A dancer in a static pose on the screen. Is there movement? It seems not. But the film of the movie camera is moving, filming the dancer. Electrons are running, pixels of the digital matrix are changing. Does this mean that movement is happening? The dancer's body comes to life within the frame set by the cameraman. How does this frame and the dancer's choreography interact? Should the frame obey the laws of choreography or exist in counterpoint with it? Or, perhaps, should it freeze, allowing the dancer to create his own pattern within the frame? The dancer makes his body move according to the laws of choreography. But at the same time, his nature determines how the body will exist within this choreography. After all, nature created the plasticity of the body outside of choreographies and directorial tasks. So what is more interesting to watch? What is the real beauty - in an artificial, memorized choreographic movement or in a natural, random gesture?
What critics are saying
Verdicts use the same scale as your list: highly recommended through avoid — plus optional scores and blurbs.
Nobody on Critic, Sir! has logged a verdict for this title yet. The silence is either respectful or suspicious.
Sign in and use Add to My List below to share your own verdict.
Watching Lists
to create and edit public lists.
Loading lists…
Purchase & Discovery
Find this title on Amazon
Digital
Prime Video & digitalAmazon mixes rent, buy, and Prime in one place — one search covers the usual options.
Physical edition
4K Blu-ray & physical releasesSearch on AmazonOfficial merchandise
Official-style merch searchApparel, collectibles, and moreAs an Amazon Associate, Critic, Sir! earns from qualifying purchases. Full disclosure