Just viewed Another Earth which I chose in all innocence, not knowing a thing about it except a bit of information from a description that intrigued me. I chose wisely. Hopefully you are reading these comments after you have viewed the film. While reviewers here are, for the most part, on the money, and aren't overly expository, this is a story that is, above all, honest.
Many years ago, I read a NY Times magazine article discussing the talent of actress Glenda Jackson, in which the comment was made that she, like any great actor, is honest in her expression. I've learned two things about acting: The first is that acting is not pretending, is certainly not lying. Then that each of us is an actor, just perhaps not as professional or expert at it as some. But we act every day, we express ourselves, we connect, we experience. It really is much less complex than one might think.
I highly recommend reading co-writer/star Brit Marling's biography at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1779870/bio. My sense is that she is primarily responsible for the story, and that director Cahill enhanced the project by contributing his filmmaking talents. A quote from the actress on IMDb: On why she decided to become a screenwriter in relation to her being an actress -- "How terrifying to surrender your life to being chosen all the time. Having to be chosen and re-chosen. Writing so that I can act became a way of having not more control over my future but not having to wait for permission. You can choose yourself." There's the honesty. I'm all I have, but that connects me to everything.
I do not appreciate only two comments from reviewers: The cinematography is just right. Home movie style (or more professional when appropriate. Film is eclectic, and this is most amazing when it works, for story is always most important, and to have so many tools at the fingertips to share a story does provide a challenge. Actually, the truth is that two of my favorite directors began as cinematographers: Peter Weir and Nicolas Roeg (I find it curious that they're both Australian, but then it seems that all of the world's most popular religions originated in desert-like environments).
I too was wondering how the two-earth thing might be handled, especially since I have a long-term interest in physics, have photographed what anyone might call "ghosts," and have had experiences that, if shared, might cause anyone to label me as "nutso," "crazy," or simply "bananas." Then two thoughts occurred: One is that physics could be responsible for helping us human beings to learn more about how to be more human, and know more about why we even conceived of gods. Second to this, and more important for this film, is that no matter how big or small the earth-2 is in various shots, it's just like real life --- we use our personal filters to view the world, and now we are experiencing another's filters, that is, becoming involved in their story. The lack of fleshed out physics serves only to highlight the quite honest performances, the heart of the story. In any case, the science serves to support one of, for me, the truths of life: Life is a dialog, and the participants are, of course, you and your experiences and, of course, all those human beings in your life and, of course, the mystery.
If you think about it (not too hard) we really don't want an ending to the story. One of the achievements of this film (and I think this is Brit Marling's contribution) is the great tension created, like in the best adventure stories that, in the end, are not so much resolved as given new life. We are given permission to own it. The rest is up to each of us.
Greg McCormick Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Many years ago, I read a NY Times magazine article discussing the talent of actress Glenda Jackson, in which the comment was made that she, like any great actor, is honest in her expression. I've learned two things about acting: The first is that acting is not pretending, is certainly not lying. Then that each of us is an actor, just perhaps not as professional or expert at it as some. But we act every day, we express ourselves, we connect, we experience. It really is much less complex than one might think.
I highly recommend reading co-writer/star Brit Marling's biography at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1779870/bio. My sense is that she is primarily responsible for the story, and that director Cahill enhanced the project by contributing his filmmaking talents. A quote from the actress on IMDb: On why she decided to become a screenwriter in relation to her being an actress -- "How terrifying to surrender your life to being chosen all the time. Having to be chosen and re-chosen. Writing so that I can act became a way of having not more control over my future but not having to wait for permission. You can choose yourself." There's the honesty. I'm all I have, but that connects me to everything.
I do not appreciate only two comments from reviewers: The cinematography is just right. Home movie style (or more professional when appropriate. Film is eclectic, and this is most amazing when it works, for story is always most important, and to have so many tools at the fingertips to share a story does provide a challenge. Actually, the truth is that two of my favorite directors began as cinematographers: Peter Weir and Nicolas Roeg (I find it curious that they're both Australian, but then it seems that all of the world's most popular religions originated in desert-like environments).
I too was wondering how the two-earth thing might be handled, especially since I have a long-term interest in physics, have photographed what anyone might call "ghosts," and have had experiences that, if shared, might cause anyone to label me as "nutso," "crazy," or simply "bananas." Then two thoughts occurred: One is that physics could be responsible for helping us human beings to learn more about how to be more human, and know more about why we even conceived of gods. Second to this, and more important for this film, is that no matter how big or small the earth-2 is in various shots, it's just like real life --- we use our personal filters to view the world, and now we are experiencing another's filters, that is, becoming involved in their story. The lack of fleshed out physics serves only to highlight the quite honest performances, the heart of the story. In any case, the science serves to support one of, for me, the truths of life: Life is a dialog, and the participants are, of course, you and your experiences and, of course, all those human beings in your life and, of course, the mystery.
If you think about it (not too hard) we really don't want an ending to the story. One of the achievements of this film (and I think this is Brit Marling's contribution) is the great tension created, like in the best adventure stories that, in the end, are not so much resolved as given new life. We are given permission to own it. The rest is up to each of us.
Greg McCormick Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania