I wanted to like it so much.
There are few things I enjoy more than discovering new, brilliant filmmakers. You should have seen me jumping up and down after happening upon Sud pralad (2004), which at the time was obscure even by Cannes film festival standards. I definitely can take arthouse - I'm French, for crying out loud -, I can take slow, I can take weird.
Don't get me wrong, there is definite talent in Anhedonia. There is tone and personality. Interesting subject matter. Good use of inside/outside scene contrast. Lots of work on the sound design and photography.
But overall, it did not live up to the rave reviews for me. When, as a viewer, you embark upon deconstructed storytelling, you want something to hang your hat on to. It may not be plot, it may not be character development. But, something. The eerie weirdness of Robbe-Grillet, the depth of insight in Godard, the sheer beauty of Lynch's nightmares, the maniacal machines of Greenaway. The desperate layer-peeling of Coppola's Conversation, Nolan's Memento or Aronofsky's Pi. Most of all, what you need to get through the night is a little something called tension.
And tension, for me, was not there. The main character is on a quest, and there is a ruthless killer on his trail, but none of that matters if there is no truth there, to make you care.
That is where Anhedonia let me down. It is a nice intellectual construction. But I found it artificial through and through. The depressed hero, the maniacal villain, the enigmatic mentor, the multi-dimension universe all go through the expected motions. But for me, they did not resonate. It felt like there was no point other than the complexity itself, a convoluted path leading you back to where you started with nothing to show for it.
It may well be that I was expecting too much. Or that I am not the intended target. Or that I missed the point. I do hope it is the latter. I do hope the filmmaker will, in time, have lots to say about life, art, love, death or whatever it is he wants to talk about. I will watch his next film. Because there are few things I enjoy more than discovering new, brilliant filmmakers.
Don't get me wrong, there is definite talent in Anhedonia. There is tone and personality. Interesting subject matter. Good use of inside/outside scene contrast. Lots of work on the sound design and photography.
But overall, it did not live up to the rave reviews for me. When, as a viewer, you embark upon deconstructed storytelling, you want something to hang your hat on to. It may not be plot, it may not be character development. But, something. The eerie weirdness of Robbe-Grillet, the depth of insight in Godard, the sheer beauty of Lynch's nightmares, the maniacal machines of Greenaway. The desperate layer-peeling of Coppola's Conversation, Nolan's Memento or Aronofsky's Pi. Most of all, what you need to get through the night is a little something called tension.
And tension, for me, was not there. The main character is on a quest, and there is a ruthless killer on his trail, but none of that matters if there is no truth there, to make you care.
That is where Anhedonia let me down. It is a nice intellectual construction. But I found it artificial through and through. The depressed hero, the maniacal villain, the enigmatic mentor, the multi-dimension universe all go through the expected motions. But for me, they did not resonate. It felt like there was no point other than the complexity itself, a convoluted path leading you back to where you started with nothing to show for it.
It may well be that I was expecting too much. Or that I am not the intended target. Or that I missed the point. I do hope it is the latter. I do hope the filmmaker will, in time, have lots to say about life, art, love, death or whatever it is he wants to talk about. I will watch his next film. Because there are few things I enjoy more than discovering new, brilliant filmmakers.