I liked the subtext of the movie until I read Shane Carruth’s interpretation of it in an interview. My reading of it was a bit more profound and complex than what he intended it to be. I was a bit disappointed. Then I understood what Derrida meant when he said that the author is dead. The author better stay dead. Otherwise he can be a nuisance and a disconcerting presence between the reader and the text. We all read into things what we want to see. We see our own vulnerabilities and preoccupations mirrored into every piece of art and that’s when we love it. As someone said, you cannot be moved by an idea unless you already agree to it subconsciously. So my advice to writers and film makers is- never talk about your work. Never talk about what you intended or what you are trying to convey. Make it. And just get out of the way.
Finally when I caught up with UKKP, it proved to be a worthwhile experience. Ideally, behind-the-scene stories of a film should remain behind the screen only. Also judging a film should not be influenced by a concession for the limitations of the film makers. But UKKP is one of those films where knowing the back story can make a lot of difference. With this film, I learned an important lesson. No film stands in isolation of the physical realities of its making. Be it a big budget studio project or an indie project, the logistical realities will heavily influence the story and theme. In UKKP, this issue takes a much more radical realisation; thats all. Continue reading