Movie Review: Cave of Forgotten Dreams

[3113]

I don't know how to give you guys a review or rating on this one. It's a documentary by Werner Herzog. If I had my way, I'd take this man's camera away from him. Forever. I'll get back to that. The problem is that the documentary is about this cave found in France that contains all this amazing artwork, arguably the oldest human artwork ever found, and thanks to the condition of the cave (there was a rock slide that sealed the main entrance something like 25,000 years), this cave artwork is in pristine condition. The French government barely lets anyone in and when they do, those going in can only stay for a very brief time.

So, you see, this is it. If you want to see these drawings--meaning, not as pictures online but like you're wandering through the cave yourself--you have to see the movie. Unless you've got a lot of pull with the French government. This cave is locked up with a steel door on its one opening. I wanted to metaphorically walk through that cave and see the paintings, and so I went to see the documentary.

Oh. My. God. This director makes the sort of documentaries that people who make mock documentaries mock! Utterly ridiculous! The "good" is that you get to see all the artwork and the cave itself, which is wonderful. The bad is, frankly everything else. Most of the experts who discuss the art and paleolithic man are as emotional, sentimental, and prone to flights of fancy as the director is (one woman argues that the image of a female pubic area near the image of a bison is like Picasso's Lady & the Minotaur--and here I was thinking it was just naughty graffiti ); there's a lot of weird surmises and noble savage shit.

Meanwhile the director narrates the thing as if it's the Seventh Seal and asks penetrating questions like: "But all you know are these facts. What about the people? Did they laugh? Cry? Fall in love?" Aaarrrggg! Included in this film is, I kid you not, an ex-French perfumer who looks like Rodney Dangerfield and discusses how the cave might have smelled, a European archeologist wearing furs who recreated a bone flute and plays the Star Spangled Banner on it, and albino crocodiles. Don't ask.

All in 3-D. Surreal doesn't begin to cover it. And yes, by the end I was laughing my ass off, it's gotten so absurd. But the cave paintings are amazing, and when the film maker shuts up and doesn't get in the way of them with his stupid pondering on life, the universe and everything, you can really sit back and admire how those artists captured their world on cave walls.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Well, forewarned is forearmed, I guess. I really want to see the images. Maybe if I just took a set of headphones and put on some Tuvan throat singing or Tibetan chants it would work better. From what I've read about the film, Herzog is entirely under the spell of the most fatuous of French paleontologists (and that's a long rant in itself!) so don't expect much in the way of sensible interpretation of the cave art. Outside of France, the general opinion is that cave paintings were an attempt to bridge the gap between our 'false' world and the 'real' world of the spirits. I believe Herzog alludes to this, to give him credit, but so many of the French intellectuals have historically been opposed to such interpretations. They didn't come up with it, is the problem. But it's only 30 minutes long and I've put up with 30 minutes of idiocy before without loosing my grip or going postal. I still want to see the images . . .

 

[3113]

Well, forewarned is forearmed, I guess. I really want to see the images. Maybe if I just took a set of headphones and put on some Tuvan throat singing or Tibetan chants it would work better. From what I've read about the film, Herzog is entirely under the spell of the most fatuous of French paleontologists (and that's a long rant in itself!) so don't expect much in the way of sensible interpretation of the cave art. Outside of France, the general opinion is that cave paintings were an attempt to bridge the gap between our 'false' world and the 'real' world of the spirits. I believe Herzog alludes to this, to give him credit, but so many of the French intellectuals have historically been opposed to such interpretations. They didn't come up with it, is the problem. But it's only 30 minutes long and I've put up with 30 minutes of idiocy before without loosing my grip or going postal. I still want to see the images . . .

Actually, he does go with that premise almost exclusively: that the art is a bridge between spirit world and real world, and that all this art is spiritual, spiritual, spiritual. Did I mention spiritual? I had trouble with this. For example, some of the art involves duplicates or doubling up on the legs and such and it gets pointed to as if it's trying to show animals moving--and some of it may be doing that. Why not? But It sure looks like a lot of the images were just an artist drawing something, then not liking that and drawing it again, then thinking of something better and drawing it again...

I know a lot of artists. Not the sort that have gallery showings, the sort that draw for a living. I see a lot of the sketchbook on these walls. And why not? I'm sure Paleolithic man was spiritual, I'm sure he worshiped totem animals and busty women, I'm sure he created art to honor the divine and connect with it. I'm also pretty sure that like every other artists who's ever lived he doodled, experimented, re-drew, and sketched. Why does every single one of these frigging drawings have to be a spiritual connection? Maybe the person was just working, over and over again, on getting the horse just right!

Oh, and it's not 30 minutes. It's an hour-and-a-half. Enjoy!

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Actually, he does go with that premise almost exclusively: that the art is a bridge between spirit world and real world, and that all this art is spiritual, spiritual, spiritual. Did I mention spiritual? I had trouble with this. For example, some of the art involves duplicates or doubling up on the legs and such and it gets pointed to as if it's trying to show animals moving--and some of it may be doing that. Why not? But It sure looks like a lot of the images were just an artist drawing something, then not liking that and drawing it again, then thinking of something better and drawing it again...

I know a lot of artists. Not the sort that have gallery showings, the sort that draw for a living. I see a lot of the sketchbook on these walls. And why not? I'm sure Paleolithic man was spiritual, I'm sure he worshiped totem animals and busty women, I'm sure he created art to honor the divine and connect with it. I'm also pretty sure that like every other artists who's ever lived he doodled, experimented, re-drew, and sketched. Why does every single one of these frigging drawings have to be a spiritual connection? Maybe the person was just working, over and over again, on getting the horse just right!



Oh, and it's not 30 minutes. It's an hour-and-a-half. Enjoy!

Okay, 90 minutes of tribal music in the iPod, coming up! I'll bet you're pretty much on with the idea of sketching some and seriously drawing some. I don't want to think how many trees have died supporting my sketch pads so I understand completely. My take on this is that those images that essentially take a natural formation and turn it into an animal are the real shamanic deal. But not all of them are. Some are just painted on flat surfaces. Those I have difficulties accepting as spirit beings transitioning between worlds.

And don't tell me that busty, naked women images are The Goddess Incarnate. If I were a Paleolithic hunter all full of fresh meat and testosterone, six feet tall and muscled like a modern decathlete, I expect I'd be one horny SOB. Yeah, bring 'em on, those Wartburg venuses!

 

[TE999]

I heartily agree with the concept and I'd love to see the paintings, but there seems to be three problems with this film: 1) It's narrated by French auteurs, 2) They seem to be more interested in bloviating than giving a coherent narration, and 3) It's a French film and the French are given to flights of fancy unseen outside of their own cinema.

The tour would have been better served as a National Geographic Special narrated by Alexander Scourby (RIP...unfortunately).

 

[3113]

I heartily agree with the concept and I'd love to see the paintings, but there seems to be three problems with this film: 1) It's narrated by French auteurs, 2) They seem to be more interested in bloviating than giving a coherent narration, and 3) It's a French film and the French are given to flights of fancy unseen outside of their own cinema.

Actually, you're being too hard on the French there. The film's a European movie made, written and narrated by an existential and fairly dour German director interviewing a lot of sentimental French archeologists. So, not a French film narrated by French auteurs, but that certainly doesn't stop the film from bloviating and going in some weird directions (albino crocodiles...)

 

[TE999]

Actually, you're being too hard on the French there. The film's a European movie made, written and narrated by an existential and fairly dour German director interviewing a lot of sentimental French archeologists. So, not a French film narrated by French auteurs, but that certainly doesn't stop the film from bloviating and going in some weird directions (albino crocodiles...)

A dour German director (a bit of an oxymoron there)...that's even worse...and existential to boot! Reading Nietzsche has been known to induce comas. Other than the images...which are the focus of the film...the rest of it sounds horrible...up to and including sentimental Frenchmen speculating on what the cave painters must have been thinking.

"Let me finish this bison, Thudd, then I'll join your cave bear hunt."

 

[amicus]

Chuckles, 3113, we may have finally reached agreement on something.

It has been some time now since I watched this on television, but I am quite sure it is the self same film you are referencing.

I am always tempted to give the benefit of doubt to attempts to interpret ancient artifacts as it is certainly a difficult task and requires a tremendous background of information and knowledge just to recognize what one is looking at.

There is a film...ah...."Local Color", if memory serves, with a bit about artwork created by mentally challenged children being judged by a so-called art expert. It was hilarious!

ami

 

[JackLuis]

Did they show the cave as well lit and modern, or lit by flickering pine root torches? It probably had a different feel in torchlight?

Drawing placement in the cave may have had some relevance as well.

How many artists? One practicing artist, living alone in a cave to ease his spirit, or a handful of artists over many years? Or, did the French address the practical?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The images were painted over decades and probably centuries, just as at Lascaux. I believe the film attempts to replicate the Paleolithic lighting but you'll have to check with 3113 to make sure.

 

[3113]

Did they show the cave as well lit and modern, or lit by flickering pine root torches?

You don't understand. This cave and its paintings are considered so rare and precious (and rightly so!) that visitors have to be vetted and only about six-to-ten are allowed in; they have to follow a shitload of rules, like they can only stay in the cave for an hour, must stick to single-file walkways, and can only shine "cool" lights on the paintings. Ain't no way the French gov's gonna let torchlight in there or even light it with a bunch of modern electrics. When the people go in, the door is locked behind them and all they've got are the lights in their hands.

They do try to move the lights to suggest what torchlight might have looked like on the images, but it's not real successful.

How many artists? One practicing artist, living alone in a cave to ease his spirit, or a handful of artists over many years? Or, did the French address the practical?

VM's right about many artists over time, but not quite right about the "over decades or possibly centuries." Over THOUSANDS of centuries as it turns out. At least one drawing was done 5000 years later than the others.

As for the one artist--there IS one identifiable artist who literally made his mark all over the cave. He put his palm prints across one wall in the area of what would have been the entrance, and so he's been identified as an individual (possibly not a "he" but they insist that from the height of some of the prints he was 6". I happen to think he was only 3" and sat on someone's shoulders ). That palm-print signature of his is found throughout the cave. But it seems clear that there were other artists, not just him, though he might have been the, well, teacher? Master painter? Art Critic? Your guess is as good as mine.

 

[trysail]

Over the course of a long, distinguished career, Werner Herzog has made some fabulous films ( Grizzly Man (2005), is one I'll never forget as long as I live ). Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972), Woyzeck (1979), and Fitzcarraldo (1982) are others that are held in high regard.

Grizzly Man is not for the squeamish. If you are one of those folk who think of teddy bears ( or VM! ) when you think of bears, you probably don't want to see this portrait of a slightly deranged Timothy Treadwell.

There is good reason that access to the cave is restricted. The paintings at Lascaux were damaged by artificial light and the exhalations that mobs of humans introduced.

...The cave [ Lascaux ] was discovered on September 12, 1940 by four teenagers, Marcel Ravidat, Jacques Marsal, Georges Agnel, and Simon Coencas, as well as Marcel's dog, Robot. The cave complex was opened to the public in 1948. By 1955, the carbon dioxide* produced by 1,200 visitors per day had visibly damaged the paintings. The cave was closed to the public in 1963 in order to preserve the art...The breathing of 1,200 visitors per day, presence of lighting and changes in air circulation have created a number of problems. In the late 1950s appearance of lichens and crystals on the walls led to closure of the caves in 1963. This led to restriction of access to the real caves to a few visitors every week...

* N.B., I disagree with this Wiki's attribution of the damage to carbon dioxide; it was human-induced humidity { H2O(g) } from exhalation and not carbon dioxide that created the problem.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Herzog
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly_Man
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascaux