The exchange of gazes between two people people observing their surroundings, are often connected to a quality we like to call «cinematic». The obviously cinematic character of the gaze is confirmed in two films currently being screened: “Carol” (Haynes, 2015), which for long sequences floats like elegant, wordless exchanges of gazes between supressed feelings, and “Son of Saul “(Nemes, 2015), which puts us face to face with one of the victims of the Holocaust and his struggle to keep his composture while witnessing the things happening around him.
Saul in the latter of these films, a prisoner working in a concentration camp in Auschwitz, has to use his eyes in order to orient himself in the machinery of death, but in reality wishes that he was couldn’t see. «It would’ve been much easier if you didn’t understand», he tells a fellow prisoner while starting into his bowl of food. Saul has chosen to concentrate on death rather than life. Death is seemingly the only thing left saving. His body, his gaze and his thoughts are completely focused on it – for instance, obsessed with how to bury a boy who has been strangled by the Nazis, a boy he believes to be his son. Saul tries to make himself blind to – or put up a personal, almost absurd resistance to – what is happening in life, and the film glues us to his face of denial.
“Son of Saul” shows how there is also a strong cinematic potential in the opposite of the eye’s field of vision. Films can also create an eye for what is surrounding, what is outside our field of vision – an eye for absence, an eye for what we cannot see or choose not to see. An eye for blind spots, and even – as in “Son of Saul” – an eye for death.
Login to continue...You have now read 4 free articles this month, so log in if you are a subscriber,
or please click here for subscription (3 euro/month) to read all articles.