Identifikation einer Frau

This feels a little bit like "Antonioni For Dummies". Although there are some mysteries and ambiguities, for the most part it's rather plainly laid out and not as enigmatic as his more highly-regarded works. Which isn't to say it's a bad movie. It drags quite a bit, but there are some intriguing parts. The highlight is the fog-shrouded centerpiece of the film... a rather blunt metaphor, but still eerie and compelling. The ending is also a treat. The cinematography by Carlo Di Palma is excellent, perhaps even surpassing his work on RED DESERT. And the soundtrack, though it will probably sound dated to most, is full of stuff I like -- OMD, Tangerine Dream, Steve Hillage. Overall, the film is engaging, but only intermittently so. The first half is more rewarding with all its paranoia... things fizzle out more in the second part.

As introduced by Lorenzo Codelli, Identification of a Woman was presented in the Cannes Film Festival in 1982 and received a special anniversary award. It's like a personal movie because the lead character Niccolo (Tomas Milian) is a film director, and tells of a personal crisis of the filmmaker. Niccolo was played by a leading Italian actor of the time, Tomas Milian, who was famous for his roles in Italian spaghetti westerns, and was an action star. This was essential the last feature film made by Michelangelo Antonioni before his stroke, before which he spent most of the 80s publishing short stories and exhibiting his abstract paintings.

And personally, my bad track record with Antonioni's post L'Eclisse movies unfortunately continues. I'm pretty sure I'm missing something very obvious (or could be it so subtle it eludes me?) that I'm finding each of them quite difficult to sit through (save for perhaps The Passenger), and to try and see its underlying meaning. Perhaps I am just scratching the surface and in doing so, fail to appreciate what the movie's about and for.

Or maybe Identification of a Woman is indeed the weaker of the lot, because of certain resemblance to plot design with his earlier masterpieces? For starters there seemed to be some repetitive themes revisited, but that I'm fine with because it made it easier to click with and connect. Just like how Niccolo and his squeeze Mavi (Daniela Silverio) spend considerable time at an emotionally empty high society party reminiscent of that in L'Notte, where they nurse issues from the heart, as well as for one to come to terms with the other's secret admirer.

Surely the sex is good, and the movie wastes absolutely no time in getting beneath the sheets for some surprisingly erotic time of a horizontal tango complete with underarm forests, but naturally physical love doesn't compensate for emotional depth absent between the lovers, highlighting something inherent wrong in their relationship. Having anonymous threats made to Niccola also didn't help, as he experienced first hand how these threats got carried out to hurt those he loved. We spend a bit of time with their attempts to escape from a stalker, and even had a technically brilliant sequence involving a deep mist that I thought contemporary movies like Frank Darabont's The Mist, or the video game movie adaptation of Shallow Hill, had taken a huge leaf from.

For Niccolo's inability to declare his love and address their conflicts, we get a dose of L'Avventura here. Mavi disappears, and we don't really get to see much of her thereafter. Niccolo tries to launch a search, and we get into the second half of the movie where we see his new relationship with a young actress Ida (Christine Boisson). But of course there are issues to grapple with here, and I thought was something I'd understand as well, and that's the continued holding out of the candle for someone else, together with the notion of love versus need, and serving as an emotional crutch. It's not fair of course, but there's more challenges ahead for Niccola in his relationship with Ida to accept, but by the time we get to it, I'd more or less didn't really care for Niccola anymore.

Which probably contrasted to a statement which Lorenzo Codelli shared about what Antonioni said regarding this movie being about its characters. I thought his earlier movies had stronger and more interesting characters, or at least those who can hook my attention down and allowed me to care for them a bit, versus those in this movie. Then again, I suspect I may be on a different wavelength since I enjoyed most of Antonioni's earliest works in the 50s, as compared to the more contemporary ones shown this week so far.

I think there are no such things as popular movies or intellectual films. there are good films and bad ones. Whether they are westerns, film noirs, comedies or action movies is irrelevant. some of them speak to you as if you were a nut-head, others as if you were able to share their vision and if necessary think by yourself, not mentioning others who would simply insult a 5-year old. This movie definitely falls in the second category. First of all it is visually rewarding. Antonioni is a painter in films and every scene, every shot is beautiful and interesting. As to the plot and characters, they are puzzling, for, as in all Antonioni's movies, they never act or react as expected. There is mystery, in every scene. It is so modern that not many films of today can compete. The love scene for instance is unrivaled in today's cinema and makes "Basic Instinct" look like sexual excitation seen through the eye of mickey Mouse. It's a film about creation, fatherhood, what it is to watch and to be watched. it's about cinema!

Possibly the most atmospheric film I ever seen, it made a huge impact when I first saw it, and that opinion has never changed. If there is one film that conveys the mystery of life this is it. It is also a highly evocative picture of Italy from the perspective of the upper middle classes in the late Seventies. Crying out for a DVD release as the photography was excellent too on the original film showings.

Antonioni's "The Passenger" is probably my favorite film. It's a singular work which manages to have the highest philosophical ambitions without seeming the least pretentious. That's not to say that Antonioni never seems pretentious. He sometimes is very much so, and this is a case in point. I wouldn't describe this as a good movie exactly- it's a bit too self-absorbed, with some lousy dialog and a howlingly funny leading man, who seems like an SNL parody of an Italian leading man. But having said that, it's still vintage Antonioni, and he was a master. For every moment that makes a fan wince, there are others of exceptional compositional beauty: street scenes in which "extras" take on inarticulable metaphysical weight, moments, such as a scene where the protagonist is lost in fog, that seem to depict the invisible. The theme of the film could seem misogynistic, and in a way it is. But really, this film is about the unknowability of the Other, and the way that black hole nonetheless illuminates Being.