baby blues

Started by jenkins, October 30, 2013, 11:22:33 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jenkins

Natalia is a 17-year-old mother juggling adolescent desires and adult responsibilities in Kasia Rosłaniec's visually stylish sophomore film set in present-day Poland.  Rejected by her mother, Natalia roller-skates down the streets of Warsaw pushing a trendy baby-stroller, chasing after her boyfriend, Kuba. While he prefers to smoke weed and skateboard with his buddy, she clings to her baby, yearning for Kuba's love and attention. Natalia is not a bad mother, but she is not mature enough to make correct judgments and she's definitely not ready to subscribe to domestic life. Clueless and driven by high-fashion illusions, Natalia's life progressively spirals out of control, leading her to make decisions that will change her life forever. BABY BLUES' fashion-forward dress, bright color palette and cast of young, untrained actors offers a daring and innovative exploration of uncontrollable impulses and the fearless attitude of contemporary youth.—Dilcia Barrera

Country: Poland
Year: 2012
Director: Kasia Rosłaniec
Screenwriter: Kasia Rosłaniec


Pubrick

Quote from: jenkins<3 on October 30, 2013, 11:22:33 AM
untrained actors

you really get off on that don't you.

what i think about when i see some of these trailers for movies with "untrained actors" is less bresson and more Korine. especially the aesthetic a lot of them seem to have. if the actors who have no professional training whatsoever actually fit the roles and fit into the style of the movie then the director must be willing to make a movie that is tied to the natural behaviours of a certain time and place.

that is to say they take something natural from these people and use it to fashion something original of its own time. that is sometimes not as enlightening as they may think. the problem with it is with the hegemonic world culture in today's youth; what you get is something that just shows everyone is the same and everyone acts the same, instead of something truly incredible like Bahman Ghobadi's films (eg. a time for drunken horses and Turtles Can Fly) that feature untrained actors who are playing a role that NO ONE else can play.

in that sense korine was at the forefront in finding the most unique american personalities to portray people who simply could not be acted (ie. themselves). i wonder how deeply these other directors are actually penetrating their cultures and showing us the most unique representations of what their reality has to offer. not just a no name actor doing something any other actor could've done in a generic situation.
under the paving stones.

jenkins

Quote from: Pubrick on October 30, 2013, 11:40:05 AM
Quote from: jenkins<3 on October 30, 2013, 11:22:33 AM
untrained actors

you really get off on that don't you.

what i think about when i see some of these trailers for movies with "untrained actors" is less bresson and more Korine. especially the aesthetic a lot of them seem to have. if the actors who have no professional training whatsoever actually fit the roles and fit into the style of the movie then the director must be willing to make a movie that is tied to the natural behaviours of a certain time and place.

that is to say they take something natural from these people and use it to fashion something original of its own time. that is sometimes not as enlightening as they may think. the problem with it is with the hegemonic world culture in today's youth; what you get is something that just shows everyone is the same and everyone acts the same, instead of something truly incredible like Bahman Ghobadi's films (eg. a time for drunken horses and Turtles Can Fly) that feature untrained actors who are playing a role that NO ONE else can play.

in that sense korine was at the forefront in finding the most unique american personalities to portray people who simply could not be acted (ie. themselves). i wonder how deeply these other directors are actually penetrating their cultures and showing us the most unique representations of what their reality has to offer. not just a no name actor doing something any other actor could've done in a generic situation.

i like your perspective here. kinda on target but, to begin, overlooks a cinematic history of cultural regionalism. killer of sheep the situation. the emphasis on korine's oddball types and the idea of them being "what their reality has to offer" is an art culture interpretation and i wouldn't fully agree for multiple reasons, especially owing to the cinematic and cultural landscape of baby blues, but anyway i think that establishes what you want it to. many characters in korine's movies wouldn't be shown anywhere else for any reason. he's a good artist

on topic, think katie jarvis. then think about everyone in fish tank except michael fassbender and other adult characters, and imagine a movie filled with them. you're getting closer. authenticity and naturalism have been vital components of the european film scene for years now (england is in europe btw), and the integration of realness with cinematic ability is a growing goal

i don't "get off on" untrained actors. baby blues is proud to have them, it's true, they mention "first time on screen" for everyone necessary during the opening credits, but i do get off on movies working within the developments of cinema culture. and right now believability is a valued facet of global cinema culture. for whatever reason. that's their reason. me, i watch their movies

jenkins

further on topic (i'm purposely drifting back to topic),

baby blues is like if joachim trier directed a lodge kerrigan movie. my euromovie friends are already aware of recent undertakings in long takes that interlock space, time, and character, and baby blues uses many of those techniques. during pulsing scenes! i've never seen the camera be like that while people skated. and the way the rave was shot -- europe and their raves lol -- impressed me like crazy. i really want to know how they moved the camera

it must have been a hard movie to make, and it was done well. there's a lot of youth culture in the movie, which helped it feel alive and present, and it differs from the ordinary teenage rebellious movie through the fact that the lead character (who, rightright i forgot, wasn't even an actress) is a mom. simply, her life is different from the type of life it's more common to see depicted. as you'd guess, everything wild and crazy about your youth kinda makes you seem like a bad mother

in terms of movies that engage with both youth culture and cinematic culture, this is ace