Use subtraction to express rich and excellent works.
What is presented under Brinell's partial photography method is not a simple symbol of the entire human being, but a reflection of the concept of human beings. As such, it appears as partial hands, swords, horses, and repeated scenes.
In fact, the film has no intention of reconstructing history or drawing on the "deep morals" of legends. Because even the Queen's love affair with Lancelot is just some kind of ritualized mechanical repetition—here, the film no longer appeals to meaning, that is, it reaches the stage of meaninglessness. Although there are still narrations, logical connections and temporal correlations, etc., from the perspective of the organization of each picture and shot, the overall meaning is devoid of meaning.
Parts that appear repetitive in the film (such as jousting, fighting, and the queen's waiting) essentially introduce meaninglessness. And why introduce nonsense? Obviously, this is a dissolution of the historical subject (fable) itself - according to Bresson, performances, stage plays and historical plays are all intolerable things. Therefore, in this film, we must first deal with the problem of how to cancel these symbolic images.
However, after all, it is not a work that only plays with concepts or purely uses forms to subvert. The point of this film is not to subvert, not to cancel the center of the story or to be cool. No, the film isn't deliberately emphasizing emotion - it's more focused on dispelling the allegorical impression than the early country priests.
. . . This impression, which is purely figurative (by means of a story), no longer achieves its purpose through narrative, or, in other words, the impression itself no longer has a purpose. Thus, it becomes a self-sustaining being; completely above the limits of form—beyond this limit.
Well, this is indeed a textbook on the application of subtraction.
View more about Lancelot of the Lake reviews
