What are the precise rules of each of the obstructions?
Obstruction #1:
- No single edit can be more than 12 frames
- Answers to the questions posed in the original narration
- Must be filmed in Cuba
- Leth cannot have a set
Obstruction #2
- Must be filmed in a miserable place
- Go close to harrowing things that Leth will refrain from filming/showing
- Leth must play the role of the man
- The meal must be there
Obstruction #3:
- Make a film with no rules or go back to Bombay
Obstruction #4:
- Make a cartoon
How does Jorgen cope with the obstructions?
Obstruction #1:
- Jorgen takes advantage of the limited frames to create rhythm and variety. Furthermore, he creates broader movement by playing certain sequences back and forth. The rhythm of the film is also complemented by the music in the background.
- Jorgen also copes with the 12 frames by adding different types of shots: long shots, medium shots, and close-up shots.
Obstruction #2:
- To minimize the obstruction of distance, Leth uses a transparent screen. He copes with obstructions in the project by taking advantage of objects which expands the possibilities of filmmaking to create meaning and depth.
- Leth films in Bombay which he interprets as the most miserable place on Earth.
- Leth exacerbates the misery of the setting by showing a pique contrast between his luxurious meal and the people behind the transparent screen.
- Leth came to the analytical thought of how going to the limits can turn fear into madness.
Obstruction #3:
- Leth copes with the third obstruction pretty well by the end because of the lack of documentation—lack of adaptation mapping.
- He also offers the “perfect film” for the “perfect human”. There is the use of narrative, juxtaposing images, and various shot types. Through this film, we see a lot of freedom.
Obstruction #4:
- Leth stated that he did not like cartoons and had no intentions of learning the technology and process. Thus, he consulted with Bob Sabiston for suggestions. Leth reached out for additional hands for his project to cope with an unfamiliar mode of production.
Obstruction #5:
- Besides showing some nervousness, Leth coped well with the last obstructions—even happy.
What is the effect on the movies he produces?
Each obstruction forced Leth to think outside the box and find innovative solutions which resulted in unique films that deviated from the original film The Perfect Human—it deviated from Leth’s clean, spare, and classical style. Furthermore, when comparing all five films, the style, mood, conditions, actors, and setting are all diverse and intriguing. Limitations can fuel creativity and lead to innovative outcomes. By imposing various obstructions on Leth, von Trier pushes him to think differently, adapt, and find new approaches to filmmaking. This highlights the importance of embracing constraints and using them as catalysts for artistic growth and exploration. The resulting films from The Five Obstructions were also able to utilize collaboration, artistic interpretation, and the subjective nature of creativity.
Additional notes:
General
- The Five Obstructions is a thought-provoking collaborative exercise between Leth and von Trier because it pushes the artist to utilize improvisation, problem-solving, and artistic innovation. It is very interesting to see how Jorgen adapts to his given conditions as a filmmaker and creator.
- This film is an observation and investigation of The Perfect Human in a white, empty room by asking questions such as “What does the perfect human think?”
- What is interesting to note is how von Trier exercises power over Leth in this film because Leth is 19 years his senior and also once his teacher. We can see how the perimeter of artmaking has expanded where power dynamics can be challenged and how this polarity can bring about new space for artistic expression. Furthermore, it shows the idea of this constant change in the artistic realm in which Leth encompasses the classical notions of filmmaking whereas von Trier possesses the art of obstruction due to his involvement in the Dogma movement—a new form of making. Therefore, art and filmmaking create a learning space.
Obstruction #1:
- The short 12-frame obstruction subverts the technique of long takes.
- As Leth states, he cannot find his soft spots, “things that hurt”, to determine the next obstruction. However, this is good insight into one of the purposes of this exercise and why as an artist it can be meaningful to get out of your comfort zone to explore the world—not just to explore but also to explore with obstruction. When artists explore new horizons, they often fall into the trap of having unlimited agency to decide how and what they want to approach. Ironically, I think obstructions are a very useful tool for artists to grow and explore more freely. This contradicts the notion that limitations come with a lack of freedom. I believe that by making obstructions, an artist is less likely to be restricted by themselves which will allow them to adopt new domains.
Obstruction #2:
- Leth is confronted with empathy which subverts the distanced observer.
- The frame provided an image area—framing of reality— as well as distance which was “concrete and incredibly subtle and artful”. This is an example of how a filmmaker can playfully adapt to the obstructing conditions of this project. We, as students, can contemplate the incredible potential of using objects as a means.
- Leth had to onscreen rather being behind the scenes which also is a very interesting challenge to face when it comes to the art of making—the aspect of collaboration and transfer of power.
- Von Trier discourages Leth from pushing his boundaries when it comes to the transparent screen, and he states that “this is therapy, not film competition with yourself”. Thus, von Trier highlights a very important factor of being a filmmaking and creator which is the process. Sometimes the process of filmmaking or artmaking is more gratifying than the finished product. Furthermore, by abiding by these obstructions and disregarding the goal of a perfect film, von Trier states that through goad, new understanding can emerge. Thus, this suggests another way for creators to find enlightenment—through limitation.
Obstruction #3:
- The freedom of the obstruction subverts the traditional rules.
- Surprisingly, making a film with no rules from von Trier proved to be more difficult for Leth than having some. This shows the complexity of freedom and how there needs to be a balance of freedom and responsibility. Limiting free will is sometimes more liberating than having unlimited positive freedom. In the grand scheme of things, we are challenged in our understanding of free will: Is it easier to be controlled or be in control? Is freedom an obstruction to humanity? Viewers may ponder about the state of nature and the reasons why we have social contracts that assert hierarchy and rulers.
- Similarly, the two friends also discussed how they enjoyed the idea of things going out of control rather than being in control or being controlled.
- Although in the final work, Leth presents a flawless film von Trier notes that all three films have not left a mark on Leth. None of the films have left a huge impression on Leth which is a pivotal aspect to consider when an artist creates their piece of work. “What do you take away from this project?” is a question worth thinking of as an artist.
Obstruction #4:
- Using cartoons, or an unfamiliar medium, subverts motivation.
- Leth consulted with Bob Sabiston for suggestions. This also shows more of the collaborative space of cartoon making.
- This obstruction ironically expands Leth’s scope because he has to encounter a medium which he has no experience with.
Obstruction #5:
- Von Trier interprets The FIve Obstruction as a “Help Jorgen Leth” project. Through this project, von Trier wanted to explore the question “What is Jorgen?” By imposing restrictions, Leth could become vulnerable
- The general aura of Leth, as I observe, has changed by the last obstruction. There exists a slow and beautiful transformation: Leth begins to laugh, smile, and wriggle. When one abandons, subverts, and challenges traditional notions, one can find the creative process energizing, provocative, and fun.
- Leth has always regarded the rules of the game as very vital—they are “limitations or self-flagellation”. Thus, Leth wanted to apply Leth’s testimony to Leth himself. In the last obstruction, we see von Trier “break” some of the rules which hopefully gave insight to Leth about what rulebreaking can entail.
- “As we all know, it’s the attacker who really exposes himself.” Von Trier wanted to see a mark being left on Leth, However, obstruction by obstruction, Leth is “happier and happier” and he continues to present his unwavering stance.
- “How does the perfect human fall?”
- Why does von Trier decide to credit Leth as the director? I believe that this transfer of ownership or narrative is aimed to suggest that Leth had won the battle in the end. His humanness as a perfect human had proven indestructible.
Final comment: Overall, I was extremely stunned at the attention-grabbing dialogue between Leth and von Trier. It gave a lot of insight into filmmaking and the art of making. It is a film that I wish to deeply reflect on more!