Red Desert chiefly looks at a woman's unwillingness to accept the modern technological world. This film is "soft SF" it deals more with the science fiction elements of the human condition rather than flat out alien worlds, blaster guns, or time machines.

reply

[–] Zoomorph 12 years ago

No, to me this is not science fiction and neither is Stalker. But I won't engage on pointless arguments about it as genres are only meaningless organizational categories anyways. :)

~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~

reply

[–] william_pnsn 12 years ago

Fairly off topic, but someone made a comment about Tarkovsky not having any time for Antonioni. I always thought Tarkovsky was a big admirer of Antonioni and wikipedia seems to back me up. Alas, further googling has failed me so I'll ask those who know more about 60s arthouse spats.

Back on topic, I don't think this is sci-fi and I generally have a pretty relaxed view of genres. It's about dealing with modernity and alienation and it has an otherworldy quality to it, but I read that as an outward manifestation of Guiliana's anxiety. Everything is grey and dead looking because that's how she feels. The soundtrack is an amplification or her perception of industrial noise.

I do see a lot of this film in Stalker however, which I do think it sci-fi. The polluted environment and the color palette seem like it owes a debt to Red Desert.

reply

[–] geoffrey-jackson 11 years ago

I would, and I would even go farther and say that this is one of the best Sci-Fi film I have ever seen.

I would say it has a similar feel to some Sci-Fi films that I've seen. Particularly ones that include the detrimental effect of industrial pollution and contemporary life-style on the psyche. In addition to the films already mentioned I would like to add Eraserhead.

I wouldn't, however, say it the best Sci-Fi film I've ever seen. I found it a little pretentious like most but not all Italian productions.

For the record, I rate this film 6/10.

reply

[–] kenny-164 11 years ago

Jackson,

I tend to agree with you that it has a look and feel similar to sci fi, but are you saying you agree it is in fact a sci fi film? I don't think so. I mean it is fiction to be sure, heh, but in the everyday garden variety definition of sci fi, there is an aspect of the film that involves an encounter with some condition that is an extension or extrapolation of what we presently "know" to exist. That element or condition is the narrative device that leads us to encounter a speculative condition, to face questions of "what if?" - how would we feel and act, as compared to the actors in the film, if we were to encounter the fictional condition involved?

The mere "look" of a sci fi film does not meet that standard. A film that looks like it might be a sci fi film, but absent tht sort of extension described above, is not a sci fi film.

In any event the look of Red Desert as others have noted is more plausibly related to other factors than the inclusion of a narrative device extending the film into the realm of sci fi. In the case here that is likely as noted the distorted view of the world around her that a mentally disturbed person such as Giuliana might see. And of course the look serves to distort what the film viewer sees, increasing the subjective experience of alienation.

In short sci fi look, yes. Sci fi film no.

I would also note in passing how in his previous film, that being L'Eclisse, that Antonioni alluded if more subtly to a look that had sci fi elements, too. This included the walk early on in the film when Vittoria and Ricardo are walking through a landcape that has no other people in it, and their absence is even specifically referred to. Eventually this absence is jarred as a boy rides by on a bicycle. The film progresses and such things as a (then) purely modern landscape is closely examined, and a nuclear war apocalypse is alluded to as well, both overtly in a news recap and very subtly in a scene where a number of jet planes fly overhead in what appears to be unison.

But does that make L'Eclisse a sci fi film? Not in itself, as for Red Desert. The answer is no.

reply

[–] geoffrey-jackson 11 years ago

Thanks, Kenny, for your reply.

...are you saying you agree it is in fact a sci fi film?

No, I'm disagreeing with the OP and saying this film is not Sci-Fi.

Thanks also for your comments on L'eclisse. I'll pay special attention to the Sci-Fi(ish) elements when I watch that film. A nuclear war apocalypse being alluded to will put that film squarely in the Sci-Fi genre.

reply

[–] kenny-164 11 years ago

Jackson,

YOu are welcome. We agree the look is sci fi, but that does not make Red Desert a sci fi film.

To clarify about L'eclisse, the visual element I mentioned lightly alludes to the danger of nuclear war, the specific presence in the Italian sky of jet planes flying high above in a uniform pattern. But it does not allude to an apocalypse actually occurring.

Antonioni was concerned more with teh practical ways that the modern world might be lending support to a variation of our age old experience of alienation. This is true of Red Desert as well, of course, but arguably the examination is more explicit in L'eclisse.

In short, neither in my mind are sci fi films while both incorporate visual elements that are similar to ones used in sci fi.

reply

[–] escalation746 11 years ago

No, this is not an SF film. It is a psychological drama about phenomenology.

Neither is the look of the film Sci-Fi; it is simply that of Italian modernism.

The fact that some SF films adopt modernist architecture as visual short-hand might lead to your confusion.

reply

[–] thesnowleopard 9 years ago

I'm inclined to agree that it's science fiction. Whether or not it's intended to be contemporary to what was then the present day, the surroundings are definitely dystopian and the scientific element of environmental degradation is extremely strong, as if the director had happened to read "Silent Spring" shortly before he began filming. The heroine is strongly affected by her polluted surroundings, very negatively. Even the other characters around her are (like her son faking polio) poisoned as well. She's just the canary in the coal mine.

I'd also be inclined to say this has horror elements. The humming noise during the adultery scene and the screeching noises toward the end are very creepy. I kept thinking of Les yeux sans visage for some reason. The short story, "The Yellow Wallpaper" also comes to mind.

I was surprised that I liked it. I just happened to turn on TCM in the middle of the film while working on a take-home exam (about housing sustainability, of all things). But I liked the lead character and found her very sympathetic.

Innsmouth Free Press http://www.innsmouthfreepress.com

reply

[–] thao 9 years ago

Very good points!

- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

[–] thesnowleopard 9 years ago

Thanks!

Innsmouth Free Press http://www.innsmouthfreepress.com

reply

[–] The_TJT 8 years ago

No, I wouldn't call this science fiction at all. Just because it's a fictional story (as most films are) - that doesn't make it science fiction.

reply