A story about a story.


Hi

This film is a beautiful little saga, which works well also for a grown up audience. But it has “Indie” written all over it, so it will probably attract a rather small audience. An assumption well evidenced by the meager amount of threads here: 11 threads over almost a three years time span!! I really think that this little gem is worth a tad more attention than that.


SPOILERS!















The narration style and especially the ending seem to have caused some confusion. A confusion that makes me a bit confused: I think that writer/director Oberg is *very* explicit here.

First shot is an extreme close-up of the female protagonist’s hand drawing a meandering line on a drawing paper. The last shot is also an extreme close-up of the same hand writing the words “The End” on a drawing paper. It ends where it started; on the drawing board. We learn from the very start of the story that the protagonist is a comic drawer, and she is present both as the artist drawing the story (voice-over), and as acting out parts of the story (she is writing) in front of the camera.

To really spell it out loud and clear Oberg also has her saying (in voice over) during the first shot: “Every line you draw leads to something, and often you don’t know to where, - - - in comics everything is possible.” And during the shot just before the last one, the voice over continues: “… This is how I became a visitor in my own world”.

How could he possibly be more explicit and clear than this, without being ridiculously over-explicit? It’s a story about a young (and very beautiful ) female comic book artist telling her story. It’s both about *telling* the story, and the story *itself*. To me Oberg’s meandering (like the line in the opening shot) between these two levels of narration is both witty and emotionally captivating.

The saga/comic story is told partly via traditional separate comic book drawings, partly with traditional film narration (at times breathtakingly beautiful cinematography).

I can admit that this could have been rather confusing if the opening of film hadn’t been so clear as it now is.

If I’m reading the poster Asgardsrei1 right this is also his/her take of it. And another sharp-eyed poster here delivered rock solid evidence that the whole story is fiction, or rather meta-fiction. He/she pointed out the fact that at the end Angela is drawing pretty accurate portraits of some of the men and the scenes at the party, but *before* the party. Which would of course be impossible IRL.

Anyhow, it’s a well made film, told in an intriguing and captivating ambiguous way. It’s true film poetry about storytelling and image making with both pen and movie cam. Besides it makes Tokyo kind of a modern day Shangri-la (like Lost in Translation did as well).


cine

"Why is it that men are so much more interested in women than women in men?"
Virginia Woolf

reply

Hey Cine!



SPOILERS continued...










So I just finished watching SG! I must say how glad (and surprised) I am to have enjoyed it. These type of films typically fall apart. It usually goes like this: The world and characters are introduced in a world we all too familiar with (our day-to-day lives). As soon as the plot thickens, the tone will change so drastically that you could easily separate the first part of the movie (reality based) and the second part (dreamworld). I was almost certain it would happen the first couple times Angela suspects foul play over Larissa's disappearance. But instead, it just gave way to the perfect level of added dreaminess to the unfolding story. And as these stories usually go, the dreamworld second half almost always climaxes in incoherency to the point where we wish we knew what was going on and it pulls us out of enjoying the dream just because we want to know what is going on! Pretentiousness by its very definition. SG succeeds where most fail by starting with a dreaminess and slow boils it to fever pitch ethereality (Angela's participation in the drug induced party) without ever losing the story. You *always* know what's going on!

As for the ending, I have to admit that I was taken aback by the "It was all my comic book" ending. But I rewatched the beginning. You're right, Cine. It is so explicit that she is drawing her story! Right down to pencil scratching noises over "movie" scenes! Every cut in the beginning screams "I AM BLENDING THE TWO MEDIUMS TO TELL MY STORY!!!" (This could be Angela *or* Oberg speaking).

I should say I wasn't *completely* surprised by the ending. The line near the very beginning, "You go on a journey without knowing where it will end," was quite abrupt to me, and I found that very telling. It's the point when her analogies of Drawing to Story become more like how Story is to Drawing. And it's all done line by line, very intentionally (I refer to dialogue lines, but it also works for drawings as well). I would like to rewatch this again, but it is late, and I'm afraid to be overloaded by it. Perhaps another time, I can marvel even more over the subtle details. I will certainly be looking for the drawing of a yet-to-be-introduced character (as pointed out by Asgardsrei1). How intriguing!

And a quick word on the "independent" style. It certainly is written all throughout the movie. But I'm beginning to think that I really like that... but only if it is accompanied by stellar Hollywood-worthy moments (just for proof of quality moviemaking chops) and, of course, engaging characters/story.

Finally, I'd like to mention my favorite part of Oberg's statement (the Region 1 dvd's feature). It's how he explains that he didn't want to do the cliche things of a foreigner in Japan and chose to stay as close to the character as possible:

"Her imagination supplements everything that she finds strange and incomprehensible in Japan."

What a fantastic interpretation of Japan!

reply