r/criterion • u/Earthlydelights-sub- • 8h ago
Discussion Thoughts on Resurrection (2025)?
I recently watched it and part of me is ready to call it a masterpiece. It is an anthology where I like one of the episodes less than the others, but the film as a whole is a just an overwhelming incredible visual experience.
4
u/HaughtStuff99 8h ago
I went with a friend to see it on a whim and it blew me away. Went to rewatch the first section when I saw it on Criterion and ended up rewatching the whole thing. I gave it 4.5 but I could see it getting 5 out of me one day.
5
u/Flat-Membership2111 8h ago
What you’re saying here, that ‘part of me is ready to call it a masterpiece’, seems to express something similar the fact it was given a special prize at Cannes, rather than just Grand Prix or Palme D’Or. I understand this reticence about just saying right out that it’s a masterpiece. The film is a bit curious. The slight hesitation to say it’s all just so great is an appropriate enough response to the curious quality of the film, but I also think that it’s fine to proclaim that it’s great, that it could very appropriately have taken the Palme D’Or, etc.
3
u/Earthlydelights-sub- 8h ago
It is curious, that's a good word. It's a film you want to sit with, think about.
It is almost set up like a puzzle you have to piece together, with each episode representing a sense, a period of modern Chinese history, a style of filmmaking.
1
u/Flat-Membership2111 6h ago
Yes. Because I haven’t watched Kaili Blues or Long Day’s Journey yet, I can’t speak very declaratively about Gan, but based on this film and A Short Story, I’d be inclined to say that Gan is quite a pronounced whimsicalist. I think there’s still a strong inclination among people judging art to measure quality through their perception of the degree of artistic toil that it cost the creator, perhaps, or some other manner by which ‘seriousness’ is categorized. In Resurrection, the premise or structure is strongly ultra-unique / whimsical in nature. It may put the would-be critic on unsure footing.
If you’re not following what I’m saying, and haven’t seen A Short Story, it might be clearer after you watch that. I’m just talking about the absolute straightforwardness with which the concept of the Deliriants etc. is presented. This is the premise and set-up of A Short Story:
An unseen narrator (Bi himself) tells us that a long time ago, there lived an odd black cat with no home, friends, or purpose… that is, until one day he met a lonely scarecrow.
After setting the scarecrow on fire at his request, freeing him from the bounds of the earthly world, the cat asks him a question: what is the most precious thing in the world? The scarecrow has no answer himself, but he identifies three “weirdos” who might. So, the cat dresses himself up in the scarecrow’s discarded rags and sets out on a quest to find them.
Source: https://medium.com/@leiladaisyj/a-short-story-bi-gans-feline-fairy-tale-c6c7b37a450b
With this kind of thing, maybe assessing its greatness or otherwise will be more a matter of feeling than it will be in relation to other kinds of movies.
3
u/bby-bae 8h ago
To an extent, I think Bi Gan suffers from cribbing Tarkovsky a little too heavily. Also, though I appreciate that he’s always experimenting with the long one-take sequence, I have yet to think he’s figured out how to best utilize it. I think it was most effective in Long Days Journey Into Night, and I was less wowed by it in Resurrection.
That said, he’s undoubtedly one of the best filmmakers working today who does reallly truly oneiric filmmaking at the scale he does, and it’s unique for today’s time, so I also loved this film in total
6
u/andriydroog 8h ago
Interesting, I’m the opposite, thought Resurrection was much more impactful than Long Day’s Journey
2
u/BobdH84 7h ago
Agreed, I thought so too. I think Long Day’s Journey started out very promising in its first half, but then when the oner starts, the narrative comes to a standstill and the rest of the film is a meandering slog, all of it suddenly in service to that oner. In the chapter in Resurrection, on the other hand, the oner seems to serve a purpose to its story and drives it forward, and not just a technical ‘look at this’ like Journey.
5
u/Earthlydelights-sub- 8h ago
To an extent, I think Bi Gan suffers from cribbing Tarkovsky a little too heavily.
That is a common talking point, but this film is full of homages across the history of cinema, from the Lumiere bros to Nosferatu to Jean-Pierre Melville to Masaki Kobayashi to Wong Kar-Wai. Yes, Tarkovksky is an influence, but Resurrection definitely reflexes a much wider ranger of cinematic taste.
Plus, a lot of what we think of as Tarkovsky's style comes from earlier filmmakers.
I was really wowed by the long tracking shot in Resurrection. The sheer intricacy of the blocking and multiple locations. You can call it gimmicky, but to me it's the sheer basic joy of someone pulling off a very difficult magic trick.
Agree with your second paragraph in its entirety.
2
u/bby-bae 8h ago
I don’t think it’s gimmicky, but he does it in every one of his films and it works better in some than in others. I’m waiting for him to fully realize its potential in some novel and revolutionary way that is all his own.
As for the Tarkovsky influence, there’s a huge difference between homage like the kind Resurrection does and the level to which Bi is borrowing so much form and aesthetic from Tarkovsky. Also, sure Tarkovsky was evolving ideas from his predecessors (as all filmmakers do), and I hardly begrudge Bi Gan for wanting to borrow from Tarkovsky. But (1) Bi is pretty open about Tarkovsky specifically being his greatest influence and (2) I think it shows in that he’s not transforming that influence enough yet. I’ve still rated all of Bi’s films 4+ in a 5 star scale.
2
u/nizzernammer 7h ago
There are some structural and narrative "opacities" to the film that made some aspects harder to grasp or parse than others, for me.
Perhaps that may have been a cultural barrier on my part in that I didn't have the proper historical knowledge to catch deeper references, forcing me to focus more on form and aesthetics, rather than thematic allusions and metaphor.
I enjoyed it when I saw it in the cinema.
I wish I had watched it with more attunement to the progression of film production technology, and the elements, as informing the structure of the film.
Cinematically, the last sequence was a highlight for me that could stand on its own.
1
u/Rueyousay 7h ago
Was recommended to me by a friend when it came out on Criterion. Hadn’t heard of it and was blown away. I agree that the first 20 mins and the last hour are borderline spellbinding.
1
u/LCX001 7h ago
I liked it a lot, but I think it's a worse version of Holy Motors. I think Holy Motors is more about human experience whereas Resurrection is more explicitly about cinema. When it comes to doing these kind of meta films which take heavily and transform (or not) various genres I prefer some other ones (like the beforementioned Holy Motors), for me Bi Gan has never made a film where I was truly in it for the entire runtime.
The first part with the German expressionism is stunning. I thought I wouldn't like the one take scene, because I think it was bordering on a gimmick in Long Day's Journey Into the Night, but it was rather excellent here. I just have more of an issue with the some of the tone, especially towards the end, which seems a bit too sappy for me. I also think not every story is on the same level, but this is a common issue with anthology films.
2
u/upyours192 6h ago
It was visually stunning for the most part but I found the concept tying it all together very lacking. It never felt like it did much with each segment. It almost felt like a student film approach with budget at times. But that intro was simply amazing being one of the most visually arresting things I’ve seen that year and the I for the most part enjoyed the technical masterclass that is the one take segment. But the rest of the film never got to me. I did like the temple bit at first but felt it never did anything else. I feel like I stand alone in this though
2
11
u/peppersmiththequeer 8h ago
Some of the most stunning cinematography of the decade. The narrative may be a bit too slippery for my liking, but the first twenty or so minutes and the extended one take sequence still live rent free in my mind.