Time to Love - Metin Erksan
TIME TO LOVE
Director:
Metin Erksan
Writer:
Metin Erksan
Stars:
Müşfik Kenter, Sema Özcan, Süleyman Tekcan
Erksan's usage of objects and symbols to create a
contrast between Halil and Meral leads people to comment on these characters
generally on the basis of their way of life in accordance with their cultural
background and origin representing West and East. However, I think the very
core of the different sights of these characters comes not from the set of
cultural codes but from the unique sense of world-views appearing in their
stances whenever there is an act of contact between two.
There is, however, a certain difference between
these two as Meral's reaction to an emotion is something rather prepared and
ordinary compared to Halil's point to make a beginning. Meral is nearly a
stereotype from the life of a woman who is rich but depressed, having a
relationship from her own circle but without the affection of an idealized
love, looking for a way out, an adventure. With this kind of a state of mind, she
never commences with the romance itself when she meets Halil, it is only a
prepared starting point, a railway instead of a junction. She simply finds her
reason to live, a story that is known from the beginning with no intention of a
subjective initiative. I think this is the very reason that she is seen with
her two friends in the beginning, three women, copies of a same kind.
Her picture, on the
other hand, is something else. Her picture is Halil himself, his all reason,
affection, story of a different origin. Halil starts off with this picture
itself unlike Meral, as far as we know at least, because Meral's situation is
given with her own statements when she talks to Basar as she explains that she
already did not love him anyway and she was not thinking that people can love
actually, and besides all these, her whole situation coming to existence only
as a reaction, not as a construction. This difference creates the possible
conflict expected between two characters which is later destroyed by the movie's
melodramatic tendencies, unfortunately.
Halil's stance and perspective differ greatly
from that of Meral's and many people as well. He reveals an awareness of a
certain progress presenting a blurred sense of inanimation filling the space
for an irrationalized status of an emotional story that which we call love as
inanimation creates a necessity for a subject to be aware of his own effort
leading to a progress as opposed to the animate circumstance of two subjects
inside the same story. By creating and constructing his own story Halil has a
unique sense of authority of his life collecting emotions from an unprecedented
source unlike a ubiquitous presence of a romance.
Apart from all these, Halil's well-established
stance towards love and life and the movie's originality, in the time of a
melodramatic madness in Turkish cinema, cannot escape from that fictitious and
synthetic atmosphere. That destruction vitiates the movie beyond measure. It
may be about the production problems for Metin Erksan, but without a doubt that
melodramatic sense of storytelling debases the movie.
Prepared by: Duygu Söbe
Comments
Post a Comment