Is this a commentary? Just one big joke? An exercise in Dadaist absurdity? Is there some hidden meaning that multiple viewings and finely tuned analyses will uncover?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and without clear expression otherwise, so is intent. But this much is certain: Even for a format where creators frequently challenge all convention of narrative storytelling and cinematic artistry, this short is an oddity.
Not knowing anything of 'Unedited footage of a bear' ahead of time, I was quite prepared to watch, well, 10 minutes of unedited footage of a bear. Imagine my surprise.
The plot, such as it is - conveyed with a singular tiny thread consistently running throughout the length - certainly keeps our attention. It's riveting, even if the exact course of events is a little unclear. The short is very well made, and I get a sense that whatever the filmmakers' concept was, they held the notion very clearly in their minds and approached the production with unwavering resolve. Not one shot, moment, or scene seems out of place, ill-considered, or given less than 100% of all involved: If I had to guess, the final cut completely matches the original idea, beat for beat. True, this may be partly because of the dark, absolutely whimsical nature that prevents us from genuinely guessing at the writers' vision - but bizarrerie in and of itself, no matter how incomprehensible, doesn't preclude quality of craftmanship, nor one's ability to appreciate it.
Is this review making sense? Should it, under the circumstances? Let they who have understanding transcribe a few words on a peculiar film shrouded in the mystery of an innocuous title without spoiling it, and without also adopting the very eccentricity they hope to evaluate.
Fun, ridiculous, wild, well-made, offbeat. I can't imagine 'Unedited footage of a bear' has a particularly large audience, but for those who dare to give this a try: Welcome.
