Interview with
stergios pashcos
The following is an interview I had with Stergios Paschos, the director of Afterlov.
In the beginning of the film, there is a lot of fourth-wall breaking. Whether it’s Nikos talking to the camera or the boom coming into the frame, the audience is made fully aware of the fact that this is a movie. This tactic isn’t utilized as much once the movie progresses, but nevertheless is an important device of the beginning of the film. I perceived it as an embodiment of Nikos’ anxiety and inability to express his true thoughts/emotions, but I also feel that it hits a deeper note that I am currently missing. Thus, my question is: why is the fourth wall broken so cleverly and frequently in the beginning of the film?
The idea behind that is that Nikos is something like the director of the film – or the situation he sets up, if you prefer- and I wanted to make that strong with him talking directly to the viewer. For me it’s like inviting her to a trap that at the end he is going to fall in. And because he makes us accomplices to his trap the shock will be even bigger when he will lose control. Or at least that was what I had in mind… That’s also why the breaking of the fourth wall almost stops when Sofia comes in the movie, because it’s a contract between him and us.
Expanding on the first question, the one part of the film that I really cannot figure out is the slate before the sex scene. I was fully invested into the couple finally talking their way through the issues, and the reminder that this was indeed a film caught me off-guard for a minute. While I did quickly forget once more that I was watching a movie, for those few moments, I was really pondering what the slate and minute board before “action” meant. I still can’t decipher what it means, and was wondering if you could share your insight.
The first reason is that it breaks the contract that we had with Nikos from the beginning of the film. He is no longer in charge.
The second reason has to do a lot with the whole construction of the film. If you noticed, the film is built on variations of the same theme. It’s not really the plot that progresses but the layers that go away and reveal something new in their situation. It starts from almost grotesque acting and as it goes forward this melts to something much more earthly. Different words and acting, trying again and again to express the same feelings that cannot be fully expressed with words in my opinion. A constant try to catch the “truth". That’s what they try to do but also the film itself. So, at that scene for me it was like the actors really found something. Like they found what we were chasing in the whole film. And I wanted to present it to the audience exactly like I first saw it, without cutting anything.
The third reason is very hard to explain. I will say only this: I have the opinion that sometimes when the stitches of a work of art are visible they make it more real than trying to hide them. Because at the end of the day what you saw really happened, it doesn’t matter if it happened for the camera or not. It happened.
And there is also a fourth reason: the moment I saw the scene in the editing with the slate I couldn’t see it any other way. And that’s always my most important reason to keep or throw away anything.
Throughout Afterlov, Nikos and Sofia playfully hit each other multiple times. They are almost animalistic in their methodical striking; each time, it seems as if one is trying to either assert dominance or size up the opposite. While they never really hit each other painfully, the attacks do play a subtle but crucial role to the plot. Are they just a playful encounter between lovers or is there a deeper need for Nikos or Sofia to be on top?
It’s exactly this ambiguity that you very well describe that makes it work in my opinion. And I cannot have a positive answer for the one or the other. As it happens many times in life.
My last question centers on the concept of masculinity. Nikos is not a man with grandiose machismo ready to bed any woman. He is an unsure, emotionally possessed young man who rarely lacks control. Through a lot of this film, it seems that Sofia is the dominant force in the household, even though Nikos has her under lock and key. The power relationship is constantly shifting between the two, and it ends with no clear victor. How do you think Nikos embodies the changing idea of the masculinity of the Greek man?
About this question I really have no idea. I didn’t have in mind the masculinity of the Greek man while we were making the film. I had myself and people I know. I don’t like to generalize. I speak from my perspective and let others to think about it or make conclusions.
In the beginning of the film, there is a lot of fourth-wall breaking. Whether it’s Nikos talking to the camera or the boom coming into the frame, the audience is made fully aware of the fact that this is a movie. This tactic isn’t utilized as much once the movie progresses, but nevertheless is an important device of the beginning of the film. I perceived it as an embodiment of Nikos’ anxiety and inability to express his true thoughts/emotions, but I also feel that it hits a deeper note that I am currently missing. Thus, my question is: why is the fourth wall broken so cleverly and frequently in the beginning of the film?
The idea behind that is that Nikos is something like the director of the film – or the situation he sets up, if you prefer- and I wanted to make that strong with him talking directly to the viewer. For me it’s like inviting her to a trap that at the end he is going to fall in. And because he makes us accomplices to his trap the shock will be even bigger when he will lose control. Or at least that was what I had in mind… That’s also why the breaking of the fourth wall almost stops when Sofia comes in the movie, because it’s a contract between him and us.
Expanding on the first question, the one part of the film that I really cannot figure out is the slate before the sex scene. I was fully invested into the couple finally talking their way through the issues, and the reminder that this was indeed a film caught me off-guard for a minute. While I did quickly forget once more that I was watching a movie, for those few moments, I was really pondering what the slate and minute board before “action” meant. I still can’t decipher what it means, and was wondering if you could share your insight.
The first reason is that it breaks the contract that we had with Nikos from the beginning of the film. He is no longer in charge.
The second reason has to do a lot with the whole construction of the film. If you noticed, the film is built on variations of the same theme. It’s not really the plot that progresses but the layers that go away and reveal something new in their situation. It starts from almost grotesque acting and as it goes forward this melts to something much more earthly. Different words and acting, trying again and again to express the same feelings that cannot be fully expressed with words in my opinion. A constant try to catch the “truth". That’s what they try to do but also the film itself. So, at that scene for me it was like the actors really found something. Like they found what we were chasing in the whole film. And I wanted to present it to the audience exactly like I first saw it, without cutting anything.
The third reason is very hard to explain. I will say only this: I have the opinion that sometimes when the stitches of a work of art are visible they make it more real than trying to hide them. Because at the end of the day what you saw really happened, it doesn’t matter if it happened for the camera or not. It happened.
And there is also a fourth reason: the moment I saw the scene in the editing with the slate I couldn’t see it any other way. And that’s always my most important reason to keep or throw away anything.
Throughout Afterlov, Nikos and Sofia playfully hit each other multiple times. They are almost animalistic in their methodical striking; each time, it seems as if one is trying to either assert dominance or size up the opposite. While they never really hit each other painfully, the attacks do play a subtle but crucial role to the plot. Are they just a playful encounter between lovers or is there a deeper need for Nikos or Sofia to be on top?
It’s exactly this ambiguity that you very well describe that makes it work in my opinion. And I cannot have a positive answer for the one or the other. As it happens many times in life.
My last question centers on the concept of masculinity. Nikos is not a man with grandiose machismo ready to bed any woman. He is an unsure, emotionally possessed young man who rarely lacks control. Through a lot of this film, it seems that Sofia is the dominant force in the household, even though Nikos has her under lock and key. The power relationship is constantly shifting between the two, and it ends with no clear victor. How do you think Nikos embodies the changing idea of the masculinity of the Greek man?
About this question I really have no idea. I didn’t have in mind the masculinity of the Greek man while we were making the film. I had myself and people I know. I don’t like to generalize. I speak from my perspective and let others to think about it or make conclusions.