THE MAN FROM LONDON

Hungary, 2007, 132 minutes, Black and white.
Miroslav Krobot, Tilda Swinton, Erika Bok.
Directed by Bela Tarr.

A combination of Bela Tarr and a story by Georges Simenon: Simenon in slow-motion (very slow). (Never has a steadicam been steadier in staying put on a face - or a back of a head).

In admiration: Tarr has made a film which would be at home in a gallery, each frame a stunning black and white photograph. He has captured the style of the silent German expressionist films of the 20s with something of the Warners sets of the noir 40s. The pace is relentlessly slow, giving time for contemplation and reflection on some basic drives of human nature including depression, greed, family dissent, honour.

In exasperation: while the intention is admirable, it is hard going for most, the ultra slow camera movement, the heavily slow movement and delivery of dialogue, the overall phlegmatic performance that gives very few clues as to the inner lives of the characters that Tarr wants us to resonate with (except for the heated family arguments) means that for most, this is rather a cinema of endurance. Tarr, of course, has his admirers but, as an American reviewer noted, this is a film ‘for no known audience’.

1.The importance of the style? The nature of communication? A stylistic exercise? Audience response to the style, to the content?

2.Bella Tarr, his career, his art gallery style, slow, black and white photography?

3.The black and white photography, the steadicam and its focus, steady on situations, characters? A film for contemplation, time for contemplation? The long takes, the compositions of each frame, the light and darkness, the slow movement of the camera, the slow motion of the actors’ movements, the delivery of lines? The cumulative effect? The musical score – and the repetitious theme?

4.Audiences contemplating the visuals, the sound, the silences? The characters?

5.The film based on a Georges Simenon story? The basic plot? The inner life of the different characters?

6.The style for the inner thoughts and feelings of the characters? The inner life, audiences understanding this or not? What signals for communicating the meaning of this life? The phlegmatic tone of the characters, emotionless (except for the fight between husband and wife)?

7.The basic plot: the initial robbery, Mitchell and the selling of the theatre, Brown and Teddy and the robbery, the fight, Teddy’s death, drowning, the language? Maloin and his going out to find the body, finding the money, drying it on his stove? Going home, his relationship with his wife and daughter, taking this for granted, estranged? Buying the fur for his daughter and the consequences at home? The arrival of the police, interrogations? Brown’s wife? Brown, his death, no charge?

8.The signals cabin, the audience scaling the side of the ship, in the cabin, tracking from side to side of the boat, seeing the case thrown from the boat, seeing the passengers slowly disembarking (and it repeated the second night)? The train, its departure?

9.Maloin and his look, age, life experience, boredom, repetition, the café, his playing chess, laconic talk, seeing Henriette cleaning the floors, his anger, forbidding this, coming home to his wife, the meal, going to sleep and the attention to detail of his getting ready for bed? The meals, the arguments? The buying of the fur? The screaming match? The confrontation with Brown? The police, his going to the cabin, taking the food and wine, intending to kill Brown or not? The money, his giving the money to the police? The dashing of his hopes?

10.Brown, as a character, the man from London, the possibilities in his job, the robbery, the clash with Teddy, Teddy’s death? His being killed by Maloin?

11.The inspector, serious, slow delivery, the inquiry? Going to the cabin, saying there was no charge?

12.Mrs Brown, passive, listening, going to the cabin, her grief, the close-up as the finale of the film?

13.The portrait of the wife, the daughter? Their relationship to the husband?

14.Insights into human nature – or human nature being opaque?