koyaanisqatsi

Some of the films a week before last failed to move me as others in the past have. No matter how seemingly pointless or inaccessible a film we watch seems to be, I can usually form some sort of personal explanation or conclusion about it. Even if it's not exactly what the film is really about, or what the director wanted one to get from it, I like reaching my own conclusions about a film. However, I couldn't form any sort of personal conjecture about these films to give them a deeper meaning. Perhaps that is due to their structural nature, which sets them so far apart from the others anyway. Part of what makes them what they are is the method in which they were compiled, so maybe this just made them seem drier and less emotional to me. And Kren's news pieces didn't seem remotely avant-garde to me. I'm not trying to be a snob; I simply didn't see any distinction between them and any other old news piece.

Koyaanisqatsi. I loved it. I was as absolutely immersed in its existence as I could ever imagine to be. The world became a rhythmic music video of the orchestral score accompanying it. the only thing that disheartened me was the fact that the underlying themes (and methods/content to portray them) are very similar to the ones in my film essay. Or at least my ideal film essay. It's as if Koyaanisqatsi visualized, on a much more grandoise and professional scale, the essence of the idea that I've dreamed of explaining through my essay. Nature is the only true and reliable aspect of this life that we are living in. It is natural, true, and reliable. Technological advances and human conventions muddle this clear view of the natural pure take on life.