Songs from the Second Floor

Disciplined, surreal take on our human condition -- here's a world, depicted in muted tones and blindingly antiseptic whites, where rampant commodification has left no avenue for expression, the future is sacrificed for pointless self-preservation, men are literally bogged down by material good, and the spectre of regret is ever-looming -- but I prefer the fleeting joys at the edge of the precipice that Andersson's follow-up You, the Living finds.

Through its lack of colors, lack of emotions, and lack of movement depict a surreal take on the human condition. Here's a world that is ransacked with people overcome by material need and stress, so caught up in their own lives and issues, they don't realize how absurd everything around them is. Andersson takes common situations, most of them the odd and bizarre events of real life, and forces the viewer to see how ridiculous life is and how unnecessary it is to take anything so seriously.

sinema bu değilse başka bir şey hiç değildir

Haiku review: Anderson's a bore / Pretentious artsy drivel / Swedes should lighten up.

Beguiling. Each well-composed scene seduces you with humorous surprises before you can realize that the camera never moves (with one exception).

Basically what Roy Andersson did here was throw together a big bunch of seldom witty (but always cynical) caricatures, slap a blue filter on the lens and film them in long, unmoving, highly-staged long-shots. If that's what floats your boat, whatever. I don't like caricatures myself and the fancy cinematography seemed onanistic and pretentious and didn't help one bit.

#3100 In the whimsical realm of 'Songs from the Second Floor' (2000), Roy Andersson choreographs a ballet of absurdity, where the human condition takes center stage. Drawing inspiration from the poetic musings of César Vallejo, this film serves up a smorgasbord of existential queries with a side of droll humor. A visual and cerebral delight, 'Songs from the Second Floor' invites you to laugh, ponder, and perhaps, find solace in the shared vulnerability of our existence.

One dethatched, odd sequence after another, Andersson narrates the bankruptcy of capitalist society and the overall irrationality of the human condition until he makes sure you are depressed. It's a fine effort with some piercing high points (the parts with the dead people, notably) -unfortunately, its caricatures hardly allow any emotional investment. In other words, I went "Hmm, that's clever" many times during the film but I was only occasionally touched by the dour proceedings.

Refreshingly odd. Style over substance? Nah. Rather build up of real, human substance through meticulous style.

These "songs" offer a surreal look at what humanity has done with the world. Andersson's film makes clear that we have lost our way, that the world as it is currently constituted, enamored with money-grubbing profiteers, offers no hope for humanity. Only Kalle seems to question all this, a self-inflicted tragedy in his own business leaving him vulnerable to guilt, and maybe, change. The final image of the film, littered with crucifixes and the dead, offer a subtle hint at an answer . . . or not.

It’s indubitably got its look and style, and some scenes do serve as reminders of the underlying pervasiveness of loneliness, despair and guilt, but there’s also a kind of cuteness to it, including in the use of victims of the Second World War and the final scene's walking dead. At times this viewer almost had the feeling that the filmmaker was trying to make a Sandy Bates movie, complete with ambivalence about jazz heaven. But in this case, for me the result unfortunately contained no laughs.

Just as visually striking as Andersson's other films and has really interesting and funny segments. His films are so unified and cohesive that it's hard to separate them. If you enjoy one, you're likely to enjoy the others, but also if you've seen one, then you've kind of already seen the others too. And as usual, I feel like each vignette hangs around for 20%-30% longer than it should

Artsey and meh

This is surrealism don't right. I can't say I understood all or even most of it (some symbolism is much clearer than others), but it's compelling, and the central distress call about modern life comes through loud and clear. It's listed as a black comedy, but I didn't find much humor of it. Never since The Red Balloon have I seen a film that so aggressively assures that bright colors have nearly no place in its world, which is a great design decision.

Original grotesque-surreal movie with sweet-sour scenes. Shot with long sequences, bleak like life of people depicted in it. I did prefer "Du Levante" way more than this one.

This is what directing commercials for 25 years does for your opinion on capitalism

Each tableaux unfolds itself slowly, opening up space for sharp, concise dialogue and action that condemns and depicts the fading condition we are stuck sinking in.

01.17 Hobbit

all the very good and very real aside in this one i started to feel tired of andersson's preoccupation with christianity, but i still kinda get it in a weberian sense

Like a poem

A frighteningly prescient depiction of post-millennium living, predating yet predicting the existential anxieties of post-9/11 and the 2008 housing crisis. Andersson's uncanny ability to compose his shots and meticulously block his subjects in deep focus calls to mind the formal brilliance of something like Tati's 'Playtime,' albeit with a dark, absurdist humour whose deadpan nature itself feels like self-parody of Swedish culture and its stringent adherence to an autonomy of the 'self.'

Aquário

The static camera and interesting figures as well as the different setpieces that appear without warning succeed in engaging and surprising. Andersson has put a lot of good ideas into this film, resulting in several resonant, interesting as well as funny moments. Nevertheless, I felt that the apathy permeating the film outstayed its welcome, given that the point was already clear pretty early on.

As extraordinary staged as these segments are, they end up contributing to an inert overall picture. Each scene, shot in a delicately staged master shot that provides a very European style of macabre depression, only work for themselves and there's so much going on in each of these shots, they actually don't add any dynamic variety over the course of the film.

Bi sik anlamadım

Star Rating: ★★★★★

A kafkaesque black comedy composed of a ton of long takes. Almost like watching someone's dreams or nightmares unfold on the screen.

Andersson's inaugural installment about human nature leads you through the dark corridors of mankind by means of odd yet compelling vignettes that are as funny as they are pitiful. While his rigorous, deliberate style may prove unrewarding and repetitive for some, the dreary circumstances his characters find themselves in unfold with unexpected impact. Recommended for anyone looking for something comical yet potent and offbeat.

Definitely not as accessible or enjoyable as 'You, The Living'. Andersson's absurdist vignettes here are a bit too slow, pallid and repetitive for my taste. Most of the scenes were so boring, I couldn't bring myself to understand the message.

Like an unholy cross between Fellini, Bunuel and Bergman, Andersson's tragi-comic take on the emptiness of modern consumer life was a near perfect film about millennial dread. Employing fixed camera positions, complicated one take sequences and astonishing set designs to create strikingly bleak tableaux, the artifice is intentional: the 'characters' seem trapped in the frame, which reflects their alienated self absorption; and Andersson's mordant wit is both strangely kind and cruel.

i think this theme of material alienation and amoral emotionless cold society satires especially in Scandinavia became such a cliche that at the end they don't offer something transgerssive and new. what they do is to depict such a cold universe again and again. i don't want to buy this eventhough its a well made stylistic movie.

Excruciating to watch. Each tableaux is (with some exceptions) comprised of a single static medium shot with a deep background. The colors are very muted and there is little and/or slow movement on screen. It makes for the most visually uninteresting piece of film I've ever seen. Such a chore to get through. It's a shame because the script seems like it had potential.

I know this was made in 2000 and this will sound stupid but I couldn't get rid of the idea while watching that in a way this film is about the financial crisis. Anyway this was an interesting movie.

bir kaç hikayeyi iceriyor. Gösteri sirasinda adam kesen sihirbaz, dükkani yanan ve sigortacilari ikna etmeye calisan bir adam ve adamin akil hastanesine düsen oglu. Adamin ölen arkadasinin ruhu adamin pesindedir. ve adam ona olan borcunu ödemeyecegi için mutlu oldugunu söylemistir. Kafa karistiran ve bunaltan bir film...

A dry but darkly humorous take on life told with a unique and intriguing vision. The seductively simple camerawork draws you in, and the time just flies by.

Roy Andersson's sweeping absurdist comedy, profiling a strange Swedish city where human sacrifice, self-flagellating mobs, and ghosts alike command our attention. There's no real plot, although the wanderings of the broken-down businessman Kalle (Lars Nordh) provide a bit of through-line. No matter: it's an immensely imaginative and audacious film, with stunning sets and cinematography, fine acting, and witty, ultra-dry writing and directing. And remember: "Blessed are those who sit down."

Good lord....this was unnecessarily dull and painful to watch. Thought I was going to love it.

Sometimes it looks like a cross between Robert Altman and Aki Kaurismäki, with some symbolic elements attacking the capitalist madness of the modern world. But this last point was overdone by many other filmmakers, for decades. Those scenes with the wooden crucifixes, for example, look very childish to me, trying to criticize some religious doctrines. But I'm not saying it's a bad movie, it's just not my kind of thing.

An immense film if there ever was one. It is superior to the later work "You, The Living" by the director in that it has a clearer central idea linking all the scenes together, an unconventional apocalyptic scenario which is both funny and also exceptionally disturbing. Its a masterpiece.

Some will find this style of film intolerable, but I think its languid pace, combined with its unfeasibly long takes perfectly illustrates how insignificant an impact most of us make on the world around us, and is wonderfully effective at portraying the stultifying banality of most peoples' existence. As an added bonus it's funny too. Watching these people muddle through life's bleakness and absurdities made me smirk often, and occasionally utter a muted guffaw.

It's certainly it's own creature. Deserves one or two more views.

The use of visual depth is really striking and the melancholic mood makes for a very interesting experience.

Visionary!

René Magritte framed and presented by Roy Andersson aka What the fuck are we living for?

Visually and conceptionally striking, even if it drags a bit and could have used more cohesion.

Wow, this is bleak. As others pointed out, great style but no substance. This had much potential, if only it had a backbone.

watchable

Roy Andersson's style is unbeatable: lack of colors, lack of emotions, lack of movement. Even camera is standing still. But it's hilarious, funny, often common situations turned into odd and bizarre moments taken from real life, though some extra surreal moments. People stuck in their lifes, entire city queueing on same road. I got the point of the movie, but it's way too long! His short film World of Glory works way better because it's short. A must-see movie anyway.

Style over substance. Pointless.

The mankind is falling. Most decadent movie I've ever seen. Seems inspired by Bergman, Bunuel and Jodorovsky at the same time. A must-see one

A thoughtful, comic indictment of corporate drudgery, bureaucratic indifference and personal disconnects. The tone is Buñuellian, a cross between Exterminating Angel and Phantom of Liberty. It's presented as a series of miserable (but funny) episodes, intermittently switching between a handful of main characters. The world is composed of cold bluish-grays and off-whites, and a delightful surrealism is maintained without ever getting so out of control that it unhinges the film.