preview

Inception: The 1966 Film Blow-Up

Better Essays

The greatest pieces of abstract work either allow the viewer to create their own interpretation or require a clear explanation the artist; the 1966 film Blow-Up is no exception. Both the editing choices and mise-en-scène throughout the film, by the final scene the audience is left with great uncertainty. Quite similar to Inception (Christopher Nolan) or One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (Miloš Forman), viewers question the reality of events or even characters. Without clear declaration Antonioni causes the viewer to question the events witnessed. Presumptively, the main curiosity from the viewer pertains to the final scene where our main character, Thomas (David Hemmings), seems to vanish from the same field shown during the opening credits. …show more content…

The common use for engaging with cinema is the ability to escape your everyday life and experience someone else’s. It is no wonder then that we wish to accept what we are presented with as reality and nothing more. As mentioned before, the conclusion of Inception leaves audiences hanging not know what reality the movie finishes in we are left in. This idea is represented in Blow-Up in the closing scene, where we find Thomas in the park throwing what we assume to be an invisible tennis ball back to the mimes followed by him then dissolving from the field. The significance of the assumed tennis ball calls to attention what reality the film finishes in. Throughout the film we expect to be placed in Thomas’ reality, which at times is extremely scattered and evidently stressful. While a seemingly insignificant scene, Thomas explains to two women asking for a photoshoot that he literally has no time, even for self-care with the example of him mentioning needing to remove his appendix. In this moment the silent acknowledgement to stress causing mental instability possibly causing an alteration in his perception of reality. Shortly after his encounter with the women, Thomas drives to an antique shop to break away from his photoshoot. While he is looking around, the employee questions what he is looking for, to which Thomas replies that he is looking for landscapes. Again, as insignificant seeming as the previous …show more content…

After he registers that it must be her she vanishes, which could be the catalyst event sending him further down the rabbit hole. During his adventure searching for Jane, he finds himself in a concert located in a back ally venue. This is a particularly curious scene to witness as all but two of the concertgoers are seemingly lifeless until Thomas’ presence disrupts the environment. After he gives up the search for Jane he continues on with his trip to meet with Ron. Once he arrives at the party hosted by Peter the audience becomes more disoriented both in truth and the remaining events. Once Thomas finds Peter, he informs him of the murder in the park and states he was with the body earlier. The model he photographed earlier that day, Veruschka von Lehndorff, sends Thomas’ reality into question by implying that they are no longer in London but actually in Paris. Thomas continues discussing the corpse in the park with Ron, who is clearly disinterested, but after some time Ron finally asks Thomas what is was he saw in the park to which he replies “nothing.” By his reply to what he saw leaves room for the audience to question if there really was nothing. Ron signals Thomas to speak with him in a back room, giving the initial impression that the two may come to a conclusion about the body, but the next time we see Thomas, we are unsure of the events from the previous

Get Access