← Back to Reviews
in
L'Eclisse (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962)
I could watch Monica Vitti all day. She has a really unique screen presence, and I find her incredibly attractive. Michelangelo Antonioni was fortunate enough to have her in two of the films in his trilogy about humankind's lack of communication in the early 1960s (the other two being L'Avventura and La Notte). My problem is that I love Monica much more than Michelangelo.
When I first watched this film many years ago, I wanted to throw something at my TV because of its laboriously obvious and drawn-out opening scene depicting the end of a relationship. It really left a bad taste in my mouth so that it was difficult to get into the rest of the movie. Now, I can just grumble a bit waiting for that scene to end because there really are a few things in the movie worth admiring. Besides Vitti and co-star Alain Delon, the cinematography is really quite impressive. Sometimes I have to debate who really has the best use of shadows in their films: Antonioni, Hitchcock or Spielberg. This film, being in black and white, really does push the light and dark composition of its images, and the exterior scenes especially seem to carry some almost subliminal meaning which makes you think you may be watching something important.
Ultimately, despite the fact that the film gets better as it goes along, it feels like some intellectual exercise of an idea. Some of the truths depicted are undeniable, but much of it just seems to be overkill and/or unnecessary. Although I find the ending stylistically daring, I certainly thought it was unsatisfactory within the thematic context. It's obvious what will happen between the two main characters, so Antonioni doesn't even bother to show you it. Instead, he seems to randomly follow people around Rome and insert little newspaper headlines to try to make a link between how individuals are unable to relate to each other in the same way that nations and cultures aren't. When the film ends, you feel cheated, even though it's certainly worth a peek for serious cineastes.
I could watch Monica Vitti all day. She has a really unique screen presence, and I find her incredibly attractive. Michelangelo Antonioni was fortunate enough to have her in two of the films in his trilogy about humankind's lack of communication in the early 1960s (the other two being L'Avventura and La Notte). My problem is that I love Monica much more than Michelangelo.
When I first watched this film many years ago, I wanted to throw something at my TV because of its laboriously obvious and drawn-out opening scene depicting the end of a relationship. It really left a bad taste in my mouth so that it was difficult to get into the rest of the movie. Now, I can just grumble a bit waiting for that scene to end because there really are a few things in the movie worth admiring. Besides Vitti and co-star Alain Delon, the cinematography is really quite impressive. Sometimes I have to debate who really has the best use of shadows in their films: Antonioni, Hitchcock or Spielberg. This film, being in black and white, really does push the light and dark composition of its images, and the exterior scenes especially seem to carry some almost subliminal meaning which makes you think you may be watching something important.
Ultimately, despite the fact that the film gets better as it goes along, it feels like some intellectual exercise of an idea. Some of the truths depicted are undeniable, but much of it just seems to be overkill and/or unnecessary. Although I find the ending stylistically daring, I certainly thought it was unsatisfactory within the thematic context. It's obvious what will happen between the two main characters, so Antonioni doesn't even bother to show you it. Instead, he seems to randomly follow people around Rome and insert little newspaper headlines to try to make a link between how individuals are unable to relate to each other in the same way that nations and cultures aren't. When the film ends, you feel cheated, even though it's certainly worth a peek for serious cineastes.