The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies
MCN Columnists
Mike Wilmington

By Mike Wilmington Wilmington@moviecitynews.com

Wilmington on Movies: The Afterlight

The Afterlight (Three Stars)
U.S.: Alexei Kaleina & Craig Macneill, 2009

A genuine American art film, shot very lovingly, albeit with a low budget, and filled with sometimes stunningly beautiful images of forests, fields and farms in rural upstate New York (Walton), The Afterlight tries unabashedly for pure cinematic poetry, and often gets it. It’s also sometimes pretentious, though not in a way that alienated me, and the story line is often deliberately opaque, though not annoyingly so.

The story of The Afterlight, by first time filmmakers Alexei Kaleina & Craig Macneill, is set in a short stretch of time before and during a solar eclipse, and it centers on a young couple from the city, smiley but quiet construction worker Andrew (Michael Kelly of The Adjustment Bureau and The Changeling), and pretty, troubled Claire (Jicky Schnee of All Good Things), who try to rescue their relationship (from what we don’t know) by relocating to the country and an old abandoned schoolhouse. There, they slide into internal darkness and angst as they interact with their neighbors, the feisty little girl Lucy (played by local Walton non-professional Morgan Taddeo), the ethereally lovely and slender blind woman Maria (Ana Asensio — and it‘s certainly strange that two knockouts like Claire and Maria are in the same upstate town, never mind neighborhood) and Maria’s melancholy elderly aunt Carol  (memorably played by the late Rhoda Pauley, to whom the movie is dedicated).

There’s one other major character, Claire’s father Carl, played by Rip Torn — who, not surprisingly, gives the best performance in this well-acted movie, though his part consists mostly of voice-overs and one scene with Claire that’s virtually a monologue (in which he recounts his disturbing experiences as a prison van driver), and though all of his moments were added in re-shoots after the film was initially completed. Even in these fragments, Torn is superb, and one only wishes there were more of him.

The best of the movie ravishes. The sunlit green tableaux and shadowy interiors of The Afterlight, in which the other characters seem both trapped and restless (like the bird), are so impeccably framed and so astonishingly well-shot, by cinematographer Zoe White (making her feature debut) that your eyes are always rewarded, your mind usually intrigued. Macneill was a student of Stan Brakhage, and, like Brakhage, he and his moviemaking partner Kaleina have a painterly, poetic bent that can slowly, softly mesmerize the viewer.

I liked the movie very much, and when some of its early festival admirers compared it to Michelangelo Antonioni and Ingmar Bergman, they had some justification. The Afterlight is obviously made by filmmakers who know and admire Antonioni and Bergman, and who would probably be pleased by the comparison — and the images, scenes and emotions often suggest those two masters. (More pastoral than urban, the film reminded me a bit more of Bergman than Antonioni — and it reminded me as well of other lyrical Swedes, like Jan Troell, Alf Sjoberg, Arne Sucksdorff and Bo Wideberg.)

Shaping their tale in moods and rhythms far more European in feel than American, Macneill and Kaleina aren’t afraid to fill their scenes with stillness and solitude, to let their fine cast quietly strip their emotions bare, or to offer an occasional visual symbol or two (a caged songbird, a lonely forest, even the eclipse itself). The director-writer-editor pair, and  cinematographer White, show a sheer love of moviemaking that often makes their film a joy to watch. (Facets)

One Response to “Wilmington on Movies: The Afterlight”

  1. Sandeshaya says:

    Alexei Kaleina? then just wait…
    Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Wilmington

The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Yes, good movies sprout up, inevitably, in the cracks and seams between the tectonic plates on which all of these franchises stay balanced, and we are reassured of their hardiness. But we don’t see what we don’t see; we don’t see the effort, or the cost of the effort, or the movies of which we’re deprived because of the cost of the effort. Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice may have come from a studio, but it still required a substantial chunk of outside financing, and at $35 million, it’s not even that expensive. No studio could find the $8.5 million it cost Dan Gilroy to make Nightcrawler. Birdman cost a mere $18 million and still had to scrape that together at the last minute. Imagine American movie culture for the last few years without Her or Foxcatcher or American Hustle or The Master or Zero Dark Thirty and it suddenly looks markedly more frail—and those movies exist only because of the fairy godmothership of independent producer Megan Ellison. The grace of billionaires is not a great business model on which to hang the hopes of an art form.”
~ Mark Harris On The State Of The Movies

How do you make a Top Ten list? For tax and organizational purposes, I keep a log of every movie I see (Title, year, director, exhibition format, and location the film was viewed in). Anything with an asterisk to the left of its title means it’s a 2014 release (or something I saw at a festival which is somehow in play for the year). If there’s a performance, or sequence, or line of dialogue, even, that strikes me in a certain way, I’ll make a note of it. So when year end consideration time (that is, the month and change out of the year where I feel valued) rolls around, it’s a little easier to go through and pull some contenders for categories. For 2014, I’m voting in three polls: Indiewire, SEFCA (my critics’ guild), and the Muriels. Since Indiewire was first, it required the most consternation. There were lots of films that I simply never had a chance to see, so I just went with my gut. SEFCA requires a lot of hemming and hawing and trying to be strategic, even though there’s none of the in-person skullduggery that I hear of from folk whose critics’ guild is all in the same city. The Muriels is the most fun to contribute to because it’s after the meat market phase of awards season. Also, because it’s at the beginning of next year, I’ll generally have been able to see everything I wanted to by then. I love making hierarchical lists, partially because they are so subjective and mercurial. Every critical proclamation is based on who you are at that moment and what experiences you’ve had up until that point. So they change, and that’s okay. It’s all a weird game of timing and emotional waveforms, and I’m sure a scientist could do an in-depth dissection of the process that leads to the discovery of shocking trends in collective evaluation. But I love the year end awards crush, because I feel somewhat respected and because I have a wild-and-wooly work schedule that has me bouncing around the city to screenings, or power viewing the screeners I get sent.
Jason Shawhan of Nashville Scene Answers CriticWire