…Gustav Klimt movie, Klimt, finally came out on DVD this week (it stars John Malkovich as Klimt). I rented it immediately and watched it the same afternoon–hoping to see a portrayal of the relationship between Klimt and Schiele. I liked how much the guy playing Schiele really looked like him, but I found his character portrayal was too much of a pose; by that I mean that he imitates the self-portraits drawn by Schiele in his mannerisms, and while certainly recognizable, didn’t give me a sense of the person, only a sense of the representation of the person, if that makes sense. While I was a little disappointed with the biographical information, I liked the allegorical and symbolic manner in which the film unfolded the events of Klimt’s life. Snippets of events were shown through a dream/flashback sequence, but that style also lent the film a disjointed though surreal quality. I plan to watch it again tonight, hoping to glean other tidbits of Austrian, and Klimt’s life that I missed the first time, or at least to better understand the symbolism in the movie. Maybe it’s not just the movie I should be looking at again. Maybe everything about our lives is symbolic, and so often we forget to read the signs.
I should rent that. I ended up writing a couple ekphrastic poems thanks to his work while over there. I looked at them again a few weeks ago. A few are worth revising I think.
I hope you do see it. I liked the half-hour making of the movie clip. It details how the movie is an international production, and also shows how all of the paintings in the movie are reproductions. Art imitating art in art.