Customer Reviews

Orson Welles' The Trial

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

It was only after I purchased this that I realized a copyright claim was never made on this film and it has always been in the public domain, meaning there are innumerable "bootlegs" floating around of inferior quality of which this is one, whereas in 2000 Milestone Film & Video released a restored version based on the original negative. While this DVD delivers the goods, the quality is pretty bad, there's not even a proper menu to the film, the sound and picture quality are very average and there are no extra features whatsoever. Considering this is just an inferior dub for which the DVD maker would have had to pay $0 in licensing fees, the list price of $15.99 is hefty indeed. I'd seek out the restored original and stay away from bootlegged copies like this

What The Trial lacks in comprehension (purposely at that) it makes up for in cinematography, set design, art direction and music. Essentially a nightmare tale, Joseph K. slowly comes to madness as his accusation for some unknown crime leads him into the abyss of a legal system, full of strange, abusive, mysterious, confusing people.
As a film I couldn't sit through it at once, I had to get up and return a couple times because the convoluted situation makes it hard to follow. This aspect is surely purposeful, Welles is a master of storytelling and images, and the production itself proves amazing.
I would highly recommend this for it's adaptation of Kafka's posthumous story, beautiful and horrible direction, cinematography, set and art direction and music.

I found a lot to adore in The Trial, but just as much to furrow my brow over. The cinematography is stunning; full of visual metaphor and gorgeous photography, it's an unyielding show of moviemaking expertise. Welles plays up the bleak, "no tomorrow" nature of the exterior scenes, the structured chaos of the workplace and the hedonistic excess exhibited by the various stages of the trial itself, each to great effect. The story, though, feels too flighty and nebulous for my taste. It should come as no surprise, being a translation of a Kafka novel, that the entire picture often feels surreal and confusing. It continuously floats and sputters just beyond the grasp of understanding, like a moth delicately avoiding a set of flailing hands. The premise may have been established nicely during the slightly more straightforward opening scenes, but as the duration grows it becomes too ambitiously ambiguous for its own good.

I HOV 2 WOTCH DIS MOO V 4 CLAZZZ N DA DISK SKIPZ LOTS KANT WACH!!!! HOWE AM I R 2 DO PROJEKT IF NO C MOOOV? TELLL MEEEEEE!

MAYBE THIS MOVIE DIDN'T MAKE MUCH SINCE WHEN IT WAS REVIEWED,BUT TODAY
IT IS THINGS TO COME.

I really don't think this works. Is it deep and meaningful, just because it borrows from Kafka? The theme of `man against an uncaring bureaucracy' only works if you are drawn into the life of the main character, which I wasn't. (Yes I know this isn't all its about.) Surrealism wasn't just stringing a few illogical, off beat ideas together. I don't think this film is thought provoking or surreal to have sets furnished with stacks of rubbish newspapers and other documents. What was the purpose behind a whole bunch of candles decorating a set? In the end I really don't care if that is supposed to mean anything or not.

There are some very good actors in this film, Anthony Perkins for one. Orson Welles as K's legal advocate, is commanding, especially the way wells uses his fabulous voice, but why is he in bed the whole time? Look, I know that there are answers to that, but they are ridiculous, and it just doesn't add to the Kafkaesque. If this is supposed to be a sort of existential psychological thriller; then just doesn't work. Where is the frustration, the torment and the mental anguish? I've been put through far worse trials teaching for the Victorian education department!

The cinematography is reminiscent of, but not as good as `The red desert' by Michelangelo Antonioni, which was produced around the same time. The film quality in `The Trial' varies enormously; really sharp images of portraits and some great shots of eyes, but any wider shots are out of focus. The contrast varies badly and attempts at dramatic, back lit, rim lighting for example, are just too subtle for the quality of the film's cinematography to pull off.

Now about the audio: There is some really nice music in this film, classical and jazz. I don't know what went wrong with the recording of the dialogue but it sounds like it has been dubbed! The `office' scenes remind me of `Brazil' by Terry Gilliam, and whilst it isn't the same film; `Brazil' does a much better job at very similar kinds of themes. For me `The Trial' is just trying far too hard to be deep and meaningful.