The story will be somewhat complete and somewhat incomplete. Consider the similarities of this format to more recent films such as the HARRY POTTER SERIES or the TWILIGHT SAGA. These films stand on their own but they are part of a continuing story. Serial and series films, we'll discuss the difference on Thursday, can be seen as precursors to the popularity of sequels, the development of series television, and the ubiquity of modern film marketing tie-ins.
Suggested Supplemental Screenings: THE PERILS OF PAULINE (1914), THE HAZARDS OF HELEN (1914-1917), JUDEX (1914/1916)
After viewing "Les Vampires: Le Spectre", I was some what disappointed. The entire viewing I was waiting for the gang Les Vampires to show up and wreak havoc, but instead only a few plot twist were revealed that aided as a buildup to future action. I did enjoy the innovative camera techniques used such as changing angles and the inclusion of long,medium, and close up shots. I found it kept me interested rather than bored like most silent films that tend to only include wide shots. Since the film is part of a series, I was not surprised that I felt confused throughout the movie. All the characters seem to have already been established in previous installments and it was evident that Le Spectre set up the plot for the next film. The use of coloring techniques to differentiate between day(green), night(blue), and indoor shots(brown) was very interesting to me. It allowed me to follow the story more closely and it never left me guessing what time of day it was. My favorite character of the whole film was Irma Vep. A strong, female character, she served as the films femme fatale and possibly as the first fatale to grace celluloid. Upon seeing her name, I immediately figured out that her name was a simple anagram for vampire. The association with vampire and femme fatale made perfect sense to me. Both are leach type creatures that leave there victims as previous shells of themselves and easily manipulate those they are after. Although I was not truly sure of Irma's intentions, it was not difficult to tell she was going to get what she wanted in any way possible. All in all, Les Vampires made me want to discover who the characters were and what was in store for them as any serial should. So in my opinion this film accomplished what it was meant to do, leave the audience wanting more.
ReplyDeleteAside from the mysterious and suspenseful story, one of the aspects I found most interesting about Les Vampires: The Spectre was the way in which the film had to communicate with the audition without the use of sound. Title cards guide the audience by expressing the most important dialogue and by narrating the story. Without spoken dialogue, one has to heavily rely on reading body language. This was somewhat confusing to me at times; however, when the next title card came up I would get back on track with the story. Color also played a significant role. It was amusing to see that a sort of sepia tone was used for the interior locations, a green tone for the outside, and a blue tone for portraying night. Also, we can see early uses of flashbacks, split screen for telephone calls, and insert shots. The camera was mostly static throughout the film. There was a point that it did pan slightly, but other than that it was usually still with some different camera angles edited in. In addition, I found it funny how Mr. Metadier mentioned he is a “film fanatic”. Although Metadier did not mention a specific film, it reminded me how many references to films within a film are made so frequently in recent and past movies.
ReplyDeleteI believe this episode of the film stands just fine on its own. It was easy to understand the story from the beginning, mainly because of the title card explanations. It does leave one wanting to know more about the Vampire gang once the episode is over. Le Spectre was interesting and held my attention throughout most of the episode, but I don’t think I would be able to sit through the entire collection that makes up Les Vampires.
I was mildly disappointed after screening the Spectre section of Les Vampires. I had read Truffant’s book on Hitchcock over the summer, and in it—Hitchcock had spoken very highly of silent films. At one point Hitchcock speaks of the silent film era as a time when cinema was at its closest to “perfection”. Because of this, my expectations for silent films would never be met. Many of Hitchcock’s earlier films had a similar feel. Even in his later films, with his efficiency for shot selection, it is obvious that they are blatantly informed by silent films like the Ghost.
ReplyDeleteIt’s important to have no expectations next time I view a silent film because they rarely meet my expectations. That said, it’s an impressive film considering how little reference points there were to draw from in 1913. Also, the director Louise Feuillade was apparently uber prolific in his movie making enterprise. Some say he made around 800 films before his death. Thats hard to imagine.
It was interesting to see what parts of the story were told with text title-cards and what he chose to show visually. Although silent films are praised for their visual storytelling, this one did not impress me greatly. It wasn’t as hyper efficient as I had expected.
It was a clear story that was easy to follow. I just wonder if its clarity was due to the myriad of text-inserts we were peppered with from beginning to end.
-Jeff Ward-Ramos
Les vampires felt really long. I did like the fact that the move had close-ups and had inserts. What I did not like was the fact that the whole picture, when it came time to go outside, and if it was night it was blue. I would like to have seen just a little bit of blue but not the whole screen. And on the inside, I would like to know why was it that the film look old gold and not just black and white, I feel that the old gold really did not do anything for the film nor did the blue at night. Then the green outside in daylight was something really funny to me. At first I though, “hey, maybe there is something wrong with the film” but then later on, after two hours watching the film I guessed that it was meant to be like that, I really did not like in the movie, that if I am looking at a movie in black and wighte I would like for the movie to be in black and white not old gold, green or blue. What I did like about the film was any time that someone would turn on a light the screen would go from blue to old gold, but that was the only time that I like the film. I feel that the trapped door was really well put together and I understood that it was a trapped door and not a box or just a wall. This movie took me by surprised when in the first film the man finds a box and then when he opens it up inside there lays the head of a women, I found that so well planed I really was taken back by that one fact. Also, the fact that when the guy garb the box and put it on the table, he did it in a way that made me feel as if he wanted to let me know that there was something inside the box, and then just to put the icing on top of the cake, when he opens the box and the guys are the firsts ones to really get a feel of what is going on then the main guy picks up the box just a little bit to show the camera what’s inside. This film has really well done camera movements and shots. I enjoyed this film because it had a little of everything from dance to theater. I would just like to know, when this film came out was it a big talk meaning, did anyone say anything about the women that was dressed like “cat women.”
ReplyDeleteLe Spectre was just one short from Louis Feuillade’s 399 minute film Les Vampires. The story follows criminal trying to steal money from Mr.Guerande, the main character throughout the 10 episode series of Les Vampires. I did not enjoy watching Le Spectre. Like any other silent film it felt so long even though it was only a half hour. When I watch silent films I tend to lose focus because there is no dialogue and the music is very repetitive. This was the first film I had seen that used intertitles to narrate the story. They are helpful to understand what’s going on in the story after you watch a scene and have no idea what happened. From a visual stand point the film was very boring because of the static camera, it was stationary for every scene. Yet, I found that the use of different colors to represent time of day and location was interesting. All of the scenes in the house or bank were sepia and red tone but when the characters stepped out side the color of the film changed to green during the day and blue and nighttime. The most captivating shot of the film was at the end where there was a split screen of the guys on the phone. I do not think I would enjoy the other 9 parts of Les Vampires.
ReplyDeleteWhile it was a little hard to follow at times (two of the actresses looked very similar and we were only given a line of dialog every once in a while), Louis Feuillade’s “Les Vampires: Les Spectre” is a massive step towards contemporary film. The theatrical acting was toned down and was more realistic (at least a little; there was less arm flailing). Feuillade made use of a border line car chase (still half of one of his shots in the sequence was of the street before the cars were even on it), his framing was more modern (at times chopping away a little of the unneeded empty space that is usually a characteristic of early cinema), he used a few insert shots, and he finally used a close up during an action sequence, and in turn, built suspense. When the man was stabbed on the train they used a close up, disoriented the audience, and as a result ended up with a far less corny action. I didn’t mind at all that it was a little bit slow paced and that there was no epic gang vs. cop shootout because this is just one part in a series. I’m sure had I watched the other five hours of it I would’ve seen a real rise in action.
ReplyDeleteThe colored filters where a nice touch. I’m under the impression that they were to indicate time of day for exteriors, greening indicating daytime and the dull blue for dusk or nighttime. I would say that red was meant to set an ominous mood for the more thrilling scenes but they used it in the office building as well so its hard to say.
I must say, I did not like Les Vampires like I hoped that I would and the reasons are not the films fault. The first disappointment came from the fact that Les Vampires was the name of a gang, rather than actual vampires, which is what I was expecting. Also I saw it in the library, huddled around one of those screens in those booths with bright fluorescent lights above my head, which isn't really the ideal location or atmosphere to watch a movie, especially one that relies only your vision alone.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that I liked most about the film was the trick safe that they had in Moreno's room. It is a remarkably clever idea, and you don't see it all the time. It also allows for that really cool shot where you can see both rooms with the wall in between them. In doing this the filmmakers were able to use the fact that they were on a set to their own advantage. You see this in many films now (and it was spoofed in Naked Gun when Leslie Nielsen walks around the door frame), but this must have been one of the first times that it was used.
I also was surprised at how brutal the film was. It wasn't gory by any standards, but they did show the man die on the train and then the gang throwing him out, which looked pretty real (and much better than The Great Train Robbery). I usually don't expect that in old films, but then again it was before the Hollywood codes and things of that nature so they could be as explicit as they wanted.
The format was also interesting to me. It was such a good idea to have a long story and then split it up. First of all, they could tell the story as they wanted it, but still hold the audiences attention. Secondly they could make more money off of it by making people desire to come again and again to see the rest of the story. Sure this has been replicated many times (TV and Serials), but the original idea is still pretty monumental.
Chapter 4 in "Les Vampires" was a very interesting episode in the 399 minute thriller. Considering that the movie was made in the down fall of cinema, the movie was quite interesting. I really liked the tint in every scene. The gold, green and blue was something I have not seen in a movie. It gave a sense of time, but sometimes you could tell that it was daylight out during the midnight scene on the train.
ReplyDeleteOne of the problems that I found was the names of each individual because at one scene you are introduced to the guy who fixed the telephone and then all of a sudden the man who bought the apartment with the safe had an entourage. Even though I started watching in the middle, it would have helped if they clarified on names. The other problem I had was that they couldn't explain a lot, but there was a lot more that needed to be explained. For example, when random people kept showing up in the movie, we had no idea who was with who. Although, I did understand that there were a lot of twists and M. Night Shymalan type twists.
The twists seemed one of a kind back in the day, but every Film Noir and mystery film has taken these twists from Les Vampires. The crowd must have been very confused to find out that the robbers were the bankers and actually got away with it while the person who bought the apartment was put into custody. Overall the movie was very interesting and I really appreciate seeing where certain shots and twists come from and seeing it happen 100 years ago is amazing to think how far ahead the directors were 100 years ago.
I found myself impressed and amused by the film Les Vampires, “The Spectre”. I was surprised that in comparison to the earlier silent films we’ve observed such as “Life of an American Fireman”, that the plot of “The Spectre” was full of complexity. The addition of “captions” or “titles” played an integral role in assisting the viewer grasp the depth of the storyline. The titles combined with numerous inserts made it much easier to follow than previous films. In a way, I almost found the deliberate use of inserts humorous and endearing...as opposed to a rolling close up shot, most inserts seemed like a still photo with a static thumb in the frame indicating the letter being held, etc.
ReplyDeleteThe camera stayed stationary while shooting (no tracking shots, no pans or tilts), except for the last scene where we see the train…the camera shifts left, but it almost seems accidental…I found it curious that they didn’t explore camera movement more.
Another observation was the shift in the color of the film… The opening shot was sepia and later on in the film, scenes were tinted blue or green. This was most likely used to indicate time of day, blue meaning night-time…but the green had me stumped. Perhaps this was an artistic choice to enhance mood or create visual interest, but as opposed to the carefully selected hand tinting in “The Great Train Robbery” which highlighted specific elements, the overall color tint used in Les Vampires caused me to tilt my head in mild confusion.
As opposed to previous silent films we have observed in class, I noticed the acting techniques in Les Vampires were not as “over the top” and grandiose as I expected. You can ascertain quite easily that this film was extremely planned, thought out and in all probability very time consuming to make. Because of the camera positioning, the interior scenes could have very well been pieces of theater performed for the camera. For example, the apartment set included a visible wall division between the room housing the safe and the neighboring wall of the room that the male and female thieves inhabited. As opposed to exclusively intercutting between the first room and the second room, it is made obvious the rooms are adjoining by using a wide shot…much more like a stage drama.
There was a noticeable lack of variation in shot distances, but the addition of a few scattered close ups assisted in making the viewer more emotionally invested. The progress made in this movie is tangible in comparison to its predecessor’s largely due in part to the fact it’s the possibly the most ambitious story we’ve observed thus far in a silent film. There are multiple characters that converse and share “dialog”, multiple locations, “good guys”, “bad guys”, and mystery.
---Brianne McKay
I really didn’t know what to expect going into a screening of the “crime thriller” Les Vampire: Le Spectre. Being that this 30 minute episode was just a part of a series of nine films, I felt that it was a little hard to follow. I assumed that the previous episodes would lead up to whatever is going to happen next as Professor Delellis mentioned in his blog that it would be somewhat similar to the Twilight Saga films. I can’t really find similarities in that respect; except for the fact that the story is about “vampires” (the gang “Les Vampires” are not actually vampires).
ReplyDeleteI did find it interesting however the use of different types of shots and how the scenes were colored (tinted) differently depending on location and time of day (e.g. indoor/brown, day/green, night/blue). I thought this created some visual interest as well as denoted the differences in time of day which would otherwise be hard to differentiate with black and white film. I also noticed that the acting was a little less theatrical (exaggerated) than in other films that we’ve watched in class. The actors seemed a little more realistic in their actions than they normally would in silent films.
The story itself wasn’t particularly interesting or intriguing to me. I don’t think I would ever be able to get through the entire 399 minutes of it without either falling asleep or wanting to pull my hair out…I just really didn’t find it entertaining at all. The film is definitely innovative for its time though, with a pretty solid narrative, different shots and angles, and what I believe might be a moving camera in some instances. Overall, Les Vampire combines realism and fantasy as Feuillade creates a frightening world where the ordinary may suddenly be overwhelmed by the mysterious.
This is, by far, the most intriguing film I've watched in this class. The progress made in the techniques in just a few years is astonishing. Firstly, I liked how the director used filters to depict day, night, and indoor locations. Although I was somewhat perplexed by the use of green in the day shots.
ReplyDeleteThe use of different angles gave the film suspense, which is what many of these early films were lacking. My favorite scene was when the man opens the dresser and the audience finds out it has a false back. I had yet to see such ingenuity in the first films we've seen in this class. It was definitely the most intellectually satisfying scene in this film for me.
I also found the mixture of still shots action shots to be interesting. The still shots were a primitive form of inter-cutting. It gave the audience a way to understand the actions that were going on in the film without the excess use of title cards.
-Nathalie Fernandez
I though Les Vampires was a well mad film for its era. I didn’t particularly enjoy it, I actually thought is was rather long, but given the fact that in 1913 there weren’t many movies to “borrow” from, the technique is quite good. Also, I don’t think many movies during that era had a story line or a plot with twists like this one. I thought that was unique. But, I still lost interest in the film. I think it’s because we’re used to seeing ten cuts per second and not ten cuts for the whole movie.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that bothered me was the use of color to show a different time of the day. All the movies I’ve seen in black and white, are in black and white. For that reason, the color change from one scene to the next threw me off and I had a hard time adjusting to it.
The thing I found the most interesting was that this was one of ten films. There are characters that have been established and developed and there’s a theme to all of the movies. The movie that we watched was close to half an hour. Louis Feuillade literally invented a TV show, or an HBO series in the 1910’s, except there were no TV’s at the time, so it had to be called a movie. I don’t think there’s an arc throughout all ten movies, I haven’t seen them, but it is the same characters in different situations. At least for his first five episodes, which are all close to half an hour. The last five last about an hour. So to me, Feuillade invented a TV drama without even knowing it.
Like many of my fellow classmates, I was originally expecting Les Vampires to be a film about vampires full of Edward, Bella, and sparkles galore. Instead, the film was a part of a ten part serial about a gang of master criminals and a femme fatale named Irma Vep (a clever anagram of “Vampire”). While this film was bucket and buckets full of more entertainment than Lumière and Company, it did seem to drag out a bit. Regardless, I felt this filmed was inventive in its ways of getting around the limitations of film technology at the time.
ReplyDeleteThe use of different film techniques such as Close Ups, Inserts, and Tracking made the film a lot more realistic and entertaining than a movie created from simply plopping down a camera throughout different takes. No more waiting for someone or something to pop out of that empty space on the screen. Through the use of close ups, the audience can much more clearly see the expressions of the actors. Now that we can see their eyes, nonstop arm flailing can be toned down. This was the first thing I noted about Les Vampires: the acting could be taken seriously! Because the actors and actresses were no longer running around the room like headless chickens, the acting was much more subdued and realistic, making it easier to focus on the narrative of the film. Les Vampires was the first time I saw a real close up of a character’s expression. For example, the semi-close up of Irma Vep freaking out when Mr. Metadier comes up to pick up the money was believable as well as office supply boy Philippe makes a suspicious face towards Irma Vep.
Another technique that was refreshing to watch was the use of color filters. Through the use of color, we could now tell when a shot was indoors, nighttime, or outside daytime. Without the use of these filters, the story would have been impossible to understand. I thought it was very clever to use the flashlight effect when the man discovers Mr. Metadier’s body and wallet, making the blue “nighttime” effect consistent. This must have been a real innovation during the time when audiences were accustomed to watching nonstop black and white films for hours on end.
In conclusion, while Les Vampies did seem to drag on for a bit (as the majority of films during that era would), its use of cinematic techniques made the viewing experience much more enjoyable and realistic than any Twilight Saga movie.
Les Vampires
ReplyDeleteLes Vampires had an interesting way of telling the story. I found the tinting an interesting idea, and it showed an experimental side to the film. That is what is so great about this time is that these filmmakers were using this medium for the first time and they were not afraid to experiment, which is able to show the audience a bunch of different interpretations of what these filmmakers thought it took to tell a story. I thought that what they were trying to do was have a different color for exterior daylight, which was green, and exterior night was blue and sepia was for all interiors. I found it interesting, because now when you shoot on video filmmakers are usually trying to the tint of the Kelvin temperatures to disappear while this filmmaker embraced the idea of tint and experimented with it in his final product.
I noticed that the director had a lot of static shots that were extremely long showing most of the action of the entire scene in it. That was a little bit frustrating, because often times I wanted a closer look at things. Another thing about the camera angles were that the director or cinematographer made the angle to dictate where the audience was looking rather then editing between different shots. He used the idea of “integrity of the shot”, because he believed that the shot did not need to be in movement that the action would be enough to entertain the audience.
This film lacks action and could have been more suspenseful, but that is coming from someone who has seen films of this era. At the time, this film was probably very suspenseful, and was definitely a huge progression from the films before. It had a clear story, and was one of the first of its genre. It connected different scenes and showed a beginning middle and end. It could have worked as a full piece even without the other episodes.
It reminded me of how the television show “Law and Order: Special Victims Unit” episodes are set up, because you do not really need to follow the episodes in order to understand what is happening in each of the episodes, but they do incorporate the same cast through out the seasons.
I thought the acting in this film was better than the other films because it was dramatic then the theater acting we have seen before, and that helped to push the story along and make the characters more believable which helps the audience believe in the story more.
Sarah Garcia
Louis Feuillade’s “Les Vampires” really stands out as arguably the most plot driven piece of work we’ve seen thus far this semester. Having at least a slight familiarity with all the other filmmakers we’ve covered, Louis Feuillade was a surprise. It seems to me that perhaps he was one of those remarkable filmmakers whose art was forgotten over the years only to be rediscovered and given a new vitality after some time. It isn’t too difficult to imagine that history would disqualify his importance to early film in preference for Melies’s work. (In fact, these instances in which history forgoes an individual’s contribution to an event or movement are only too common.) However, it is quite possible to recognize the influence Melies had on Feuillade. I noted perhaps the relationship between Melies’s “The Black Devil” and Feuillade’s “Les Vampires.” More to the point, it would seem that the similarities between these two works are very general, broad – predominantly their dark undertones for the time period. Their differences are much more evident. This leads me to believe that the relationship Feuillade’s work had with Melies’s constitutes more than anything a response to Melies’s stylized films which were innovative in the manner they presented fantasy with a playfulness that was almost irresistible to the audience. It’s almost as if Feuillade wanted to avoid this combination after viewing Melies’s work and instead desired to introduce something a bit more challenging for the audience. As a result, Feuillade’s “Les Vampires” seeks to integrate fantastical elements with everyday reality. His use of fantastic realism, and the manner by which he was able to capture this atmosphere on film, demonstrates the work’s value as an evolutionary step in cinema.
ReplyDeleteIn much the same manner that Melies’s took the work of the Lumiere brothers’ one step further by introducing the narrative form and creating a unique cinematic experience, so too did Feuillade take Melies’s work one step further by creating an environment much more relatable to the general public and introducing new precision in filming technique. This precision primarily involves camera placement and greater control of what exactly is allowed in the frame. Also, Feuillade uses plot extensively to enwrap the audience in the proceedings. He desires the audience to lose themselves in the unfolding events, often times applying suspense as too what will come next. Melies, on the other hand, would probably sustain his audience with the visual spectacle.
Perhaps my favorite aspect of “Les Vampires” would be the films varied tint. I believe it shows an attempt to hook the audience but in its own way it’s also evolutionary, or even premeditative, in demonstrating the audience’s response and infatuation with color as a visual stimulant. I can’t help but compare this method with some recent projects that continue to experiment with color – such as Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing” or Steven Soderbergh’s “Traffic.”
Les Vampires is an interesting concept for that time period because not only did it have a storyline but also was made into weekly episodes that would bring back the audience to see what happens next. This is brilliant from a business perspective because people will pay again for something that most films of that time played altogether. Keeping the same characters and plot also makes it easier to write sequels and therefore more efficient.
ReplyDeleteThe tinting of the celluloid I think is a really good idea however I felt for Les Vampires they relied on it to much and the tint was to heavy for the scene. If it was a lighter blue representing the night outside I think the audience would still understand the concept and be able to see the scene more clearly.
The story itself was pretty easy to follow. The text inserts were a nice touch and helped the story move along. One of my favorite characters in any of the movies we have watch so far has to be the lead female of the Les Vampires. Her wardrobe must have be outrageous for that time and I’m not quite sure where they could have found the idea for it but it works. Overall I thought it was a good “film” and was surprised that it was so entertaining
atching Les Vampires, I recognized that much of Hollywood still follows suit in storyline and character presentation. Although the acting is still in its transition from theater dramatization, Les Vampires is a great example of its film generation’s development. The greatest acting technique was found in Irma Vep and her realistic performance compared to the drastic acting around her. The language of her expressions and body language were easy to read but still in a realistic manner. I found her presentation of the character, Irma Vep, very interesting and fairly captivating.
ReplyDeleteI watched the first few episodes of Les Vampires, and being accustomed to our present day film pace, I had trouble maintaining interest. Especially with the plot repeating itself in various ways, there wasn’t anything new to discover, except maybe a good acting performance. It was interesting to soak in the culture of its time and the fashions and social norms.
I enjoyed the concept of Les Vampires for a while, but to watch it repeat its formula over and over again, it got old really fast. I couldn’t get myself to watch every episode knowing each one would begin and end very much the same. However, the title cards were a refreshing development of its time, and it allowed a stronger connection for the audience to have with the characters.
-Allison Basham
I enjoyed this screening. I liked the presentation of it as a serial or type of TV episode. The pacing and movement of the episode was well delivered, and it’s evident there was a larger audience that was demanding more from their films or episodes. I thought that limitation on technology made the episode hard to deliver fully, because the titles slides only slowed down the pacing, and often made, the intricate story hard to follow – due in part to the fact that I hadn’t seen the previous episodes. It is interesting the way people in general adapt to the circumstances they are given. Les Vampires used tinting to express the time of day or setting because their film lacked specific coloring. Music, facial expressions, and titles slides all helped to deliver the structure of the story. All of these techniques become quite clear now that we have the luxury of experiencing full sound color, and action. In addition, the performances were slightly exaggerated to explain an emotion or key in the plot, as the spy or informant looked around with exaggerated suspicion or the happy old man danced his way into the office just show that he was “happy” – naming a few.
ReplyDeleteOnce the plot had been developed and the action came into play, I found it far more entertaining. The last 12-minute segment was the best because it did not try to compensate for its limitations but just delivered a true action/mystery sequence that had no real need for sound. The pacing and delivery in this segment was far more natural and entertaining. This is where I have no problems with silent film or black and white – when the director and story embrace what they have to deliver a compelling story. Obviously, it is easy to critique in hindsight, and I am by all means thoroughly impressed with rapid change in technology, and innovative thinking to deliver a great story now and to the audience at the time.
Daniel B.
I could not get through this film even with two cups of coffee at hand. I had to force myself to keep with it until I just had to give up.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it was because sometimes I got a little confused plot-wise, or maybe it was just because it was silent. Or maybe the filters just distracted me entirely from the story. It felt so long and I jsut could not connect with anything. It was like one thing after the other that just didn't mean anything to me.
I was surprised at how bored I was by this because the concept alone should have over-rided the silence factor. But no, I couldn't make it through. I do, however, have to commend the interesting scene composition choices, but I quite deal with the idea of 'the integrity of the shot.'
Maybe I shouldn't have watched it at eleven-thirty on a Wednesday night, but, either way, it was one of the most unenjoyable things I've had to sit through.