Even Dwarfs Started Small is pretty bizarre, right? Even by Herzog's standards. The film, which has become somewhat of a cult classic, enraged those from the Left and the Right during the late 1960's when it was made. Herzog claims many thought
Dwarfs was ridiculing the student revolutions that were taking place during the time. He resists this interpretation, even while antagonizing those who made it. "I told these agitators that the film has absolutely nothing to do with the 1968 movements, that they were blinded by zealousness and that if they looked at the film twenty years down the line they just might see a more truthful representation of what happened in 1968 than in most other films."
So what did you think? More importantly, what did you
feel? How does
Even Dwarfs Started Small connect to the previous creations of Herzog's we've seen (
Herakles;
The Unprecedented Defense of the Fortress Deutschkreuz;
Signs of Life) - or does it? What does this film mean - or is it meaningless?
I definitely look forward to seeing how you sort this one out - what you liked, what you didn't like, and what it meant to you. I mean, this film is so intense and so extreme it's hard not to have an opinion about it, right? So please post your in-depth, inspired response to this strange piece of work by no later than 12 noon next Wednesday.
And have fun!
Herzog’s film Even Dwarfs Started Small to me (and I could be totally wrong, that’s the beauty of analyzing films – we all come to different conclusions) was about the childish nature of humankind in general. It is a film with essentially no plot (returning to my point last week on Fulci and other Europe filmmakers), but a film that regardless of this has something pretty powerful to say. If it is about child-like natures, then why not cast the film with children? I believe he didn’t do that because Herzog wasn’t trying to say something about children – he was trying to say something about adults, i.e. they still act like children. The casting of little people – to be politically correct – was brilliant in that their stature makes the majority of us already assume this connection between children and man. But here’s the clincher: it is their childish behavior that they exude throughout the entire picture that solidifies this theory. These aren’t children, they’re adults. Hombre – who I’m convinced is my spirit animal – looked to be at least in his 60s or 70s, and yet he behaved, as did the rest of them, like a child no older than maybe 10 or 11. He was always standing around giggling and repeating everything that was already said (classic toddler behavior). When the pornography is found, it doesn’t arouse sexual excitement in the characters in the way that it would adults, but rather curious speculation the way it probably would children who lack an understanding of the sexual nature of the content. But even the instructor character, who one could argue acts the least childish of them all, exhibits childish behaviors as is shown when he gets in an argument with a tree – imaginative and childlike. The food fight, the tormenting of the blind characters, the attempt to ride a dead pig not understanding that it is dead, these are all just a few of the many examples that occur throughout the film. So what is it that Herzog was saying about mankind? Well, perhaps that maybe it ought to be referred to as childkind instead.
ReplyDeleteMy comments got split!! AAHHH!!! Anyway, to continue, I'm not totally sure that I can say Dwarfs and Signs of Life are connected because, to me, Signs of Life was about the dangers of cornering an animal (or bug or human). The instructor character in Dwarfs is cornered throughout in the way that the soldiers were in Signs, and although he threatens violence upon Pepe, he never actually reacts in a violent manner. Even the other characters refuse to make good on their promises of violence against him and Chicklets. Again, this is not a film about cornered animals, this is a film about the child-like nature of man.
DeleteI am familiar with some of Herzog's films as we were screening them when I lived in Germany for a while. This one was definitely new for me and I have never heard of it before. Although I understood what the filmmaker wanted to say, it was still very disturbing for me. I can't say I hated it but it was highly unpleasant. The scene that stood out for me was the "marriage" scene, when the man was trying hard to get on the bed and couldn't make it, and then he put some magazines to become higher and he still couldn't do it. Whatever he tried couldn't help. The bride didn't care and was busy with a magazine. Everyone else was from time to time opening the door and checking on them (disturbing!!) Although it was somewhat funny and everybody in class laughed, I had a feeling of hopelessness. The book definitely helped me to understand the movie better. Herzog says that we are all dwarfs, and it's not us that are small, but the world that is so huge because we live in the period when machines become smarter (in other words- bigger) than humans, and buildings grow higher than trees, getting ahead of mother nature.
ReplyDeleteHerzog had a lot of fun working with these little men. He says he often forgot that they were so little. He made a guy laugh until he was crazy and sick, and kept him laughing in the end of the movie until he couldn't take it anymore himself. The laughter was too overwhelming for me. There were moment when I literally wanted to stop my ears.
Andress Sandra
This may very well be my favorite film of his so far, and just an overall favorite. We still have much to discuss, but Herzog definitely hit a home run with his interpretation of what is clearly horror, surrealism and social criticism.
ReplyDeleteI will not speak too much about this film in subtext and context, as I have already structured my paper heavily. But Herzog's use of unsettling, consistent laughter, music and animals, all create a horrific metaphoric world that represents the often critical relationship of corporations, business and company management, and the mistreatment of it's workers beneath them. However, rather than make this a one sided observation of industry and the hierarchy, it also examines the division within the lower sector and how many of the workers often mistreat each other during times of unrest and protest.
The cinematography in this specific film had times where it floated between documentary and narrative, which ultimately adds a level of unsettling framing and blocking with several of the dwarfs during their escapades. This added a level of surreal horror that doesn't depend on jump scares or genre tropes, but rather disturb the audience with imagery, sound and subject matter. The one element that I enjoyed (but also disturbed me) is the constant use of the dwarf's laughter that went from funny to discomforting in a matter of minutes.
Again, my paper will cover more of the content and the aesthetic choices for this film, but overall this film is a now favorite entry of my list of cinema pieces.
Even Dwarfs Started Small was by far the most chaotic film of Herzog’s I have ever seen and am probably ever going to see, however I wouldn’t bet on that. I definitely told myself I needed to read a bit about Herzog’s own opinion of his film before even thinking about tackling my opinion of it. I really appreciate that he used dwarfs as sort of a platform for setting a stereotype. Obviously, these grown people are to represent children in society. Herzog even says himself in “Werner Herzog a Guide for the Perplexed” that it was set in an institution for juvenile offenders (juvenile meaning under age; ie. children). Herzog went on to say that the actors were more than happy to be in this film. That they had a sense of dignity with it in that their voice as normal human beings was finally being told. I now understand this mask that society as been hiding behind as the “norm”. Dwarves are more commonly than not associated with “freaks” in that they are different from the norm. But it is not the dwarves that are small, but rather the world around them that is so abnormally large. Herzog also said that everyone has a dwarf within themselves and depending on how they feel about their inner dwarf will affect their opinion of the film. I cannot say I loved it to be perfectly honest. I think it was the severe display of chaos that drove me over the edge. The part that really itched under my skin was the very end scene where Hombre is laughing continuously at the camel. His laugh was the entire premise of the film; chaos at the peak of madness. Hombre laughs for probably a good five minutes or so and even begins to cough towards the end which was not scripted. I do believe it had some similarities between “Signs of Life” and “The Unprecedented Defense of the Fortress Deutschkreuz” in that these people are trapped within their own madness. Physically, yes trapped within the walls of wherever it is they are residing, but also mentally trapped within their own madness.
ReplyDeleteWhat a terrible, horrible, disturbing movie. I'm still not sure I have processed how surreal and disturbing the movie really is, even a week later I still feel my skin crawling just thinking about it. A cast of horribly evil little dwarves who are angry at an unjust system of ruler-ship. The social commentary is a bit overshadowed I feel by the sheer mental exertion it takes not to leave the theater. Truly, monstrous acts have created monsters. Even the relatively sane characters, such as the girl with the bug collection, are still swept up in the mob mentality of the other dwarves and going along for the ride. It is a definite horror film because of the immense amount of dread contained within. Even the scenes of relative goodness, such as the scene in the bedroom, and still so damn creepy because again characters are forced to do things by the mob of others. It was shot in a the classic Herzog "it's-all-too-real" style, with excellent use of nondiagetic sound. I don't think I'll ever get Hombre's laugh out of my head, and I swear if I ever hear it again I might go insane. Pretty good movie if you're into the total bizarre of it all.
ReplyDeleteThis film was definitely perplexing, intriguing, and offensive to my senses all at the same time. To begin, the dwarves throughout the film are made to look maniacal, evil, and menacing through not only their atrocious actions, but their terrifying laugher. Herzog uses their laughter almost as a diegetic, consistent background track, still subtly playing at all times even if no one is laughing on screen, as if it assumed that there are still more dwarves off screen who are having a good laugh about more hijinks. At first their actions seem a little rebellious, but nothing truly offensive. I think for me the turning point from rebellious into downright cruel was the scene in which they bullied Hombre into the room with the tiniest woman in an attempt to have them get intimate. It is clearly implied that Hombre is the blackest sheep amongst the entire group of outcasts, and that he has never had an intimate relationship with a woman, let alone even a friend. It can be said that the same situation applies to the tiny unnamed woman, who throughout the first half of the film wants nothing more than to get her shoe back. Although they initially revolt against the situation like children afraid of cooties, they eventually realize that they secretly want to act on physical desires like “normal” people would, and just like children, they slowly and curiously attempt to discover each other. In the end we as the audience sadly watch them struggle to even sit on the bed together, before finally giving up. This was perhaps the only instance of humanity that I saw in these characters, before they resorted to killing innocent animals, stealing cars, and strangely obsessing over bugs skewered on toothpicks and dressed in fancy outfits. For me, this was particularly offensive to the senses, not only because of the animal cruelty, which I refuse in all films under all circumstances, but because at the time that this film was made, people with disabilities were still being extorted for entertainment purposes, and always made to be the scary, freaky villain in film and television. The acts of cruelty he has them commit are beyond unnecessary, like picking on the blind dwarves. What purpose did that serve? For Herzog to take this stereotype of the time and intensify it even by taking the natural high pitched tone of their laughter and twisting it into a sick soundtrack that accompanies mischief and destruction, is not something I can enjoy or agree with as a film maker. Not to mention that by thirty minutes into the film I wanted to take the toothpick out of the grasshopper groom, and shove it into my ear just to stop myself from having to listen to Hombre’s laughter one more time. I could only compare this film to a twisted Lord of the Flies, yet without a clear narrative conflict, protagonist, or antagonist. I cannot even honestly say that I figured out what the institution was, what “mistakes” the instructor made, who Pepe was, why he was held hostage inside, why the cops never came, or various other critical plot points. I will say, that my favorite scene has to be Hombre finally sitting tall and proud on the motorcycle, never looking happier, with everyone else looking onward in surprise and even a glint of respect as Hombre finally commits an act to make himself part of the group, and not just the littlest man running and laughing behind them.
ReplyDeleteThat laugh, oh god that laugh. I did not enjoy Even Dwarfs Started Small at all. The whole film made me confused and uncomfortable. The film is similar to Signs of Life due to its lack of plot but it seems that Herzog has devloped more of style with this film. However, he's definitely experimenting here still. The cinematography is pretty unique ( I wonder if he meant to catch the cameraman's shadow to give it more of a documentary feel?). The dialogue is just plain weird but I'm not sure if that's a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteThe main thing stuck in my mind after watching this is how uncomfortable it made me feel and I believe that was Herzog's purpose. He wanted it to be nightmarish and unsettling and holy cow he does a good job at it. But the film also left me with an angry feeling because I had spent over an hour waiting for a plot until eventually I gave up and accepted there wasn't going to be one. I was beyond confused when in the middle of the chaos, the dwarves decide to play a version of a game I've grown to know as "Seven Minutes In Heaven". It was a good indicator that I was about to spend 90 minutes in hell.
The only reason I found the film to be interesting was due to how weird it was. I will most likely never watch the film again nor can I in good conscience recommend this to anyone else. But I don't necessarily think it was bad. I can honestly commend Herzog for making a pretty good film that people could love to hate.
A film like "Even Dwarfs Started Small" usually evokes extreme and divise reactions from people. I, on the other hand, fall pretty squarely in the middle. While the film is uncomfortable or awkward to watch, I only find it mildly disturbing and certainly not horrific. Granted, I've seen far more extreme films. It does make sense to me why people have a visceral negative reaction to the film. It's frustrating and grating. The amount of effort into achieving this effect is actually pretty impressive on Herzog's part.
ReplyDeleteTake the last shot for example, a topic of contention in the comments so far. As the film has gone on, we as an audience have gotten used to the "little people." Certainly not to their activities, but we've become desensitized to the characters as a whole. How they act, their very "stature" all becomes status quo. Until the final shot. Herzog holds on this moment in order to, you guessed it, make you uncomfortable. This almost three minute shot wears you down, leaves uncertain of what to do or think. In these moments you're mind scrambles to figure out what the hell is going on and suddenly you become aware not just of the situation, but the film as a whole. It brings you right back to the emotional level you felt at the beginning of the film and then cuts to black. Pretty genius.
Herzog, in my opinion, seems to believe that moments of madness give insight into who a person really is. The focus on the sanity, delusions, or obsessions in his previous films also provides a lot of subtle information about the characters, without explicitly doing so. This also applies to humanity as a whole, as demonstrated in "Dwarfs."
"Dwarfs is absolutely exploitation of its main characters, but with purpose. The characters in this film are aware of society's views of them and thus feel no need to pretend to be normal. Does this play into society's bias against them? Yes, but who cares? Without the constraints of social law (or authority) the characters are free to do whatever the hell they want and chaos erupts. What other group is somewhat exempt from social law? Children, by nature of not yet knowing social law. So we can't help but compare the characters to children when they act the way they do. And yet, there's a slight difference. These are also adults, and as such are perfectly aware of more mature subjects: religion, sexuality, and technology. This awkward halfway between child and adult is not just demonstrated by their actions, but their appearance as well. They are literally adults the size of children.
So what's the point of all this? Well it seems that Herzog is pointing out that we all have this potential to be childlike, and many of us do it on a daily basis. It's hard to deny that sometimes the acts and conversations the dwarfs participate in seem like something out of a stupid youtube video. So embrace your inner dwarf everyone and we can all join in the merriment of abusing disabled people!
In 1967 Jean-Luc Godard released Weekend, upon its release Pauline Kael’s review explains that, “Weekend is Godard’s vision of hell, and it ranks with the greatest.” This can also be said of Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now and Werner Herzog’s Even Dwarfs Started Small. This is a film that immediately puts you on edge. What is Herzog trying to convey? I do not know if he is trying to convey anything besides that he knows how to make an audience involved and uncomfortable. I have certainly watched some very uncomfortable films before, most notably the great Ingmar Bergman’s Cries and Whispers, but this piece of work has definitely placed itself upon that pantheon. There were many moments where the better sense I have had to stop me from jumping through the screen to help save the animals. And how interesting is that? It almost seems as though one feels more empathy for these simple-minded creatures than these human beings. On a technical level, this shows a natural climb in stylistic effort and voice for Herzog. Much more noticeably a Herzog than his debut feature, Signs of Life. However, Herzog has not yet captured his touch for photographing nature in all of its grandiosity. In Paul Cronin’s book, Werner Herzog: A Guide for the Perplexed, Herzog explains that Bergman begins his films with a human face, he then goes on to explain that he prefers to begin with a landscape shot. This, obviously, has not yet been developed. This may seem trivial, however, Herzog’s film are sometimes described as visual poetry, and honestly, what is more visually poetic than a large, daunting landscape?
ReplyDeleteTo dissect a beast of this magnitude takes time. Werner Herzog’s nightmare is both terrifying and, at times, galling. Its sporadic beauty stems from the open-mindedness the film presents; any and all interpretations could be correct and all have merit. It is a mirror film and we see what we see within ourselves. To me, the film looks at humanity under a microscope. The actors and actresses being dwarves are an obvious (though not necessarily correct) testament to this. Take a look at what happens in the film: characters are forced to have sex, there is a captive, animals are brutalized, the weak are treated wickedly, a monkey is crucified… The list is long and endlessly horrid. It is especially terrifying because humans have done everything in the film, but in the real world. The actors and actresses are dwarves because we can remove ourselves from the equation and spectate for a little while. They are different from us, we think. This assumption could not be farther from the truth when looking at the annals of history. Now to dive into some of my favorite “nightmare" concepts. Being a big fan of surrealism and things experimental, some parts really have stayed with me (and will influence me for a long time to come). “My ears are ringing. Someone must be thinking of me.” Though based on an urban legend, this line is truly terrifying and really stuck out to me. It is a thought for the dream world; a thought that pulls us in deeper to the black hole. The framing of the scene in which two characters are told to have sex is quite fantastic. It is a long take where we see the man struggle to get up… and there we see the humor as well. The main song of the film is nearly unbearable. I had to plug my ears through most of it, but I enjoyed that—not many things cause me to turn away, it felt good to have such a strong emotion. It is totally off-putting and fitting with the nightmare of it all. By the way, how many animal rights violations did we count? The scene with the monkey I mentioned before, but even more effective for me was the incredibly long take of the camel. It was another painful moment watching the character laugh endlessly at the poor animal’s struggle. Absolutely brilliant. Lastly, the shape and figurative nature of circles comes up once again (like in Stroszek). The car is going in endless circles, and I don’t think it necessary for me to explain the broad, human interpretation of such an act. It is one of the more obvious examples of the downfall of humanity in the film. So it is a mirror-film. It is a necessary film; one in which you learn more than by watching the top Oscar nominees any given year. Let the art do what it will to you and breathe in the nightmare remembering the dark moments have as much merit as the good moments in life.
ReplyDeleteWhile watching Even Dwarfs Started Small, many thoughts circulated through my head at once. The most prominent one, for me personally, is a motif that continuously reminded me of a John Waters film, most specifically, the 1972 film Pink Flamingos. Although Pink Flamingos was released two years later than Dwarfs, I couldn't help but see similarities between the two. Both films seemed to have moments of being disturbing for the sake of being disturbing (such as the scene in Flamingos when the man with the singing rectum performed at Babs’ birthday party or in Dwarfs when the chickens were hurled through the window). Unlike Pink Flamingos, however, I feel as if Dwarfs featured even less of a focus on plot and more on general nonsense and wild antics (and also unlike Flamingos, Dwarfs made almost no effort to craft remotely decent characters or to create any sort of plot or value in the form of a story at all). Although both contain a similar shock value and sort of theme to me, I am not sure if this reflects the time in which these films were made or the traits that both Herzog and Waters may share.
ReplyDeleteI personally have trouble discerning a particular meaning or ideal behind this film, though. To me, the piece as a whole appears as shock value for the sake of shock value. I spent the entire hour and a half searching for a central plot that made sense and came up borderline empty handed… however, that is a common theme that I’ve noticed in many of Herzog’s pieces that we’ve watched. They all feature scenic shots and wild antics and camera work to accompany a limp, lack luster plot line. I believe this is why I have such a difficult time becoming invested in any piece of his. As a writer, it pains me to watch certain pieces that have no substantial value whatsoever, however beloved they are. To me, the two films we have watched so far seem to be meaningless, simple activities that are desperately trying to cling to an unremarkable (and in some cases, almost indistinguishable) plot lines. They may contain symbolism, like the theme of chaos and sanity in Signs of Life, but they are held together by such a thin, uninspired concept that, in my eyes, any notable symbolism or poetic imagery is lost all together.
I am hoping my opinions will change over the course of this class., but as of right now, my mindset is simply that Herzog should win countless awards for being able to make an hour and a half feel like 4.
There's something disturbingly fascinating about chaotic films such as Even Dwarfs Started Small; it's that they draw us into some sort of chaos that can actually be found within ourselves. Here, the chaos is found between the delinquents and the instructor; within oneself, it can be understood as inner chaos versus oneself.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the casting of little people, I understood there to be underlying similarities between them and vices. They often get looked upon in discomfort and disfavor, the audience most likely will refuse to relate to them, etc. In essence, they sound an awful lot like antagonists, but oddly enough I wouldn't call them that.
Their actions certainly reflect vices, though; the film is scattered with instances of crucifixion, animal cruelty, cruelty towards the disabled, etc. Here are evils commonly taken and taking place throughout history; much like with the instructor, these evils slowly erode the sanity and sense of security of humans around the world.
As we see towards the end of the film, the instructor found himself ultimately overwhelmed. Much Like Stroszek in Signs of Life, here we have a character who the audience initially identifies as the most sane and level-headed of the cast collapse under the weight of something bigger than him. Just as he crazily challenges a tree to a contest of strength, he is arguably fighting a losing battle.
The first thing that struck me about this film was the lack of direction or purpose in the characters' rebellion. Their motivation was the mob mentality. Instead of escaping which they very well could have done, they chose to mindlessly destroy and tamper with every boundary previously set for them. I can definitely see the parallels between the dwarves' behavior and that of our often mindless culture. We are all guilty of falling into that rhythm which moves us to act like those we admire simply because it is easier than acting and thinking alone. The dwarves would've been at a discouraging loss if they were operating individually. Very rarely does chaos ensue by the cause of one person alone. Without a real defined purpose, chaos became their purpose. When there is no direction, we find others just as lost as ourselves and cling to their uncertainty to get us through.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to start off by saying that I did not enjoy this film as much as the first feature we watched in class. Though I found it to be comedic at times, there was no overall sense of purpose to me.
ReplyDeleteOne of the scenes I did enjoy would have to be the one in which Hombre attempts to jump up onto the bed. I couldn't tell whether or not he really couldn't get onto the bed or if he just didn't want to, but regardless, I thought it was a brilliant scene, given the circumstances of the subject choice of actors.
I thought the scenes in which the palm tree was brought down and the one in which having the car spin in circles were beautifully shot as well. I thought the bringing down of the palm tree was symbolic and the car spinning scene was just a very interesting shot, especially when the group is playing around it and trying to get in.
If Herzog felt that the movie was a nightmare unraveling before him, I would have to say that it was more of a limbo-type situation. I think I may be biased when I say that many older films seem to have an issue with pacing. Again, perhaps I’m just used to the more modern form of editing and pacing, but there were multiple times in this film in which I was struggling to stay focused. One example would be when the group started throwing chickens and breaking class in the office of the overseer. It was such a dramatic point of the film, but it began to drag onto the point that I felt it took away from the impact of the action within the scene.
Also, I was really disappointed by how the story unfolds. The beginning, especially the opening shot quickly grabbed my attention, but towards the middle, I began to question what else could possibly happen among the group of ‘dwarves.’ It seemed like they did everything possible by the middle of the film.
Again, a nice film with very good elements scattered within, however, I felt there were areas of improvement for this one. Can’t wait to see what’s next!
Nicholas Duerdoth
ReplyDeleteWerner Herzog HW #2
September 22, 2015
“Even Dwarfs Started Small”
Just to start off, my overall opinion of this short film was by far one of the worst, pointless, annoying films I have ever forced myself to watch. As the film was not in English, we had to constantly read the subtitles that had little to no context to make up for the absurd laughing you are, what felt like, held against your will to listen to.
However, I do understand a few points that the director was trying to get at. For example the madness of the Dwarfs by locking up the professor, breaking objects that grew more and more serious. Then essentially started burning down buildings like they were serial arsonists. This could symbolize how society cannot handle being forced into a lifestyle that they do not wish to have.
Another thing that really stood out to me after giving myself a sanity break after watching this film was the constant use of “The Police” when the Dwarfs were afraid. Now this may be a stretch, but I believe that this was the director trying to display that society (the dwarfs) were trying to display total fear of absolute control and power above them bringing order to the chaos they had caused. For example, when the Dwarfs were helping the lady find her way back to the city, when they initially thought it was a Police Officer they became angry, flustered and thought of ways to take over the Police officer if it turned out to be one. This was actually a very passive but VERY powerful scene in the movie.
Overall, I can appreciate the themes and messages that was attempted to be put into the film.. It was just what I would consider a complete and total failure to appeal to ANY particular audience, and I would not watch this film again if I had the freedom too.
I'm fascinated by the parallels that have been drawn between the characters in the film and the nature of childhood. It is easy to draw the visual parallel between the all-dwarf cast and the physical stature of children - but I think part of what felt so unsettling about the film was that, with this in mind, the lines between childhood innocence and social madness become blurred. There are no societal rules to which the characters abide. Additionally, the ways in which they process the world are very primitive and immature. They are fascinated and delighted by the simple mayhem of making a car drive in infinite circles, hurting animals, and forcing one another into uncomfortable situations. Because the characters don't have the physical stature or appearance of most adults without dwarfism, their actions take us aback - their build isn't what we typically associate with extensive brutality, and yet it becomes apparent that they are all too capable of violence because of their barbaric circumstance. They feed off of one another, taking the audience into a spiral of chaos because their behavior is destructive and their environment is uncivilized.
ReplyDelete“Even Dwarfs Started Small” is very similar to that of “Signs of Life” because of the somewhat lack of plot in both films. Herzog, in both, makes almost more of an experimental, thought-provoking film than anything else. This is very true for me when it comes to “Dwarfs.” For most of the film I did not know what the hell I was watching. Until the insanity and child-like, rebellious behavior of the dwarves became somewhat customary. The scenes with the car driving in circles with the dwarves chasing and playing on it was by far the best part of the film for me. To me, it really showed the desire for chaos within the mob mentality. It’s a whole lot easier to follow others than to lead. But, this chaos is really getting them nowhere. Instead, madness ensues. It definitely was a disturbing film, and that’s honestly the only reason why I enjoyed it. Like Jim Morrison once put it, “I’m interested in anything about revolt, disorder, chaos, especially activity that appears to have no meaning. It seems to me to be the road toward freedom.”
ReplyDeleteI did not know to laugh or cry. I felt like I was confronted with my own opinion on dwarfs. Do I feel bad for them? Do I laugh at them? Some moments I feel they were self aware, laughing at themselves as they play in the dirt. Other times, like the bed struggle scene, the man's acceptance of his struggle was sat to me as a viewer. But his attitude is almost inspiring. You can see a life time of not getting what he wants, of failing to succeed in a world purpose built for people unlike him. Yet he is unchanged. He does not mope or flinch at his inability to mount the bed. In the end I enjoyed the film. I felt it gave a voice to the people involved. Perhaps it was commenting on how people thought Dwarfs would spend their time; as maniacle or mystical creatures.
ReplyDeleteI did not know to laugh or cry. I felt like I was confronted with my own opinion on dwarfs. Do I feel bad for them? Do I laugh at them? Some moments I feel they were self aware, laughing at themselves as they play in the dirt. Other times, like the bed struggle scene, the man's acceptance of his struggle was sat to me as a viewer. But his attitude is almost inspiring. You can see a life time of not getting what he wants, of failing to succeed in a world purpose built for people unlike him. Yet he is unchanged. He does not mope or flinch at his inability to mount the bed. In the end I enjoyed the film. I felt it gave a voice to the people involved. Perhaps it was commenting on how people thought Dwarfs would spend their time; as maniacle or mystical creatures.
ReplyDelete