Art work

Never would Renly have imagined it would be "Detachment".

Not a play, but a film—a cinematic work of art, to be more precise, an experimental art film.

And before him stood Tony Kaye, the director of "Detachment".

Tony could be dubbed an eccentric in the entertainment industry. Throughout his career, he had directed only four works. Among them was "Black Water Transit", which was shut down due to encroaching on the interests of a powerful group. He always focused on sensitive social issues. For instance, his directorial debut, "American History X", delved into racism and neo-Nazism. And four years ago, during "Lake of Fire", he challenged the sensitivities of religious groups. Both works had caused considerable ripples in the art world, with the former even earning Edward Norton an Oscar nomination for Best Actor.

Carl Lund was no exception either; "Detachment" was the sole creation of his screenwriting career.

No wonder Renly hadn't recognized the two men, no wonder he hadn't put two and two together, and no wonder Woody had been willing to play matchmaker. The three people before him were quintessential representatives of the New York School of artistry. They were wholeheartedly dedicated to their artistic creations, never compromising with Hollywood and caring little for its preferences.

"Detachment" was such a work.

As described by Carl and Tony, "Detachment" centered around a teacher named Henry Barthes and told the story of his experience as a substitute teacher in a public school.

It wasn't an uplifting story akin to Japanese television dramas where passionate teachers save troubled students. Instead, it reflected the harsh reality of society—a story so brutal that the overwhelming despair made it difficult to breathe.

During this period, Henry encountered three different women. One was a female teacher silently enduring violence from students and parents; another was a female student tormented by obesity and domestic abuse; the third was a homeless young prostitute subjected to violence by clients.

All three sought Henry's assistance to varying degrees, yet he himself was caught in a quagmire.

Having witnessed his mother's suicide as a child, blamed by his maternal grandfather, he sank into his own grief and became unable to extricate himself. Childhood traumas led him to protect himself, shutting down emotional communication with others, facing the world with indifference and detachment. He became a teacher, immensely talented, yet never staying at a single school for long, avoiding emotional connections with students. He always lingered between different schools as a substitute teacher.

In each of these three women, the consequences of family upbringing and societal influence converged. The film tackled education and society, but at its core, it was about families—a movie that depicted the profound impact families have on every child.

Faced with the three souls seeking help, Henry endured torment once again. He attempted to redeem them, but he had to redeem himself first.

The film adopted a documentary-style filming technique, using interviews to examine the problems faced by modern American education from various teachers' perspectives. Through monologues, it depicted characters' inner musings and struggles, utilizing a raw film quality, handheld cameras, and intense color schemes to explore the depth of characters' thoughts, reflecting the state of society as a whole.

Such experimental filming techniques were more suited for theater plays, but even within theater, an excessive amount of internal monologue often fell into the pit of tedium, let alone in a film.

It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that this was not a likable film; it was even detestable. Tony's lens had focused entirely on that state of struggle, magnifying emotions to an extreme that left one almost breathless.

This was a film exuding a bone-deep chill.

Another work that pushed despair to the extreme, "Manchester by the Sea" from 2016 was more restrained and ingenious. It kept all the despair locked within the characters' bodies, slowly seeping out. The boundless cold felt endless, with no boundaries in sight, bringing tears to one's eyes.

Casey Affleck, who portrayed the male lead, had won the Academy Award for Best Actor.

"Detachment", however, used a magnifying glass to shatter every detail, crying silently, tears unshed. It was as if sinking slowly while drowning, gradually departing from the light on the water's surface, being engulfed by darkness. The film presented this process in slow motion, elegant, beautiful, and grand, yet also sad, desolate, and despairing.

More importantly, "Manchester by the Sea" had a clear story structure, making it easier for audiences to accept. In contrast, "Detachment" sacrificed the framework of the story itself, allowing the narrative threads to become relatively hazy, focusing on the delineation of emotions.

In other words, when Tony was filming this work, he had no intention of winning the audience's favor. He presented the state of "Detachment" completely through the artistic medium, much like the murmurings of a dream.

The reality bore this out as well. After "Detachment" was released, it faced extreme tests of both praise and criticism. The overall media score was only fifty-two points, far from passing, with supporters praising it to the skies and detractors condemning it vehemently. Even IMDb's seasoned cinephiles' ratings hovered around eight points, neither rising nor falling.

Awards also reflected this point. Mainstream award ceremonies such as the Golden Globes, Oscars, and Cannes Festival saw it completely overlooked, with no one even mentioning it. Yet, on European indie film festivals, Independent Spirit Awards, and platforms like the Woodstock Film Festival, it garnered a series of awards. Still, it went unnoticed and remained unknown.

As for box office performance? It was only screened for three weeks in art theaters, then quickly pulled and even in the DVD market, it didn't fare well. It just lay gathering dust in corners, truly a loss to the point of no return, even the dedicated patrons of art theaters showing a lack of interest.

There was no doubt, this was an art film thoroughly ignored, rejected, and reviled. However, such works were countless in the outer corners of New York's off-Broadway scene. These bold, innovative, cutting-edge, and distinctive works formed the foundation of art.

Just like "Once Upon a Time in America".

Italian director Sergio Leone had waited thirteen years to fund and create this work, even earlier than "The Godfather" series. It consumed all of Leone's energy and ideas. Yet, upon its release, due to the butchering and editing by the film company, it was panned by critics and audiences, not only failing at the box office but also lacking any artistic recognition.

Ultimately, this directly led to Sergio's melancholic demise. The generation's film maestro passed away, embracing regret, sorrow, and destitution in his hometown.

It wasn't until ten years later, when Sergio's director's cut, edited in a Proustian style, was released, that people discovered the brilliance of this film. Thirty years later, "Once Upon a Time in America" became an irreplaceable absolute classic among gangster epics. It even surpassed "The Godfather" and "Goodfellas", becoming a beloved favorite for countless critics and audiences.

It was hailed as "the greatest failure in Hollywood history".

The reason "Once Upon a Time in America" was ignored had many factors. The film company was an unavoidable part, but historically, even without the company's interference, due to its artistic nature, it deviated from mainstream aesthetics and even critic aesthetics. This caused it to be overlooked by its time, only to be rediscovered and appreciated after time's dust had settled, with numerous similar cases.

"The Elephant Man", "Blue Velvet", "Heathers", "Mulholland Drive", "Donnie Darko", "Dead Man", "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Trainspotting", "My Own Private Idaho", "Fight Club", "Blade Runner", and many more, all had similar fates.

Of course, it's not to say that Renly praised "Detachment".

On the contrary, Renly didn't like "Detachment", he even had a bit of aversion to it. Not only because the process of watching the film was extremely dull, not at all friendly to the audience, but also because the emotions in the film were too profound, too intense. Even a normal person could sense the presence of depression, let alone someone who had experienced his previous life's condition.

However, the perspectives of appreciation as an audience and observation as an actor were completely different.

From the actor's standpoint, playing Henry Barthes was an enormous challenge. All the shots were focused on the actor's emotions, magnifying them to the extreme, capturing even the slightest change.

This was different from "Buried". Henry's emotions were trapped in place. He wouldn't struggle; he had already given up struggling. All the emotions withdrew inward, then further inward. Yet, they required a profound and delicate power that could still captivate the lens. Without a doubt, the difficulty of performing was even greater.

This was different from "Manchester by the Sea" as well. Although both characters were immersed in sorrowful despair, the former was more of an anger and sorrow that rejected compromise with oneself. On the other hand, Henry was like a trapped beast, attempting to break free but unable to find an exit, so he surrendered.

Moreover, due to Tony's filming techniques, Henry's despair required even richer layers and more nuanced details. If it were just simple sadness or despair, the film's thickness and depth wouldn't reach the necessary heights. Such delicate changes were the ultimate challenge for any actor. Without exaggeration, the difficulty of performing in "Detachment" even surpassed that of "Manchester by the Sea".

In simple terms, even crying required a variety of expressions. The emotions behind each teardrop were distinct, with differing levels of intensity.

This was method acting. Henry's character didn't need the immersion of method acting. Tony had merely frozen the character's backstory to a single point in time. He had just shared all the character's background story with Renly. What was needed was the solid foundation and profound interpretation of a performer—how the smallest difference in a gaze often decided the character's ultimate depth.

In other words, this was the ultimate challenge of performance acting!