Now, it's only been 12 hours since I screened "Ice Storm" and I gotta say the material falls surely into that slot in my brain reserved for material that is not disposable. "The Ice Storm" is soul source material that resonates in the long term, Cassavetes-style.
The performances are A+, the art direction exemplary, the story a well -structured, multiply parallel progression presented with a high degree of tension generated by offscreen awareness of plot/character developments.
This film IS pressure, temptation, collapse carefully dragging the viewer where you know you don't wanna go, but secretly can't help needing to find out the truth from the Truthteller, and you know you're gonna get the real magillah. Ugly, icky, and at times disturbingly stimulating (I shudder ).
"Ice" is like knowing there is going to be a serious accident on the highway at a particular road marker, you are compelled to go stand at the spot and watch it, then you can't turn away from the scene after the collision occurs.
The only problem/issue that continues to come up in my analysis is the presence of the director's hand in all this. I am recognizing that what I think is missing or lacking is not a failure of the director, but is, rather a conditioned expectation of a non-descript cinematic element that I NEED to be represented. When something unique comes along with this level of cinematic skill and quality star value/performance, I apparently have this need to also feel an awareness of the filmmaker's consciousness in an overt sense.
"Ice" is NOT this. Ang transfixes the plot/story drama with covert control techniques that simultaneously disarm and dominate your conscious faculties , while skillfully cranking up the Emotionometer by creating a conscious, quasi-real time frame/spatial identity to this suburban nightmare. I have a deep respect for those special, few-and-far-between filmmakers reminding me that there is more than one way to direct a contemporary film.
Beware, this is one that will stay with you for a long time...
The performances are A+, the art direction exemplary, the story a well -structured, multiply parallel progression presented with a high degree of tension generated by offscreen awareness of plot/character developments.
This film IS pressure, temptation, collapse carefully dragging the viewer where you know you don't wanna go, but secretly can't help needing to find out the truth from the Truthteller, and you know you're gonna get the real magillah. Ugly, icky, and at times disturbingly stimulating (I shudder ).
"Ice" is like knowing there is going to be a serious accident on the highway at a particular road marker, you are compelled to go stand at the spot and watch it, then you can't turn away from the scene after the collision occurs.
The only problem/issue that continues to come up in my analysis is the presence of the director's hand in all this. I am recognizing that what I think is missing or lacking is not a failure of the director, but is, rather a conditioned expectation of a non-descript cinematic element that I NEED to be represented. When something unique comes along with this level of cinematic skill and quality star value/performance, I apparently have this need to also feel an awareness of the filmmaker's consciousness in an overt sense.
"Ice" is NOT this. Ang transfixes the plot/story drama with covert control techniques that simultaneously disarm and dominate your conscious faculties , while skillfully cranking up the Emotionometer by creating a conscious, quasi-real time frame/spatial identity to this suburban nightmare. I have a deep respect for those special, few-and-far-between filmmakers reminding me that there is more than one way to direct a contemporary film.
Beware, this is one that will stay with you for a long time...