"Suspiria" Discussion -- 10/13/02 - 10/19/02

[slade]

This is a thread to discuss the technical and/or thematic merits of "Suspiria."

The purpose being to foster intelligent discussion of films without resorting to "It's a piece of crap." or "It's the greatest film ever." (And so that we all can gain a bit of a film education from everyone.)

We'll discuss a new film each week. Either Morticia or I will post the film in this forum in advance, and lock the topic until the first day of discussion.

Thanks everyone. Ideas for running this forum are always welcome.

****SPOILER WARNING**** of course this entire thread is going to be full of spoilers.

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!


...edited to fix the date....I'm a little AR about dates.....

[egman]

Suspiria is definitely not a film for everyone. Dario Argento makes several stylistics choices that can immediately put people off. I'm also of the mind that the film is more of a great work of technical beauty. I've found it hard to find anything substanscial beneath the impressive amount of detail invested in the visual elements of the film, but I will try nonetheless to tease out some ideas.

For anyone new to this film, I would suggest refrain from trying to analyze the narrative in great detail. This film is heavily invested in visuals, so much so that I think people who enjoy silent cinema may have an easier coming to this film. Suspiria at its core is an expressionist film and owes alot to the work of Lang and Murnau. However, there are some differences between what Argento does and what the German Expressionists were trying to accomplish.

The epressionists invested heavily in manipulating the contrast of the image. Tension is partially built upon the differences in light. Argento also puts much energy in the lighting of his frame, but working in color he also has to find a way to work with that as well. This is a problem that many filmmakers coming out of the fifties such as Fellini had to deal with. Why use color if there is nor purpose for it? I'm sure many would've stayed away from it even longer but as many know now, audiences have become accoustmed to, so in order to increase audience acceptance, many made the shift, just as many silent filmmakers made the shift to sound when it became apparent that silent film was seen(wrongly in my opinion) as something archaic. Fortunately, Argento does find color useful in Suspiria.

The almost garrish color scheme lends a dream like quality to the film. This is further helped along by the use of some the last technicolor (3 strip) filmstock in existence. By only manipulating a few of the visual choices at his disposal, Argento creates a world that one could only visit in their dreams. This is the biggest difference between Argento's kind of horror and most modern day horror films. The modern day horror film, even in it's more fantastical strives to create a world that seems like we could live in it, like Ridely Scott's Alien for example. I mean, the films takes much liberity in set design--I doubt space travel would be so grimy and sewer like, but at the same time we believe it against our better judgement because it does look lived in. I would surely like the meet the person who thinks that the world of Suspiria appears real to them!

The use of color leads into the a disscussion of the narrative. Another reason the colors work is that the film is trying to acheive the effect of fairytale. The Argento clearily makes this point in the documentary on the 3-disc set, looking for influence visually from Disney's Snow White and narratively in dark fairytales like Bluebeard.

The use of the fairytale can also be attributed to the Expressionists, who tended to also use more basic forms of narrative such as folklore as the structure to flesh out their visual ideas.

Another element that might be borrowed from expressionism in the acting. This is questionable, however, in light of how people have described Argento's approach with performers. But somewho, the mechanical and stale acting of the performers does lend itself to the exggerated acting that prevail in silent cinema.

Another important elements of the visuals is the use of perpesctive. If anyone hopes to find a little more depth in Argento's visuals, this might be the place to look.

First of all, there are very few shots throughout the duration of the movie that directly connect our points of view with that of the protagonist Suzy. Most shots are omnipontent, and there a couple of times in the film where the narrative doesn't even involve Suzy, such as the scene of the maggots falling form the ceiling. Usually we can explain this as a narrative device, but a film like this that relies very little on narrative one has to wonder what the director is up to. On possible suggestion is that we are seeing the film through the eyes of the filmmaker.

Argento and Hitchcocl are often compared, and that possibly stems from the similarily voyueristic qualities of their cinema. If this movies is about anything in particular, then that thing might be curiosity and the sensation of seeing things that one is not supposed to.

Suspiria is not an overtly sexual film, but it is hard to deny that there isn't sexuality buried as subtext. Few men are involved in the narrative of the film, while at the same time Argento creates an intimatcy between the viewer and the women involved. We find ourselves often in dressing rooms or in the middle of what we might call girl talk. Then there is the early scene at the beginning that leads to the first death in which our view is perched outside of the widow of victims room. like a peeping tom.

The other possible sexual component is the highly elaborate murder scenes. Instead of Argento filming the first victim being stabbed once then cutting to something else like her roomate trying to get help--we watch the young man a mongtage get stabbed 8 or 9 times, with a couple of those times being forced to see her exposed heart being assulted.

This scene veers away from the suspense we had earlier from watching the woman in the window and turns something potentially scary into something excessive. Less is more in horror films, but Argento moves to the beat of his own drummer in that respect. One could argue that the being tension is built because we are refused the usually kind of release that typical horror has, but I'm not sure. There is scene later with Suzy friend Sara in which we watch here being chased. While it does not result in the brutality of the first scene, the attention we invest in watching Sara meet her doom nearly destroys the pace and any since of traditional suspense. Younger directors would did this scene in less that a couple of minutes. However, it's important for Argento to show this. It reminds me of Hitchcock's fasincation with the abuse his female protagonists will go through. And this has resulted in Argento being accused of sexism and sadisim. In his defence, one male character also meets brutual end by the jaws of his own seeing-eye dog, and the matter gets more confused latter on in other films like Phenomena when he involves his wife and daughters in these kinds of scenes, but the bottom line is that there is something to diffenately explore here.

Suspiria is surely an intersting genre picture. It doesn't offer the same kind of thrills we see now in modern horror. But as in the silent horror classic Nosferatu, the film has an unsettling atmosphere and by most accounts succesfully creates a cinematic nightmare, in which the film supplies it's own logic rather than have it imposed by the conventions of the genre.

[tic-tac]

I've seen a good many films, and there's just nothing like that opening scene for intensity...

[Morticia]

egman! Wow, that's such a great post, no wonder everyone was 'scared' away.

I tried to rent this movie for the actual discussion week, but I couldn't find it. I ended up just buying the regular edition using the Borders coupon, which took it down to a nice 'blind buy' price.

When I popped the disc in, I realized I had seen it before. Not as the director intended though...I had caught it on Sci Fi channel probably close to 5 or more years ago. It was great to settle in and watch this in OAR and uncut. Course, it really helped that there was a heckuva storm outside too...that really helped to set the mood.

COLORS
I noticed right off the use of colors...red, blue, sometimes green lights that would wash over a scene. It lent a garish tone to everything, very nightmarish and unreal.

TONE
Egman mentions the Expressionists. I have 3 German cinema treats in my collection: "Nosferatu", "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" and "The Golem". I can readily see the parallels between "Suspiria" and these films. In fact, some of the scenes (the opening murder scene and the scenes in the rain) play out as if they are silent films, because either the music is loud and 'drowns out' the incidental noise, or in the case of the rain, the rain itself makes it impossible to hear anything else.

The Sound
I spent some time with the Radio Spots, and was amused to hear them tout Suspiria as "the most frightening movie you ever heard." Now, was this because it was a radio spot? I wonder. For the strange musical score (by Goblin) was very creepy in itself, being some sort of Gothic Euro-techno genre. A good match for Argento's brightly colored tableau.

Why a horror movie?
Well, not many things scare me anymore (other than taxes and politics) but I must admit, seeing Sara plunge into the razor wire gave me the heebie-jeebies! That was a sort of knife-in-your-achilles-tendon unsettling. Yes, the opening murder, while elaborately staged, was disturbing in its attention to detail (and possibly the most disturbing thing ever seen at the time), but something about the razor wire was squirm-inducing for me.

[egman]

Thanks for the comment Morticia.It surely wasn't my attention to scare anyone away. I was hoping some of other posters would come in with their own observations. I highly doubt that bit I posted was a definitive disccusion of the film.

I think next time I post in the film class board I'll just cover one or two points and hope that more posters contribute.

[JimboQ]

Suspiria is one film that I've been so proud to have known about for several years, even at it's original release in 1977. I was way tor young to understand the premise of the movie, but the actual
newspaper movie section picture ad, with the flesh-like words and the screaming mouth really stuck in my brain for a loooong time. For a while at the local drive-in, it was a double-feature along with Carrie. The movie was re-issued (or issued for the first time) in 1990, uncut, and I was lucky enough to rent it and dub a copy to Betamax (yes you read right). Years later it went out of print and that pretty much brings us to the present. After purchasing Deep Red, Tenebrae (or Unsane), and Inferno, one began to wonder if Suspiria would EVER get released on DVD. Shoot to September 11, 2001. After we had watched on the company television to our shock that the World Trade Center had been destroyed, we were ordered to close for the day. I had realized that a video store in the nearby mall had two copies. I raced there and even though they were pulling down their gates to close, I begged them to let me purchase one. They did, and I was forever grateful. Let me tell you, all of this trendy slick teenage horror crap will never hold a candle to this masterpiece of suspense, style, & horror. A beautiful film that has stood the test of time.

[pilauh]

Suspiria is one of my favorite and as mentionned by egman :

This film is heavily invested in visuals, so much so that I think people who enjoy silent cinema may have an easier coming to this film.

As a photographer I have been heavily impressed by this film (I wouldn't say inspired, that's not true), the framing, the use of colors and as a movie lover by it's editing which is really simple but so effective (from the opening door at the airport arrival to the ending).

That is really a film where the story is more told thru visuals than dialogues. Of course, the music plays its part, but try to watch this film with the sound off and you'll be able to follow everything (i'm pushing a little bit, but not that much...) from beginning to end. On the DVD side of things, a score only audio track could have been a really nice idea for this particular film. This could have been the opportunity to taste cinema on only two of its levels : pictures and music.

The use of dramatic colors is so pushed and the framing so tight that the psychological impact is very strong. What is shown sometimes counts less that the way it is shown. Reminds me of painting, some gruesome pieces by Francis Bacon. You see a situation but after a while only the framing of colors stand in your mind, and fear or sorrow comes in.

Definitly an important movie to see. If you haven't seen it yet, run to your rental, pick the AnchorBay edition (with or without the documentary), and discover the thrilling use of colors, framing, pacing.

(don't ask about the plot, enjoy the silly story, and most of all : Jessica Harper... )

[tqpix]

Great use of colors and music. The music kind of gets irritating after a while, and the movie drags on a bit, but on a whole, the movie is great!

I hope that rumor of an American remake of this great film isn't true!

[C Roberts]

I finally saw this film after a daring blind buy a few months ago. I'm now definitely in the category of Argento fan.

I notice in reviews of the film (I read several before buying) everyone seems to think the story is weak. To me the story is just right for the film and if it was too in-depth or complicated it would take away from the dreamlike quality of the world the movie takes place in. I have some pretty intense dreams sometimes myself and they have basically the same amount of plot as Suspiria. Although Suspiria's plot is more like something Lovecraft would conjure than anything I'd come up with. Suzy walks into the movie the same as someone walking into the Twilight Zone. She's left her reality and come to a totally foreign one (and not just because its another country although there is metaphor there).

Another thing from reviews is people mention the wire room. Some just talk about how she falls into the razor wire and some complain that the room itself has no purpose other than Argento wanting a gruesome way for her to die and using the dreamlike world as an excuse to put it there. When I watched the movie I realized the room is actually full of piano wire. They must use a lot of it at a dance school where the music is all played on the piano.

The cinematography for the movie is outstanding and I personally can only compare it to The Shining as far as horror movies go. In fact the two movies seem almost perfect companions to each other as if they take place in the same world but different locations. Actually throughout the movie I found myself seeing just how much influence its had on horror movies since. While modern horror movies have more grotesque special effects and more elaborate deaths the ones in Suspiria stand out a lot more in memory.

[Scourge]

Well, Halloween is almost here, so scary movie discussion should be on the brain I guess. I'm sure since my stint here at dvdfile I've commented on this movie *somewhere* in the past. Regardless, here's my observations.

I'm split 50/50 on this movie: I love it and I hate it. That is to say that 100% of the time I can consider it one of the finest horror films ever made and at the same time not a movie to hoist on anyone, because they need to discover it on their own and accept it on its own terms if they're going to like it at all.

I prefer this movie as a silent movie. The 3 strip treatment is the process of developing color films that is recognizable in the Golden Age of Hollywood under the big Studio system, in such films as Cleopatra or The 10 Commandments. It, I believe, is still used in Chinese film by 5th Generation filmmakers such as Zhang Yimou in Ju Dou. Simply put, it's the type of film and how the film is developed. It's what Technicolor branded.

Here's the process from wikapdedia:

"The three-strip Technicolor process used three strips of black-and-white film (hence the "three-strip" designation) and a beam splitter or split-cube prism. The prism split the light into three components: green, red, and blue. The green component was registered onto a strip of panchromatic black-and-white film; the blue was registered onto a strip of red-emulsion-coated black-and-white film; and the red was registered onto another strip of red-senstive panchromatic black-and-white. The red and blue strips were mated back-to-back, in a "bipack" arrangement, with the blue-sensitive film in front.

To print the film, each colored strip had a "relief-positive" print struck from it, which was then bleached to remove the silver and then soaked with a dye that was the exact chromatic opposite of the color in question: cyan for red, magenta for green, and yellow for blue.

Each of the three dye-soaked strips were brought into contact with a single clear strip of film, with each color built up in a successive pass. Such a process was referred to by Technicolor as "dye imbibation", which was commonly used in conventional offset printing or lithography but which the Technicolor process adapted to film. The final strip of film would have the dyes soaked into it and not simply printed onto its surface, which produced rich and deeply saturated color.

Sometimes the clear film would be pre-exposed with a composite panchromatic black-and-white positive image derived from the other three negatives, as a way to deepen the blacks and heighten the contrast of the image."

This is where the amazing reds and blues come from. Suspiria is entirely saturated with deep, vibrant color. Is it possible this technique was employed to give more "clarity" to the image? Possibly more contrast? In a movie where focus on detail is so important, I don't think it's beyond reason, but I don't think too many of Argento's movies used this process and they all strive for this detail, so maybe not. Perhaps combined with the garishness (yes, I'll repeat the word that others have used twice before me in this thread over the years ) of the colors for clarity's sake, Argento also used this color process to strengthen the "fairy tale" factor. Much like a Disney movie or one of those big studio films of the past, you can't help but notice how vibrant everything is.. how strangely beautiful, even the locales where the most horrific acts take place, like it's all part of some fantasy.

Which it is. Which is why the narrative takes a back seat and this movie is best watched with no sound. The cinematography alone would make this a beautiful movie to watch. Do not ever watch this movie cropped for pan-and-scan. The camera eye of the movie truly is a peeping tom. It's almost as though we as viewers are stalking these girls. The fact that we "know" people are going to die and it's very noticably from our perspective is a bit of a perverse trick played by Argento on the viewer, a kind of "what am I going to do next?" Scenes of brutal murder play longer than necessary, just in case you cover your eyes, thinking it'll be over momentarily... it's not and you end up peeking, watching, and kind of revelling in the revulsion of the whole thing; yet another trick on you by the director. If you get swept up at all in the who's and why's of this movie, then Argento failed. Sometimes, and I think it was purposeful, not enough coverage was given to a character so that when scenes are run together back-to-back it can be confusing who just died. I feel this is another trick of Argento's, purposefully confusing the viewer and possibly making them feel as though they must be losing their mind 'because I thought she...' Repeat viewings clarify, but one run through can be pretty disconcerting.

As for the sound of this movie, other than the odd propensity for Italian directors to dub their movies over in English, even if they were recorded in English to begin with, Goblin's score is fitting I suppose, but really, to me, all sound in Suspiria other than possibly incidental and environmental sound effects, serves as a distraction. I don't mind Goblin and I actually think this score is pretty cool. I just somehow find that eventhough thematically it's right for the movie, none of the sound seems to mesh well with the pure, unadulterated imagery. I prefer to watch Suspiria with the sound down, treated as a silent film, and on this level it works brilliantly and 100%. Since a story had to be attached to the movie to try to tie scenes together and present dialogue, it's unfortunate that some of the imagery fails to explain the script (which would normally be reversed, I realize), but honestly, with the sound off, no explanation is needed and Suspiria is stylish and beautiful to watch, I just can't recommend it to anyone.

[reapersaurus]

I have not seen Suspiria, but just wanted to add that on the Idle Hands commentary, the director mentioned he loved Suspiria, and many aspects of Idle Hands were homages to Suspiria (garish colors, etc).

[Indyphantom]

Watching SUSPIRIA with no sound?????? Did I read some of these posts correctly. Probably the most wonderfully disturbing aspect of this film is the disturbing soundtrack by GOBLIN. When the images are too frightening, you can't turn away from the music.

[Triple HHH]

I have nothing new to add to the already great analyses above. I think Suspiria's two strongest elements (or maybe three) are the colors, sets, and music. There are a couple moments so terrifying, I will admit to having to look away for a few seconds, and I attribute that to the way it melds everything together.

A nice little touch in the Goblin soundtrack is how it screams "witch!" every once in a while. And it's precisely at these moments that something occurs on-screen, but it's never something horrible, just small occurances like a shadow appearing on a tree, or a glint off a knife. It creates so much suspense and mounting terror in that strange lilting manner. "La, la, la, la, la, ....." The main theme is like Goblins' version of a demonic lullaby.

Great movie for Halloween.