Less chaotic and sprightly than I like my Ruiz. Although the film is large about modes of seeing, it felt highly textual, even theoretical. It reminded me strongly of the opening chapter of Foucault's 'System of Objects'. I think I prefer Greenaway doing this kind of thing, or even Godard (though Weekend > Film Socialisme). The first Ruiz film that didn't connect with me emotionally on a visceral level (so +1 star).
narrator says that tonerre made entire scandal upside down with his defense. he also says that one of the paintings by its lightening indicates the world with two suns. this film had to be made by ruiz. from my still poor experience in cinema, i will dare to say there´s no filmmaker more reality-provoking than raul ruiz. there he stands, with not only two suns but many worlds, turning them upside down with such
The wild child of Henry James (of the uncanny tales like Figure in the Carpet, Lesson of the Master etc), Pierre Klossowski and perhaps Borges (the mirrors, the labyrinths), this is a profound though irreverent meditation on the motive for metaphor and the ramshackle and desirous structures of explanation we feel compelled to surround art with.
A mystery concocted around a mystery that arises when a painter fails to leave an auteurial stamp and so interpreters must create one for him. That, above all, may be the strange scandal of the art, that it should leave no easily discernible message among stylistically and textually different paintings. Hilarious, probing and, of course, beautiful.
A surprisingly playful film; when the first shot - a pulchritudinously soft, symmetrical, static image of a Parisian side street - appeared, I expected something along the lines of a traditional, fictitious mystery film, but then as I was introduced to a tug of war narrative and character behaviour between an unknown narrator, and the art collector, I found it homogeneous to the likes of Rivette and early Makavejev.