Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
It is a difficult subject: as a writer, one depends on having at least one character with whom the audience can identify, and therefore care about what happens to them. In this movie there is not a single sympathetic character. They're all nuts.

I'm afraid I cannot agree with you. In the history of literature, there are tons of books where one cannot identify oneself with a single character, because each of them has at least a major flaw. In my view, this makes the characters of LoW credible. Indeed, I am not sure whether the topic addressed by the movie would have been compatible with a black and white portraying.  
It is true for popular fiction that this need for identification conditions the success of a book, but not for any kind of fiction work. It is hard to identify with any of Dostoïevsky, Gogol, Tolstoï, Steinbeck or Gide characters, to mention only a few. Same works for a movie.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 05:43:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You missed my explantion of identification 'therefore care about what happens to them'. Though I maybe confused the issue by talking about there being no sympathetic characters in LoW.

All drama revolves around conflict - it is the 'major flaws' that drive those conflicts. Conflict itself is of little interest without human fraility in the face of it. (And of course by conflict, I don't mean wars, I mean the collision of different beliefs and notions of reality)

The great writers you list, write about the human condition in a way that is deeply affecting, and uplifting because they offer insight.

I think you are confusing the subject matter with the execution. This is a very good theme in a bad movie.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:25:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're right. Though I do not think the main protagonist of LoW lacks frailty in the way he deals with conflicts, the way he is depicted means to reflect his fatalism. But that is a consequence, a stance he takes towards life, and not a character flaw. Maybe there is a shortcut in the film narrative which prevents us from making out what led him to be that fatalist.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:45:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You've hit the nail on the head! If you can't figure out what motivates him, you can't appreciate his dilemma.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 07:46:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series