She doesn't want to make nice, polished films, Flemish director Fien Troch recently told the Belgian press. What she wants to do is nothing less than re-invent film making.
With her third film 'Kid', she has more or less succeeded. I have never seen a film like this. It is in many ways extreme. Troch observes the life of a boy named Kid with a cold, clinical distance. The camera is used for observing, and only that. There is no effort to connect the audience emotionally to the story. There is no identification with the actors. There is no real difference between scenes showing someone walking through a wood, or someone being shot.
The film consists of scenes that at first seem unconnected. But slowly, the audience starts to put the pieces of the puzzle together and understands what is going on. Kid, a boy of about nine or ten years old, is not a nice child. He behaves badly and is unsympathetic towards other people. He lives in a farmhouse with his brother and his mother, who is deeply in debt and doesn't seem to be able to cope with the situation. Towards the end of the film, things get more dramatic. But even the most shocking events are being shown without any emotionality.
The cinematography of this film is very special. Almost every scene is filmed with a static camera. Troch meticulously frames these shots, and they often have a graphic, symmetrical quality. I have counted the camera movements: if I'm not mistaken, there are three in the whole film, one of which is shown twice. (In a way, I think this is a pity. It would be even nicer to be able to say this is a film without any camera movement at all. It would better fit the uncompromising way of film making Troch favours).
Another thing that makes this film special, is the dialogue. There is hardly any. Sometimes someone says something, but often this is barely audible because the actors speak softly and don't articulate well. I think Troch has done this on purpose: she wants the images to speak for themselves. This is an extremely visual film, and after all visuality is what it's about in films. In her interviews, Troch explains that she instructed the actors to put as little feeling in their 'dialogue' as possible, and to speak their parts as if they were reading a shopping list aloud.
This is a film that will not be appreciated by everyone. But for those who watch it, it can be a very special experience. Is it a good experience? That's another question. Some people will be put off by the extremely cold and unemotional approach. Others will enjoy the visual quality of the scenes (they are not beautiful in any way, but very carefully composed). One thing is certain. Fien Troch is a director with a very personal approach to film making. And we can only be happy about that in a time when there are so many crowd pleasing directors.
With her third film 'Kid', she has more or less succeeded. I have never seen a film like this. It is in many ways extreme. Troch observes the life of a boy named Kid with a cold, clinical distance. The camera is used for observing, and only that. There is no effort to connect the audience emotionally to the story. There is no identification with the actors. There is no real difference between scenes showing someone walking through a wood, or someone being shot.
The film consists of scenes that at first seem unconnected. But slowly, the audience starts to put the pieces of the puzzle together and understands what is going on. Kid, a boy of about nine or ten years old, is not a nice child. He behaves badly and is unsympathetic towards other people. He lives in a farmhouse with his brother and his mother, who is deeply in debt and doesn't seem to be able to cope with the situation. Towards the end of the film, things get more dramatic. But even the most shocking events are being shown without any emotionality.
The cinematography of this film is very special. Almost every scene is filmed with a static camera. Troch meticulously frames these shots, and they often have a graphic, symmetrical quality. I have counted the camera movements: if I'm not mistaken, there are three in the whole film, one of which is shown twice. (In a way, I think this is a pity. It would be even nicer to be able to say this is a film without any camera movement at all. It would better fit the uncompromising way of film making Troch favours).
Another thing that makes this film special, is the dialogue. There is hardly any. Sometimes someone says something, but often this is barely audible because the actors speak softly and don't articulate well. I think Troch has done this on purpose: she wants the images to speak for themselves. This is an extremely visual film, and after all visuality is what it's about in films. In her interviews, Troch explains that she instructed the actors to put as little feeling in their 'dialogue' as possible, and to speak their parts as if they were reading a shopping list aloud.
This is a film that will not be appreciated by everyone. But for those who watch it, it can be a very special experience. Is it a good experience? That's another question. Some people will be put off by the extremely cold and unemotional approach. Others will enjoy the visual quality of the scenes (they are not beautiful in any way, but very carefully composed). One thing is certain. Fien Troch is a director with a very personal approach to film making. And we can only be happy about that in a time when there are so many crowd pleasing directors.