Irreversible – 2002
by Gaspar Noe
Never before a film made out
of thoroughly isolated
scenes, felt so much as a
plan-séquence [Sequence Shot]
per se.
In "Irreversible", each scene
bares the weight of the
previous one, their correlation
is so intrinsically symbiotic
that it´s far more than
a mere 'backwards arranged'
chain of events,
it exists beyond linearity,
since each 'little universe'
displayed by the scenes
work as individual colors
in a spectrum: chasing its
own tail endlessly in an
eternal loop of deeper
and deeper detachments.
Since its first exhibition, “Irreversible”
has shocked audiences
worldwide for being 'crude'
and far 'too graphic'.
Fact is It knows
no visual euphemisms
whatsoever, though its violence
is such as to shock its spectators
not by excesses but by
a discomforting awareness
of them being a witness
of a realistic portrait of our
[quite possible] fears.
Such ‘shocks’ were enhanced
by incredible minimalist
details added in post production,
such as the face of the dying man in the‘Fire Extinguishers' scene’ or
the body parts reproduced in the
‘red overpass' scene’ to potentialize
the already solid interpretation work
of the cast. These CGI´s were also
a key factor to the
perspectives of the camera,
allowing its subjectiveness
to be independent of
particular/conventional
Points of Views, flying freely
by the events in a peculiar
‘ballet like’ movement,
that ignores physical barriers
passing through solid glass.
This utter lack of human references
on the ‘P.O.V.’ of the camera,
makes it all appear
like unto a dream, or,
excusing me for pushing it that far,
as if the whole picture
was a product of the
dealings of a 'fairy tale
Witch‘ operating a 'crystal ball'.
This is such through the whole film,
except when it ‘invites us’
to witness Alex´s rape/attack
by following Alex (Monica Bellucci)
to the underground level
of that France, and placing itself
still before the awfulness of its
mise-en-scène [on screen acting].
The references to Stanley Kubrick´s
"2001: A Space Odyssey" and
"A Clockwork Orange" are endless:
The ‘gravity zero’ simulation of the camera
and its 'spins', the [though more subtle in Noe´s picture]
split montage of events with
no dependence of linearity,
the usage of scenario objects in
the committing of violence,
the bright red hallway, and
off course the two
most obvious ones:
the poster of “2001: a Space Odyssey”
on Marcus´ wall and the usage
of a Beethoven´s masterpieceto state but a few. In these Kubrick's films,
the camera is a witness of
isolated, but metaphorical
events, and ‘Irreversible’
is precisely that. Its characters
symbolize our society. Marcus
(Vincent Cassel) is a college teacher,
a graduated master, a title that
indicates one of the highest
levels of education and
civility society can produce.
It is this man who will subject himself to
becoming, as the film itself declares
through Pierre (Albert Dupontel), 'less than a man'
for taking revenge to its final
consequences. This is the reason of the
discomforting sensations
caused by a detached analysis
of the events that led to the
Irreversible tragedy; the fact thatindeed, we are no different
than Marcus.
'Irreversible' is as said, highly
controverted, due to its stretching
perspectives and announcements,
but it shouldn´t be read as
an extremist or pseudo-artistic
work of a 'try hard' director. Its violence
is to justify, in the sense that it excuses,
the film itself. Each shocking reality displayed
is but a consequence of the previous one,
as thou the film itself was the victim,
trying to investigate the reasons of such
abrupt bluntness. The result is surprising,
since its backwards montage leads us from
'hell to heaven' in its density and depravity
doing what only cinema is able to do, the usage
of the past, 'the memories', as a solace
or compensation for tragedy.
The deeper we get into the casual
aspects of Marcus and Alex´s life,
the more we want to dwell there, the more
we want to make it last, to ignore
what we´ve already seen and
move on. Such is the effects
of these wishes, that an almost
15 minutes long 'nudity scene'
in a apartment, that would otherwise
have shocked any audience,
becomes a ‘resting spot’,
a ‘refreshing shade of a tree‘ [if you will],
for the tired witness [meaning us], thou it
doens´t at any moment
allow us to forget what is
soon to come/have happened.
Racist, violent, 'dream crasher', impartial,
as perhaps our world at times is.
‘Irreversible’ is simply a
long lengthened version
of what regular [daily] TV news
reports emphatically announces.
Nothing lasts forever:
"Time destructs everything" it says, and in
an open analogy to our
digestive system, since even
the finest of meals will end up as human rejects,
‘Irreversible‘ declares that even
the finest of men, given the right
conditions, will work his way to
“the rectum*” where he too will
became a 'human reject'.
Thus in all his so called pretentiousness,
Gaspar Noe crafted a
shameful thou amazing
portrait of our dualities,
in this cinematographic 'arm wrestle'
of animal instincts versus
enlightenment, announced in its
opening scene and developed throughout
the picture, and of which
‘reason and literacy’ gets crushed by
irrational deeds. Can we really
separate the animal like cravens
of our human condition from
the virtues of intellect and
civilization as if oil and water?
Noe in his ‘epileptic conclusion*’
states we can´t.
To us is left only to meditate
upon the brought up discussion.
Ps: It´s important to mention
to those that preach this to be
an opportunist and unengaged work,
that Noe Himself is a
college professor.
