The linkage between the film and Louis Kahn would be the fact that they are very similar in term of the designs. Kahn always start every of his design from a cube and let it goes from there. And the architectures in the film are somewhat repetition (take the office’s cubes for instance). In Kahn’s designs, they consist of International style that is about simple geometric forms, form characterized by a series of volumes and honestly used of materials and the constructions in the film are somewhat comparable.
The movie basically projects the life of Modernism and the people. To me, it is rather boring (the Modern’s life, not the movie!) as things are so systematic and everyone seems to have their daily routines. For instance, the shot when people are working at the cubical offices that orientate in an extreme systematical way. It looks very boring to me, as everything is so perfect.
But I don’t mean to say that Tati want to project that the modern world is flawless and beautiful as the impersonal spaces he has shown in the movie doesn’t interact with the space in term of communication. It is designed to discourage individual thought and expression. As far as I am concerned, people cannot interact much because of the spaces themselves, so they have to end up changing it by their presence.
The film has been designed for people who has been given specific jobs, whether it is an officer, maid, or people in the apartment. I think it doesn’t look like a livable place at all as the satisfaction would be zero due to its unlikely dull environment. However, other people impose their own consciousnesses on it and mould it in order to make their environment livable.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น