Vinyan

[bluehorse]

yesterday I watched Vinyan twice in a row... because at the first view I was so taken by Rufus that I did not get much of the film
There is not much to add to the reviews above.

Very interesting the making of, really worth to watch more than once for Rufus comments and also some really funny scenes (e.g. the disembowelment scene, this horrible scene, in the making of really is FUNNY to watch. How Rufus complains about the board they put on him. That he is somehow concerned about the kids with the sharp sticks. And that something hit his head, while he was buried and could not move. After having seen this, the film scene was less frightening for me.

There is one thing of whole the story line which troubles me. Why on earth are those children so evil?
Why do they kill?
Does one of you have a good explanation? I would be really curious to know what you think.

And in this context, there was a scene I absolutely did not understand: when they reach that hut in the jungle with the children eating rice and the two old people. Those two seemed somehow like prisoners of the children??? They were frightened and seemed so desperate. Why???

And my last "question" is about the end. Normally I am very good in imagining how the story could go on after the end. But with this film, I find it hard to imagine what happened to her. Paul dead and she alone in the jungle with all these children? Does she take those children as a kind of replacement for her own child and will live in the jungle? Hard to imagine. Will she end like those two old people, as a kind of slave of the children???

So these are my "questions"... now I count on you, girls

[kygal]

I did enjoy watching the making of this movie. When they were looking at that fishy thing and chasing the director with it I could hear Rufus laugh in the back ground several times. Also enjoyed his sense of humor at what you mentioned.

As for your questions...I have no idea why the children acted this way. Maybe the spirt of Vinyan , or maybe they were just savages. Reminded me of Lord of the Flies. Possibly they had seen this behavior from adults at some point towards animals or humans. I do think Jean became their token mother. Good questions though...I never really thought about it while watching the movie...was just really disturbed of the ending.

[bluehorse]

thx kygal for your feedback.
Well, at least I'm not the only one with these open "questions".

Yes, of course, the ending is unbearably disturbing. It's just not right, it's awfully wrong.
But as I said, after having watched the "making of", I can watch that scene in a more relaxed way

Well, and then... in this film there are the most exiting 30 seconds of audible EROS I have ever heard! Visible, well... also... his gorgeous bum and the drop of sweat which is running from his nose... but all this much too short, not even a few seconds!!!!

And another strange thing that is going through my mind since most of the last DVDs I've watched:

You know what? There are strange parallels in all of his films, I find. The masturbating scene in DN is similar to this one in Vinyan... he is so distant to the woman he loves, he has no other way out than doing it "on his own" in a way or other.
Then the wedding night scenes with Shirley Henderson in Charles II and in TOTS... aren't they somehow very similar? His wifes are both Katherines, BTW. With both of them, in the first run he refuses to consummate the marriage... And later he refuses to talk of divorce...

And the rain scenes, how much rain can that poor guy stand? ... Rain dropping from his nose in Vinyan, in Woodlanders, in IASL... always terribly alone somehow.
OMG, can't anyone give him an umbrella?

So, that said... I am still curious to learn more about your points of view, girls! Don't know where else I could post the questions of my Rufus-tormented mind

[lulufi]

I found this:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP-aPmZXic4

I didn't watch Vinyan and i won't do. I really can't watch horror movies.

[tipou]

as much as i like rufus, and as much as i liked this movie, i was not much "excited" by the "sex" scene. it was too painfully descriptive of the desintegration of their couple, and of them both as individuals. paul is uselessly trying to get the rest of his life back together, by force if necessary, and jeanne is totally out of it.

the "evil" children i saw as, not so much evil, but taking "revenge" upon adults.

there are multiple references about children in the movie. one of them being the men "selling" kids as if they are interchangeable = adults preying on kids. another one is paul and jeanne contributing to an orphanage in the beginning. orphanage = abandoned children, without love, without parents, without a decent life.

paul and jeanne "lost" their child, and they both feel responsible in their way, or are tearing each other apart with blame. they may be imagining their son lost, frightened, and wondering why they left him behind. and perhaps blaming them too.

and then there is the "vinyan", the souls having died un-peacefully. paul and jeanne are both going crazy with grief, on top of being strangers in a strange land, and their own wounds are infected by the hostile environment and its ageless myths, this place that is impossible for them to understand, the "evil place" that took their child away from them.

i think the last half of the movie is mainly symbolic. of the unspeakable pain of losing a child, of the hell these characters reach inside their souls. paul is literally torn apart by guilt, while his wife, having chosen to "survive" by letting him take the blame, literally has him killed for his "fault", thus finding a semblance of vengeance for herself, for having her child taken away from her.

i am sorry if i babble on. this kind of movies gets me going exactly because it is not all spread out and explained in details for us. i like movie makers who do not think we are total idiots who cannot understand anything. they allow us to be a part of the process, by interpreting the story according to our own experiences and beliefs.

so my apologies for going on and on and on and on




TO LULUFI : no way this movie is "entertainment", that is a given, its dark and difficult and emotionally painful.

BUT IT IS NOT A HORROR MOVIE. there are about 30 seconds of something a bit gory at the end, but you can easily close your eyes and not lose anything.

i fully understand that people may not like this movie, but not because it is a horror movie, which it is not.

unless you qualify intense emotional dismay as horror.

[bluehorse]

thank you so much, tipou, for sharing your thoughts about Vinyan. I was a little bit disappointed that there haven't been many reactions on my "questions"... It is maybe because most of you have already discussed every tiny bit about his works long time ago and only rookies like me still feel the need to exchange points of view and ask questions???

I really enjoy reading about how other people have seen the same film I saw. Sometimes it seems even it was not the same film. Fascinating!
Different people, different emotions on the same film. I find that so interesting.

Tipou, Your interpretation is very thoughtful and deep. And I agree, it is not a horror movie.
And yes, probably it is all about symbols.

Umm... and as for the sex scene... I still do not feel guilty when I'm drooling .... .... the sound of his voice in that scene is simply hypnotizing me.... probably a very serious form of rufusitis?

Wishing you all a wonderful, delightful month of May!
Bluehorse

[GreenEyesToo]

Lulufi, thank you for that link - verrrrrrry nice indeed!

[wichiwoman]

Thanks, Lulufi, for finding that. That was both mesmerizing and haunting. Anyone recognize the music? Was it from Vinyan?

[tipou]

bluehorse: rueful and i reflected, not long ago, that we do not here have enough discussions about actual rufus movies - after all, we are his fans, and he happens to he an actor, so we must have thoughts about his work!!!

your questions were intelligent and interesting, and please do not hesitate to provoke more discussions.

in fact, some of those helped me understand, if only a little bit ***coughrosscough*** some aspects of his movies or roles that ... attracted me much less.

anyway, even the discussions about duds (ex.: extreme ops) often turn out to be hysterical.
so nothing is lost, ever!!!

this being said, if i ever get a bit too "pontifical", anyone is welcome to shut me up!!!

[stama]

tipou, your feelings about Vinyan are like my own feelings.

when Jeanne and Paul go into jungle deeper and deeper decompose more of their personality and raining and the mud is a symbol of the hopelessness of their situation. Camera in this film is amazing.

[bluehorse]

Apr 11, 2010 10:19:31 GMT bluehorse said:

there was a scene I absolutely did not understand: when they reach that hut in the jungle with the children eating rice and the two old people. Those two seemed somehow like prisoners of the children??? They were frightened and seemed so desperate. Why???

And my last "question" is about the end. Normally I am very good in imagining how the story could go on after the end. But with this film, I find it hard to imagine what happened to her. Paul dead and she alone in the jungle with all these children? Does she take those children as a kind of replacement for her own child and will live in the jungle? Hard to imagine. Will she end like those two old people, as a kind of slave of the children???

So these are my "questions"... now I count on you, girls

sorry for quoting myself... but I am still wondering about these questions. I count on you, girls.

Ah, and BTW, and this has nothing to do with my "questions" but just to make you laugh with me:
I found, one of the most hilarious scenes in the making of was when his body is buried up to his neck (for the disembowelment scene) and he says something like:
"Dear Mother, I a m here in Thailand. I met some very nice people"
The expression of his face is cracking me up.

[stama]

;Dyeah it is funny and the film about the making I like.

[rueful]

I don't think I can answer your excellent questions, bluehorse, because I have a hard time as thinking of the end as anything but symbolism. I finally watched Vinyan, and found much to admire, especially the brilliant performances all the way around and the atmosphere created by the director/cinematographer.

Given the strength of the performances, I thought the final journey into "the heart of darkness" was a superfluous metaphor. The story of Jeanne and Paul's devastation as a couple and as individuals was, to me, dramatic and sad enough without the supernatural elements. I thought the saddest scene in the film was when she is on the ground in the mud, and he is holding her, and they are both sobbing, "I love you," trying desperately to cling onto each other and their love. Even without the feral children, they are doomed because of their despair, their inability to accept what happened, their guilt, etc. I would have been interested to see how their story ended if it had stayed in the realm of the real world.

Obviously my version of their story would have been a lot more conventional and boring, which is why I'm not a filmmaker.

On a lighter note, I also enjoyed the "making of" video, in particular the "Dear Mother" bit. He's so damn funny.

[bluehorse]

rueful, that's an interesting interpretation... the last part seen as pure symbolism (and yes, probably quite superfluous)... seen in that way, it is easier to take.
As in many films, it would really quite interesting to know how it ends AFTER the end
But then probably films would NEVER end because there's always an afterward after the end. LOL.

If you ask me, if he would not have been killed, they would have divorced. And/or both end up in a psychiatric hospital. Don't you think? Who could lead a normal life after that nightmare?

[tipou]

May 11, 2010 18:21:49 GMT rueful said:

Given the strength of the performances, I thought the final journey into "the heart of darkness" was a superfluous metaphor. Obviously my version of their story would have been a lot more conventional and boring, which is why I'm not a filmmaker.

the problem is: many movie makers simply DO NO KNOW WHEN TO STOP. stopping at the right time is the difference between making a good movie and making a masterpiece, IMHO.