Review of The Sensation of Sight (2006) by Damian C — 21 May 2010

?Sensation of Sight? tells the story of Finn, a man who is overwhelmed by a tragic event, the exact nature of which remains a mystery until the end of the film. This personal storm destroys his inner compass and leaves him drifting without a sense of purpose. He resolves to leave career, home, and family and set out on the quest for ?Why??

Aaron J. Wiederspahn the American writer/director of this film weaves a tapestry of seemingly disparate lives, which are all connected just under the surface. The film is divided into 4 sections, called verses, plus a prologue and epilogue. Upon this loom the story is slowly woven until the final pattern is revealed in a powerful climactic moment. Throughout the film the director employs long takes and sustained moments, while he manages to eschew cliché and go against the audience?s expectations. For any film, this would be its crowning achievement, but ?Sensation? holds us close and thus gradually pulls the audience into its world and characters.

Each section begins with a black and white memory. These are not so much flashbacks as psychic imprints of moments too painful or joyous to forget. Without allowing us a crutch of information with which to protect ourselves and form judgments, Wiederspahn refrains from manipulating us, but rather treats us as equals?which may actually disturb the audience member who likes to ?get it? immediately. But this isn?t the same old film stencil. We are allowed into a man?s private thoughts, into his world, and through him, into the lives of others. However, structure alone could not sustain us through a prolonged period when we have more questions than answers. The characters generate the interest and therefore the patience to wait?the patience to be open and curious. Released from the understanding of the full context of the characters? behavior we are free to admire the humor and strangeness of everyday moments.

David Strathairn [Academy Award nominee for Best Actor for ?Good Night and Good Luck?] develops a physicality for his character, Finn, that expresses thoughts that remain unspoken as effectively as it sustains the spoken dialogue. He is sure footed but burdened; meticulous and methodical but lost in his own logic. The acting becomes invisible, as Strathairn morphs into Finn. For Strathairn [Finn is] ?a bit of a fool?not a silly person, but a fool in the tradition of the great fools who are out there slipping on banana peels ? and laughing about it?or like Beckett?s great image of a man face down in the mud laughing.?

?A Prologue to ?Why? begins with a blurry black and white memory, a sad dispute between a husband and wife. The audience doesn?t know why there is sadness and confusion, but we are allowed through an uninterrupted take, to witness the despair of these people without knowing why they are in distress. Finn says ? would you prefer me feigning some locked grasp on the Seed of Wisdom?? ?Who ever understands the complexities of ?why??? asks his wife Deanna played by Ann Cusack. At moments the dialogue moves into poetry, where the context weighs both the specific and the universal.

Throughout the movie Finn pulls a wooden box ferried on a child?s wagon. The box contains the only worldly possessions he has chosen to take with him on his quest. Among these is a set of encyclopedias that he sells one by one to each of the supporting characters in turn. Ironically, the encyclopedias are of no use to Finn because they do not hold the answers to his questions. In this sense they are a meaningless burden. However, they do serve the purpose of giving him a reason to get up in the morning and an activity to carry him through the day. They are also a link to the past, an anchor, an inheritance, a promise?

We meet each of the characters in beautifully composed single takes absorbing their lives through the spaces they inhabit, and all the while gaining an intuitive sense of these people, of a connection, or commonality that is present and accessible but never obvious. We meet Dylan, Daniel Gillies , (Spiderman II, and Bride and Prejudice) surrounded by American floral patterns in a house where the objects have accumulated over time; The Drifter, Ian Somerhalder, (Lost, the Vampire Diaries) and Tripp, Joseph Mazzello, sitting in front of a fireplace listening to a record; Tucker, Scott Wilson (In Cold Blood, Dead Man Walking, and The Last Samurai.?) saying goodnight to his daughter, Daisy, Elisabeth Waterston; Alice, Jane Adams,(Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Little Children ,HBO series Hung) playing with her daughter, Ruthie, Cassidy Hinkle. Through these full figured portraits we form a first impression of these characters and their individual joys and struggles.

Dylan (Daniel Gillies) sees Finn at the local dinner and invites himself to sit down. His manner is bitter, confused, even blatantly cynical and condescending. ?Are you still having trouble figuring things out?? He asks Finn. Dylan speaks of everything Finn is trying to avoid?his teaching job, his wife, and painful memories. This interaction deftly exposes their failure to communicate or understand one another in spite of a common history in the same hometown.

Even the minor characters in the film are played by talented actors who contribute greatly to the tone of the film. Dylan asks a Police Officer played by Lisa Bostnar ?you wanna box? ? Leaning in slightly, she replies with a cold deftness ?you don?t want none of this son?. As outright annoying to his fellow man as Dylan can sometimes be, his haphazard lack of tact provides a pivotal comedic counterpoint to the film. Simultaneously his tragedy, his estrangement from his wife and child, is at the root of the film?s central dialogue and exploration.

A young boy coasts through the landscape on his bicycle. He?s alone and out of sync with the world ? a world that isolates the lonely even more. Although the film focuses on themes of loss and isolation, it also explores a diverse array of human interaction: Mother and daughter, husband and wife, father and daughter; and centrally, the relationship of a father towards his son. It?s a story that manages to deal with tragedy as well as find sweet redemption for it?s main character. The ending doesn?t pretend to universally cure the loneliness of all the characters. Instead the satisfaction comes from a plot that has been intelligently tied together and characters that continue to live on in our minds far after the screen goes black.