The Falls

"The Falls" is an extraordinary piece of work. Nothing else comes close. The biographies of 92 victims of the "VUE" ("Violent Unexplained Event") whose surnames begin with the letters f-a-l-l, Greenaway's film is a mixture of the encyclopedic, the sinister, the silly and the plain mad. At 3h30, mad as Monty Python and as rambling as Laurence Sterne, shot and narrated in public television documentary-style, "The Falls" is designed to be exhaustive and wear you out; Greenaway himself has on occasion stated that nothing forces you to sit through, and that the film might actually work better if you just dip into it at random - "browse" was the word he used.

When I saw it, there were only myself and two other friends still in the cinema by the time the lights came up. All three of us were absolutely delighted, exhilarated in the manner of kids coming back from the Science Museum. Words like "mesmeric", "entrancing" and "fascinating" were used to discuss it afterwards, as well as "plain daft" (meant as a compliment, of course.)

Not sure if you'll enjoy "The Falls." It depends on what you want from your filmed entertainment, I guess. If you don't really think cinema should do anything other than tell stories that are easy on the brain, don't bother. If you love lists, however, and think intellectual challenge is entertaining, on the other hand, you're in for a treat.

One final note - whoever thought of recommending "Titanic" to fans of "The Falls" is obviously on some really heavy drug I've never heard about. What is it, and what other side effects does it have?

I saw this movie at a Greenaway festival, at the Neptune in Seattle WA a few years back. It was the ultimate realist experience. The movie went on and on merciliess in its informing you of how much was left. I don't think that I have been to any movie where I have seen so many people walk out. This movie has to be seen in a theatre--video offers to many chances for escape. If you let yourself be caught up in it, the experience is unparalled. Not for the weak, but for those that fall into it, a work of pure genius.

Welcome to the highly personal paramount of Greenaway's work. His scathing documentary on general English silliness. An elongated, meticulously constructed piece of fabulous fantasy. A fantastic frivolous frolic. The film chronicles the biographies of 92 selected victims of the Violent Unknown Event, or VUE for short - a strange occurrence that has left people speaking strange languages and experiencing bird-related symptoms. All of the victims' surnames' begin with the word FALL. The bios are described by several narrators. Some of the bios are curt, others are fastidiously described. They are always witty. Examples being a victim who continually tells bird jokes, "Why do birds fly south for the winter? Because it's too far for them to walk". Others constantly drive in circles. Many of them have new talents, like spitting long distances. Some of the bios reminded me of Monty Python sketches, with the similar zest of absurd English humour.

It is a challenge to sit through it all in one go, and is probably best viewed on video in two or three attempts. Not recommended for everyone, but if you want something hilariously different look no further.

I must admit I find most of Peter Greenaway's movies to be too much hard work. They are usually visually stunning but ultimately too cerebral and contrived for my taste. However I was pleasantly surprised with 'The Falls', his little seen feature length debut. This is one mighty strange movie, even by Greenaway's standards! A mockumentary concerning the mysterious and unexplained "Violent Unknown Event", or V.U.E. Approximately 92 short biographies of V.U.E. victims are presented, the people being selected in alphabetical order, surnames beginning with "Fall", hence the title. We never quite know what the V.U.E. is other than it tends to make people exposed to it mutate, speak previously unknown languages, and become obsessed with birds, flying and/or water. The film goes for over three hours and very few viewers will be able to watch it in one sitting without being driven slightly bonkers. Monty Python fans will probably "get" it as much as postmodernist artheads, but beware it isn't easy viewing, and requires some perseverance. Greenaway says fast forwarding is acceptable. I say almost obligatory! I watched it in three or four sittings, and when interrupted for a minute or two kept the tape running. You really have to watch this profoundly eccentric movie to understand why it's not the kind of conventional narrative that demands your complete and utter attention. At times I was bored almost to tears, at other points almost angry at the pointlessness of it all, but then on the other hand at certain sections you almost get into a Zen-like state and the whole thing becomes fascinating. And I must point at it is often very, very funny. Finishing 'The Falls', even with breaks, was a pretty exhausting experience, and not one I'm in a hurry to repeat, but it's a movie I'm glad I watched, and I recommend it to anyone looking for something (completely) different.

How Greenaway surprises. Here is an early work that is rich in ways that in later works seem submerged.

The concept: A 'Violent Unexplained Event' occurs at 11:41 PM GMT, 14 June, People experience physical changes, often transitioning to birds. 92 new languages appear, and 92 birdnames are embossed in some minds. Four new genders are created; survivors appear immortal. Birds are the apparent cause, perhaps the Australian flightless rattite. The survivors are catalogued by competing societies (together with the detracting Society for Ornitological Extermination, FOX). This film is from the catalogued biographies from the primary society, of those whose names start with `fall.' There are 92 of them.

Some elements are familiar to later Greenaway viewers. Already Nyman creates an apt score. There is a magical surrealism. We have counting and other overlapping synthetic laws that restructure a slightly askew reality. We have a layering, so that many scenes add to or annotate others. Later, Greenaway does this with simultaneous images. Here the device is linear. Much harder, as one must not only create the alternative world, but also it's linear unfolding. Hence, this seems his most intelligent work.

The big shocker: In his later, much more commercial works, one can always count on lush painterly images, and often on elaborate panning shots. None of that here, in fact a practiced complement. All the attention is on the narrative, with many narrators, all filmed doing their work.

This film is self-referential in all the ordinary ways, plus the idea that the creator of the film is responsible for the radical change in reality. Of course, I do believe great artists do change the world; isn't that the only workable definition of art? Does Greenaway come up to this measure or is he like everyone else, a mere spectator?

Spectating here, but we do see something that retrospectively alters my recent experience with `Drowning by Numbers.' Biography 27 is of the three Cissy Colpitts, who live in Goole and establish an experimental film repository in the watertower. This is administered from a room in the nearby maternity hospital, one of the primary epicenters of the VUE (view). The three Cissys and the watertower reappear in `Drowning by Numbers,' and their collective mission is to have a child after eliminating husbands. Fits the Prospero role of replacing God with a new logic.

Love it.