An interview with Béla Tarr

"Film language itself is risky"

filmhu: Which films had a great influence on you?

B.T.: There are some that impressed me… I like films which bear the marks of the creator – only those are of timeless value.

If you see a single image from a Fellini film, you recognize at once it was made by Fellini, though you saw only a few seconds. The director’s personality and point of view is strongly present in the film. Style is an essential issue for me to feel the presence of the creator, to see this is the way he sees the world. I’m also very interested how Hitchcock used different techniques – something I may never use. Or what solutions were used by Bresson or Ozu. In case of Ozu the camera was placed lower and lower, and at the end he dug the camera into the ground. It is very exciting to see how things get deeper.

filmhu: I suppose this can first of all be observed in case of works of a lifetime. What kind of ‘deepening’ can be observed in your films?

B.T.: If we suppose that we do not like the world as it is, and if people have some kind of sensitivity, strength and activity, then they would like to change it. So they do not accept the fact that this is the best we can have. At the beginning I thought that real problems are of social nature and if we solved these social-political problems, then life would be better. But when I started to understand all this, I realized it was not true: this was not only about social problems. Problems are much deeper, they are of ontological nature in fact. As you sink deeper into the same circle, and get immersed deeper and deeper, then you can see how hopeless everything is. Then you also realize, this is not only about ontological problems, but about cosmological ones. You reach a point, when you discover nature and perspectives and then comes the infinitude of Satan’s Tango. As one’s way of thinking becomes more universal, as one get immersed in something more and more, the style of the film changes accordingly. One film comes from the other – in a stylistic sense. And thank God, these do no come from the outside, but from the inside. In Family Nest Werckmeister Harmonies can clearly be traced – even if it does not dominate it. We always use for example long monologues, I handle time differently, as usual, and dance and music also appear in my films. Or for example the way the enjoyment of life, as the illustrative mirror image of the quality of life is presented – if you check it in my films, then you can get a true picture of life.

filmhu: You and László Krasznahorkai said not long ago that in your films (and in Krasznahorkai’s novels) handling of time is not ‘slowliness’ but punctuality. I meant you talk about the exactness of perception, which seems not only an aesthetical statement, but also an ethical expectation.

B.T.: Yes, filming is a moral issue for me, and style is an essential part of morality. It is also a moral question what you want to make a film about. Not only what you want to show, but also what you leave out, that is what you do not want to talk about.
 

The Man from London

filmhu: I know you do not exactly care about how many people watch your films, but now that your latest film The Man From London is on at the cinemas, let me ask: what do your expect?

B.T.: You are right, for me the numbers are not of great importance. Though I always think that this film – and of course all of my films – will be very popular and a lot of peole will see it, as this film talks about things that are important for everyone. I always have the feeling if you don’t see it, you lose something or you do not pay full attention to certain things. Like what? For example to the way we live, or who we are. The viewers may have different social background, sensitivity, education, but all those who have a heart or eyes to see will be touched by this film.

For me films do not work as handkerchiefs: we use them, then throw them. Films are art obejects, whose life is longer than ours. There are works which survive us, and which will talk about us to our grandchildren. I always say: let’s see this film twenty years later, how it will work then. Satan’s Tango was made 14 years ago and it is still on at the cinemas all over the world. It is the same with Damnation, which was made 19 years ago and now it is watched by the third generation, who were born when we were shooting the film. So there is no problem at all.

filmhu: You do not make it very easy for the audience. Compared to Simenon’s novel where the story is very easy to follow, you omit a lot of things, you do not show only indicate many details.

B.T.: Not the story that matters. First of all, I respect my viewers as much as myself. If I do not like primitive, stupid, simple stories, then I won’t humiliate my audience with a story of this kind. Because I suppose the viewer is as smart and sensitive as me, so I have to make a great effort to present the best I can. I always have to do my best and have to speak supposing that the viewer is as céever or more clever than me. The other thing is storytelling. We talked about this last time: every story is the same. It is not worth caring much for telling a story. We shall not tell a story. There are things which are already known. We can omit them, because that is not the point. The point is whether fate is there in the characters’ eyes on the screen. There are big stories, but they can be authentic only if there are real human destinies presented in them. The point is how deep you can present or approach human fate. If you suceed in it, then you could do it.

filmhu: Ágnes Hranitzky the editor of the film is also the assistant director. What does it mean in this case?

B.T.: Nothing is decided without her. As in our case everything happens during shooting, we can’t exactly interfere in the material during the editing process. This film consists of 29 long cuts. Cutting, that is the structure, the rhythm, so everything is decided during shooting. Ági was there all the time and was supervising the shooting through a monitor and interrupted when it was necessary, as later it would have been impossible to make corrections. I took it seriously what Godard said once: a real director cuts through the camera. He said it in 1968 but never really meant it. For me, however, it is a matter of honour. Today, as I am growing older and older, perfectionism and accuracy of film language is of greater importance. A shot must be a shot, and a film must be made properly. Films of low standards irritate me, especially if they are exclusively about clumsiness. Of course a film can talk about it, like in case of Family Net, we did not have a script and we shot it with a black-and-white 16 mm camera, but we worked with real proletarians and we said: that’s the way it is! It was anarchical intentionally. The point was to make a rough film. We had passion. Of course we still have this passion, but by now it has become more noble.

filmhu: In case of The Man From London the most striking is that the figures are incredibly isolated. In this unpopulated small town fewer characters live than in Werkmeister Harmonies, where besides the crowds relatively few people roam the muddy streets...

B.T.: Frosty streets. It is about the cold...

filmhu:Yes. So in The Man From London the main character is very isolated just like everyone around him. Yet at the end he seems to be more than that, as he has an apparently important relationship with the wife of the man from London. Is that right?


The Man from London

B.T.: It is apology. That is the real punishment, to look into that woman’s eyes. And if someone is capable of that, then...He is not a bad man. What you are talking about is a simple thing: solitude. Everyone is lonely. The sea is on the one side, but it is impossible to go that way. At the end of your daily work, you go to the pub, then you go home, you eat, you sleep and that’s all. And though incredible, loneliness becomes part of this monotomy.

filmhu:Though you shot the film in Corsica and one may expect picturesque images, there are no shots of the sea. For example at the beginning of the film we can only see the bow of the ship for several minutes. It really feels like being walled in...

B.T.:The film is what it is talking about and we try to put it precisely. I do not want to mislead anyone.

filmhu: I must ask what your next film is about.

B.T.: You may ask it, but I won’t talk about it.

filmhu: You never talk about it.

B.T.: Yes, because it is impossible. At the end of Werckmeister Harmonies the old man goes up to the whale and look into its eyes. Is it possible to tell what he is feeling then? That is why it is good to make films.

filmhu:But you might arouse our interest...

B.T.: Well... we’ll see. What can I say about The Man From London? There’s this guy, who has this look. Because that is what the film is actually about. No words can describe it. Thank God. That is why it is worth making films, this is why a film is different.