Magellan

This is annoying to say, but I do highly reccomend checking out some of Diaz's other stuff first. One of the most interesting aspects of Magellan to me is how Diaz communicates with his own style, in fact, I'm not even certain I would have had as good an experience with this without a auteuristic context. I mentioned this passingly in my first review, but a Diaz film is so recognisable for its intimidating form (his durational lengths, his unforgiving digital black-and-white, his embrace of cheap technological aesthetic, say, noise), and Magellan, immediately tosses this off. It's been referred to as his 'most accessible film', favouring an commercial-friendly runtime, gorgeous colour, and clean, open image. I think this would be a mistake to describe as Diaz shaking off his identity, a compromise, and not a deliberate choice, as It's a sacrifice that comes with something new. Whilst Diaz's films have often appeared formally inaccessible, his narrative interest as often a deceptively simple one. Sometimes non-linear, often hyperlinked, but always clear, and character-driven. Once again, Diaz flips the script, this time favouring a much more intimidating approach to narrative. The narrative of Magellan is evidently not Diaz's priority to convey - events happen, and in order, but they are rushed out of the spotlight. This becomes intertwined with the form, which often becomes the new priority, over event communication or character. Most distinctly, the formal shape of the film is made of up a series of consistently-paced, still, wide shots. These shots very often do not have sequential relation to each other, skipping time and place, and even when they do, the starkness of the cut often separates that cause-event relationship. This is the death of shot/reverse-shot. For this reason, I've been thinking of this formal style as a 'postcard style', a series of independent images, which you can breathe in separately, a style prevalent in many non-commercial films (36 feels like the obvious example that jumps to mind, but the Walker series, 24 Frames, The Zone of Interest all seem comparable). The postcards de-centralise narrative in multiple ways - they ensure actions happen in wide, as part of surroundings, as well as creating a Haneke-esque elilipticality to time, avoiding moments where action would be too much. Not only this, but as odd as it is to see Diaz embrace a seemingly one-man story (as much as I earlier described Diaz narratives as character-driven, he is typically a filmmaker that I find drives with multiple characters, and community) Magellan fundamentally isn't really the main character at all. It is his story we follow, but the perspective discards him when it wants to, finding interest in other things, and discovers him along the way again, multiple times. That the character was important at all to the narrative is not a sentiment I felt frequently, and when I did was in the few uncertain moments I felt on the first watch. Of those uncertain moments - I'm talking especially about the wife visions - on a second watch I was more excited by them, and the concept of them representing the slightly unfinished nature of this film, with the 9 hour Beatriz-focused cut on the way. There is a strange complexity to my relationship with the quality of this film, which is that I suspect it may be overshadowed in quality by the longer 'spin-off' cut, just from what little I've heard about it, and could grasp from this version. They will be very different films, certainly but if what Diaz has been hinting at in interviews is true... oh man are we in for some cinema.