Skip to main content

Limite

Director: Mario Peixoto
Year: 1931
Run-time: 2 hrs
Source: Criterion Channel Streaming

Notable For:  Peixoto is a one-time Brazilian director who created what may be the greatest cult silent film.  Formally as experimental as Vertov's work, Peixoto used a poetic, non-narrative structure to explore the frailty ("limits") of human experience.  With four recurring characters, but almost no dialogue, interpretation of the film is left open-ended, but unlike in Dovzhenko's work, the symbolism is almost always universal and easy to parse, and the emotions of the characters are at the forefront. 

Verdict: It's not an easy film, and at two hours it tests the viewer's patience, but I can certainly see why it remains very beloved, and have respect for the dedicated historians who heroically managed to keep it intact throughout the decades.  The pressures of pushing forward in the list don't often allow me to revisit films, but this is one I could see returning to, now that I'm better prepared to appreciate its subtle pleasures.  (It's certainly not the film to watch after an exhausting day of teaching.)  It's a beautiful film and an incredible achievement.

Best Paired with:  The film immediately brings to mind Epstein's Coeur Fidele, both in its pacing and its many shots of the ocean.  However, spiritually, the nearest director to Peixoto is Terrence Malick, and Limite is the extremely rare film then and now that could be reasonably compared to Tree of Life.  Malick is a little more concerned with memory and childhood, but the impressionistic approach is nearly identical.  The most recurring element of Limite's score, Satie's Gymnopedie No. 3, gives one a very accurate sense of the film's mood and even its existential philosophy.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bringing Up Baby

Director: Howard Hawks Year: 1938 Run-time: 1 hr 42 min - Bringing Up Baby  is in my mind the epitome of the screwball comedy, and probably its finest example.  Hepburn and Grant are just so perfect in their roles, and the level of constant absurdity gets to the point where it overrides any cultural datedness and just becomes fun.  (The main exception is the Irish stereotype, but given that he is justified in how he behaves, it's excusable.)  I was a bit shocked to discover that this was not a commercial success, and indeed almost ruined Hepburn's career (she had the most to lose, given how novel her quirky performance is). - Looking back at the three screwballs so far on this list, it never occurred to me before how the genre seems to rely on a rich and "privileged" female lead to be the one to challenge and emasculate the male lead.  Perhaps that was the acceptable way to present it to a depression-era audience?
Post a Comment
Read more

Fétiche Mascotte (The Mascot)

Director: Ladislas Starevich Year: 1933 Run-time: 26 min Source: Youtube Notable For : The second animated short on the list from 1933 is this stop-motion piece from the Polish-Russian film-maker Ladislas Starevich.  Stop-motion is almost as old as cinema itself (Starevich had been innovating since 1912).  The craft here is as good as any modern film, and Starevich's twisted imagination is on full display, with dolls and household objects coming to life in a dark version of Toy Story.  For animation fans, it almost goes without saying that Starevich was an influence on Jan Svankmajer's work much later. Verdict :  Every frame is a bizarre delight. There didn't seem to be an overarching plan to this work (indeed, it's possible that The Mascot  is an amalgamation of several shorter films featuring the same dog character), and so the film veers from one strange scene to the next, with much of the second half taking place in some kind of tchotchke hell governe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Partie de campagne (A Day In the Country)

Director: Jean Renoir Year: 1936 Run-time: 40 min - You can tell that French film is thriving in 1936 by the fact that a film by Renoir is the worst of the last three on the list.  (Renoir has two 1936 films on the list - and other classics from this year that didn't make the cut.)  That's only really due to its brevity, and the fact that it wasn't properly finished due to extenuating circumstances.  What exists is still pretty excellent - putting the elegant but slight story aside, it's Renoir's ode to the natural world, which never quite came through before due to the bluntness of 1930's cinematography.  In fact, it's the only Renoir film I've seen in which he channels something of his father's eye for natural beauty (a fact he alludes to himself in a later commentary he gave on the film).
Post a Comment
Read more