|
|
Relations between architecture and cinematography could be divided into two main streams: analysis (criticism) of architecture through the film medium and a film study in the light of architectural discourse. While the previously cited examples seem more to interpret ”the architectural space of a film”, the deconstruction theme is rather borrowed from architecture. And it is neither about scenery related specific style references, nor about further quotations from Derrida. There is even no time analogy. If deconstruction was seen as a play with convention or audience, the New Wave concept should be recalled. But in this case it is not Godard to be the starting point. While looking for parallels between architectural deconstruction and its film image, I think of Antonioni, called, no coincidentally, ”an architect of space and time”. His films such as: ”The adventure”, ”Blowup” and ”Eclipse” are a pure game played with the viewer. Sometimes it’s even annoying - the idea of plot fragmentation is like a ”disassembled architecture’ of deconstructionists. There is no harmony of reality and no obviousness of events. Antonioni breaks with an obligatory film narrative, just like Zaha Hadid breaks with a typical, spatial narrative of a building. A contractual, architectural division into rooms or floors is reflected in “The Adventure” by a contractual chronology of events or a need of continuation. While it is difficult to talk about Antonioni referring to the deconstruction idea (the time difference in favor of the director), it’s modern architects who refer to the director’s artwork. Zumthor explicitly admits to relate to the ”film landscape” and its objects, often filled with emptiness, remind perfectly static Antonioni's scenes, where architecture - an element of contemplation - is just as time, people, events, another element of reality.
|
