Letter to Gaspar


Dear Gaspar, can I call you Gaspar? You seem like you’d be cool with it.

I have never been compelled to write a review on IMDB until I saw your film Enter the Void.

Let me start with the one compliment I have for this film; I enjoyed the opening credits. The rest of the film disgusted me, and not because of the explicit sex and violence, as I like both Pink Flamingos and Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom, but because of pretentious and repetitive use of shock factor that is mostly exploitive of the female characters.

The first problem of this film is that it fails to create any pathos between the characters and the audience. I don’t know who is more painful to listen to Oscar or his sister Linda. Oscar sounded like the missing third member of Beavis and Butthead, while Linda portrayed the voice of a talking American Apparel ad. All jokes aside, because neither of the characters made me feel any emotion, it didn’t matter to me that Oscar died or Linda was suffering through his death. Because Noé (don’t mind if I switch to third person) couldn’t create interesting characters or apparently direct the actors, he had to turn to an exploitive storyline, the death of their parents. He showed images of the crash, over and over again, in order to compensate for his lack of pathos. Of course I felt sorry for the traumatized children, but it didn’t make me identify with the present characters at all. Alex was the only character who was well directed in the film, but maybe he just has natural eurotrash talents.

The most disturbing part of this film was Noé’s attempt to film sex. Firstly, Linda-- aka white girl who goes to Tokyo and is offered a job as a stripper the first night of her trip—was obviously exploited. The sex scene between her and “Mario” (really—that’s his name?) was merely an excuse to show off her ‘edgy’ stripper uniform with matching heels. Throughout the film, Noé kept on showing her in minimal clothes with her breasts falling out in front of her brother to try and suggest incest, another failed exploitive repetition. Of course she becomes pregnant, and apathetically has an abortion. In the version that I saw, Noé explicitly shows the abortion and the fetus. Why Noé… are you trying to shock my virgin eyes? I would have been more shocked if you had actually portrayed any sort of emotion that one might feel when they suffer through this experience. All of the women in this film, running around in their stripper uniforms, were actually made un-sexy because Noé doesn’t know how to film women. He thinks that showing every part of their bodies is somehow interesting. I guess he hasn’t realized that suggested sexuality, unlike porn, can often be more exciting. I felt the most disgusted by his portrayal of the docile Japanese characters in the film. Linda’s stripper friend seemed to serve as exotic eye candy, there only to have exploitive lesbian sex with Linda…she had no depth! In fact all of the Japanese characters, men and women, barely spoke and only seemed to just ‘be there.’ Finally, I’m pretty sure Noé has attended a Freud 101 course while he received his Bac in France. The obvious obvious mother complex between Oscar and anyone with breasts was embarrassing. I have to admit that I felt like a 13 year old boy because I literally started laughing during the Love Hotel sequence. I felt sorry for Paz de la Huerta who had to repeatedly record her ‘orgasm voice’ so that Noé could use it as a voice over during this sequence. I truly didn’t understand this sequence… was I supposed to be turned on or disgusted…. Either way I was neither one nor the other… FAIL!

Regarding the computer graphics that were used in order to create the light effects, I felt that you went wayyyyy overboard. Gaspar… you should check out Millennium Mambo if you are interested in lighting technique.

To conclude, this film failed to incite any emotions at all…. One might say that Gaspar isn’t trying to evoke emotions like typical films, but rather trying to create over the top visuals, which practically poke fun at the audiences need for violence and sex (a la Funny Games) in a sadistic mise en abyme, watch me break the fourth wall manner. But then why create the story of childhood trauma? Maybe Gaspar can explain to me one day…


Yours truly,


Jennifer

reply

[deleted]

Jennifer, Get a life!

reply

[deleted]

I found your letter pretty interesting because I've just made a post which, while supposedly presenting an opposite opinion, resorts to some of the same arguments.

I too agree that the abortion, car crash (and so forth) was exploitation as an effort to fill in some deficiencies of the movie. I really like how you defined the characters at the beginning - actually that's pretty accurate!

Now, in my opinion the pathos is not lacking enough. I think that he brings pathos in through exploitation. He is trying to shock us, he is supposedly being really hardcore, he is following the "tree or life" or something like that, and that is what's wrong with the movie. Why so much overinterpretation when trying to portray boredom or absurdity? It should have been a film against interpretation.
Car crashes and abortions are paradigmatic pathos enhancers. Anyone with a heart will feel uncomfortable. But that we already now is uncomfortable. I thought the movie was supposed to bring out the discomfort of the everyday, of the banal. Now that would have been more interesting.

Concerning the visuals, I find them interesting if inserted into a stream of MTV music videos and all of that flicker-culture. As part of that phenomenon (that is, studied from the outside) it can be quite interesting for the sake of its own naivite'. But in itself it failed even in being completely aesthetic (the plot ruined it). Experimental film provides for better examples of over the top visuals, without the cane of a storyline.

Nevertheless, I am grateful for having watched the film, and it gave me a lot to think about (take its failures as a starting point for thinking, and enjoying immensely its good parts).

Regarding sex, I think that porn can be quite effective in portraying a void life, but then the Love Hotel part just became to interpretative to be effective. (First it was just porn, and that was trully cold; then it became people having sex in such a cold manner, look, light is coming out of here and there, and wow they really look like machines, don't they, and so forth).

Anyway despite my argument I'm not devoid of a soul and I too enjoy other kinds of movies which are more positive, and am craving for a little sunlight right now. :)

reply

I just think this letter is opinionated nonsense, which you are of course entitled to, but did you have to make it so cringeworthy? It makes me care less about you as a human being.

Not really gonna try and defend it from your criticism, but I enjoyed this film. I enjoyed the hypnotic sights and sounds, the imagery really stuck with me and while it hasn't made me ponder over life and death, I did find it to be a worthwhile experience.

What annoys me here, is that you've launched a long written assault directed PERSONALLY at the creator for making something you didn't enjoy and then condescended his abilities by suggesting things and other movies he should do/watch to make himself better. Why? Gaspar Noe didn't make you watch it, he didn't even ask or suggest it for you. Do you think he can't shoot sex or women because he doesn't shoot them in the way you prefer to see them in movies by any chance? Doesn't the fact that you felt sympathy for the children but not the adults perhaps say more about your response to children, maybe?

Personally I don't think the central characters are supposed to trigger an emotional response. Noe is quite well-known for using blunt unsympathetic characters, there are no definable protagonists or antagonists. His films mostly tend to involve normal unromantic lives that are somehow plunged into darkness and things very rarely end any sense of justice or resolution. Everything just seems to happen like it is normal in the world he represents and that's it.

I can't for the life of me understand why you would criticise the lighting and effects either, I thought even someone who couldn't enjoy the "narrative" could still praise the imagery. Bizarre. I imagine Gaspar has seen and studied everything and more than you could recommend him in this field, but (don't know if you've noticed) he quite clearly likes doing things "overboard".

reply

At first I recoiled at what I expected this review to say, but by the end I was nodding. Good points, legit perspective and interpretation. Halfway through the film Linda was pissing me off and I didn't understand why her character was so *beep* airy and vapid (a talking American Apparel ad was a perfect way of putting it). And that the characters were poorly developed bothered me too, and I can't find an excuse for it. :\

That said, I still liked the film, though I think its only purpose is to be watched while tripping (those drawn-out visuals can only be watched with the patience of being under the influence).

reply

If you want "pathos" watch the Titanic again, this is deeper than that.

reply

I don’t know who is more painful to listen to Oscar or his sister Linda. Oscar sounded like the missing third member of Beavis and Butthead, while Linda portrayed the voice of a talking American Apparel ad.

that is actually spot-on! i thought both actors did a bad job and was surprised to discover that the actress playing linda had a fruitful career after this movie.

reply