MovieChat Forums > Lightning Over Water (1984) Discussion > Really that great?

Really that great?

posted 18 years ago by joseflloyd
4 replies | jump to latest

I'm not so sure this documentary is as brilliant as I have been told.
For starters it poses as a documentary that uses observational techniques and collaborative filmmaking to acheive it's ends but the techniques it uses (filming Ray rehearsing a scene, camera crew in shot etc.) dilute the overall impact of the story they are trying to tell. I found it very difficult to get emotionally involved witht the subject due to this 'rehersal' footage as I was unsure what was true emotion and what was replicated for an 'nth' take.
But maybe I'm heading off in the wrong direction as in hindsight this peice works better when discussed as a film, rather than a documentary. It instantly becomes more interesting when looked at this way as the style revels itself as more experimental due to its use of different camera sytems and intercutting of behind-the-scenes and finalized footage.
I think I may have enjoyed the film more if I had prior knowledge of the man they were filming. This is also the film's downfall, if veiwed from the documentary angle, as a good documentary should involve you in the story and make you feel something about the subject whether or not you know them or not. I felt nothing for the old man, as blasphemus as that is.
There are, of course, moments of beauty in the film but they are scarce, drowned out in the vast length of the film, and all of them occur either in the behind-the-scenes section or through the old video footage.
Watching the film is like searching for water in a desert, when you find some it's great but it soon runs out and you know you're going to have to trek a few hundred more miles until you find some more.

[–] crash_into_me420 18 years ago

well i certainly disagree on the 'not feeling anything' opinion. I definitely felt a lot of empathy for Ray throughout the film. Immediately the film gave me the impression that he was a good man and seeing him struggle for one last creative output was very emotional, I think. But aside from that, I feel that the best docs are the docs that can acknowledge their own artificiality. It shouldn't just be a matter of trying to involve the audience as directly or 'realistically' as possible. That's boring. This is just about the most excellently thought-out and executed doc that I've seen (regardless of its explicit semi-fictional qualities)

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Well, I don't know except that I personally enjoyed the film and it's one of the most beautiful films of the Seventies.

In any case, the strict lines between documentary and fiction were already eluding by the the time the film was made in 1980.

Actually already with Robert Flaherty, they were being blurred.

But I think I can sympathize with you for saying you'd have liked the film more if you knew more about the man. He's Nicholas Ray. He was a Hollywood director in the late 40's-early 60's which was also the final decade of the Hollywood Golden Age. He directed at the very least six-seven masterpieces that were major breakthroughs in American Cinema which deeply influneced European directors like Wim Wenders, R. W. Fassbinder and the directors of the French New Wave.

Even if you have seen films like They Live by Night, In A Lonely Place and of course his most famous film Rebel Without A Cause you should pretty much be able to understand the film.

In any case the film is honest about the level of truth value it's claiming to.

People dissapear ever day...sometimes when you leave the room - The Passenger

[–] annseton 10 years ago

Does it have anything about him naming names during the hunt for commies in Hollywood. If he'd made peace with himself about doing that?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]