Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 11 released July 24th)
Polls: 0 Official Lists (Results), 1960 (Results), Romance (Aug 28th)
Challenges: German/Austrian/Swiss, <400, 1970s
Film of the Week: Der Fan, September nominations (Aug 28th)
World Cup S4: Match 2H: India vs Cuba (Aug 16th), QF Preparation (Aug 25th)

Finis terrae (1929) FotW #302

Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 1834
Joined: Jul 17, 2013
Location: Chicago, USA

Finis terrae (1929) FotW #302


Post by Cocoa » October 13th, 2019, 4:19 pm

Film of the Week #302: Finis terrae (1929)


On an island off the coast of Brittany four isolated men collect seaweed. Two young best friends have a quarrel and when one's thumb becomes infected his friend must risk his life on the ocean to bring him to the doctor.

#735 on 1000<400, with 172 checks.
Nominated by blocho, Cocoa, and Minkin.
On iCM

From the 1000<400 resultsShow
#735(⇩253, #482) Finis terrae (1929)
Directed by: Jean Epstein
(201.88 Pts, 11 Votes) , Top 1–10–50: 0–0–1
History: 7354829338371882NA←NA
ICheckMovies: 169 Checks , 24 Favourites , 4 Official lists
List of Voters:Show
bjornam (25)
St. Gloede (57)
Dolwphin (NA)
russa03 (139)
rnilsson19 (169)
insomnius (NA)
perceval (204)
sushantv10 (209)
mathiasa (329)
joachimt (420)
Perception de Ambiguity (4190)

This movie fits the current They Shoot Pictures, Don't They? (+21st Century) Challenge.

Here is a schedule of all the FotWs.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Posts: 11037
Joined: May 06, 2011


Post by St. Gloede » October 13th, 2019, 7:10 pm

Been years since I saw it, but it is likely my favourite Epstein. The way the camera moves is absolutely incredible, and gives the story a simultaneously naturalistic and epic/magical atmosphere. An extraordinary experience.

User avatar
Posts: 7859
Joined: Jun 17, 2015
Location: Kakistani Left Coast


Post by xianjiro » October 17th, 2019, 7:37 am

Interesting watch though I'm a bit bewildered what camera moves so impressed St. G. Not saying they're not there; just that's not what impressed me about the camerawork. So let me start with that. There are occasional beautiful shots - a good mix of scenery and composition - but most of the time the camera is serving the story, not giving us lots of picture postcards of the view. What struck me almost instantly though was a sense that the cinematography was moving away from the silent era and towards a more modern concept of cinematography. Okay, let's be frank, there are plenty of shots where the subject is bang in the center of frame and pretty much fills the space, but there are also plenty of shots where someone (there are four cinematographers credited on the film, in addition to Epstein as director) is putting effort into composition. That was quite pleasing.

Another thing that will probably strike one is the movie doesn't have those horrible silent era actors who use such exaggerated gestures that the blind can see their emotions. There may have been one or two instances that were a bit exaggerated, but most of the time, the characters simply were. And were any of these non-professional actors even in makeup? I certainly didn't notice and it's one of the big creeps I have with silents - those black lips! Anyway, I thought the acting worked really well in telling the story. And it's probable the actors wore their own clothes as well. So there's a serious feeling of authenticity in the work.

As for the story, it mostly works though there are
some issues:Show
1) Characters bemoaning the lack of wind, cut, ribbon on women's bonnets flapping in the stiff breeze. Yes, there are days were even offshore islands and headlands are becalmed, but not a lot, so while it's important to the story, Mother Nature wasn't cooperative.

2) This was made pre-penicillin. While I'll buy a young guy not paying attention to a wound; given their line of work, I really think the older guys would have been watching out for any sign of injury. Why? For exactly the reasons the movie shows: small wounds can cost fingers or arms if not cared for.

3) Epstein makes an issue of the mothers, upon introduction in the story, not getting along. I wasn't quite sure what was meant by this. Does any little slight - like a dropped bottle of wine or misplaced pocketknife - reopen an inter-generational rift between next door neighbors and young men who are stuck on an uninhabited island for three months during the summer become enemies? Or are we supposed to be more moved by the women coming together when they are worried? Not that it matters in the end, but I spent plenty of time wondering what was up with that.

4) In the second to last shot, I couldn't tell if the mothers were telling the doctor, "Go, we'll take care of him." or pawing at the man as if to say, "Don't leave him ... " If that latter, that's totally unbelievable given the circumstances in which the story is set.
No deal breakers, but they did pull me away from the story.

On this being included on a list of documentaries, I find myself wondering what gives. It's clearly narrative in structure though I understand based on real events. Are the actors the actual people recreating their own story? Or were the voters pointing to this film as influential to the genre? Anyway, don't go in expecting a documentary or even docu-drama: this was pretty straight-up drama.

All in all, an enjoyable watch even if I tend to over think things a bit. It certainly is 'better than average' for the silent era, but when taken as a whole and rating against my system, I'd judge it just better than average: a strong 7, but not strong enough to make 8 stars.

Listen, Daddy. Teacher says, 'every time a car alarm bleeps, into heaven a demon sneaks.'
sol can find me here

User avatar
Posts: 1834
Joined: Jul 17, 2013
Location: Chicago, USA


Post by Cocoa » October 18th, 2019, 8:23 pm

While I wasn't swept away by the combo of the acting/storytelling/plot (and I don't think it deserves a spot on the Sight and Sound -The Greatest Documentaries of All Time list because it definitely feels like a narrative and nothing about the film makes it appear to be a documentary), a lot of scenes in the film were beautifully shot. I loved the coastal landscape shots (although I wasn't a fan of some of the closeups on people and foggy boat scenes). I'm not surprised to learn that there were four cinematographers working on the film because there is a difference in cinematography quality between certain kinds of scenes. Overall, I liked the film but I don't love it enough to put on my own list.

Post Reply