Gus Van Sant's Elephant would be a compelling work even if it were about senior center scrap-booking. The film is a testament to nearly every artistic function of the camera--manipulation of time, subtle depth of field contraction, selectively subjective framing and sustained index of reality all saturate the beautifully shot film. But this is not a film about senior center scrap-booking, it is about high school isolation and violence. Elephant's subject matter is disturbing and taboo, and it's tough to say if the film is ever really up to the task of handling it.
For all the time spent following our high school characters, the film devotes very little time to exploring their thoughts or motivations. For the shooting victims, this is a bit wasteful; for the shooters, this is a bit irresponsible. What drives these guys? Is their sexuality a factor in their decisions? If not, what's up with that kiss? If so, what are you saying, Van Sant? And that last explicit on screen casualty... where the hell did that come from, and where does it fit?
We're left with these and other questions. I'm open to the idea that that's a good thing, that Elephant exists to plant these questions of motivation lest we write them off in real life. But I do think that the film's emotional impact and ultimate relevance are undermined by the film's underdevelopment, particularly since the background that we are given falls safely within established scapegoat territory of sexual rejection and violent video games.
I don't ask that Elephant give me some easy prescriptive social policy, but I do ask that it justify its existence by challenging me; these characters aren't developed enough, and their motivations are either too simple or too little explored to offer a challenge. This film is tough, it's dark, it has some of the most beautiful cinematography you'll ever see. But to what end? -TK 10/3/10
For all the time spent following our high school characters, the film devotes very little time to exploring their thoughts or motivations. For the shooting victims, this is a bit wasteful; for the shooters, this is a bit irresponsible. What drives these guys? Is their sexuality a factor in their decisions? If not, what's up with that kiss? If so, what are you saying, Van Sant? And that last explicit on screen casualty... where the hell did that come from, and where does it fit?
We're left with these and other questions. I'm open to the idea that that's a good thing, that Elephant exists to plant these questions of motivation lest we write them off in real life. But I do think that the film's emotional impact and ultimate relevance are undermined by the film's underdevelopment, particularly since the background that we are given falls safely within established scapegoat territory of sexual rejection and violent video games.
I don't ask that Elephant give me some easy prescriptive social policy, but I do ask that it justify its existence by challenging me; these characters aren't developed enough, and their motivations are either too simple or too little explored to offer a challenge. This film is tough, it's dark, it has some of the most beautiful cinematography you'll ever see. But to what end? -TK 10/3/10