‘”Here is the human, here is the human, here is the perfect human, we will see the perfect human function” These are the opening lines in Jorgen Leth’s ‘The Perfect Human’; although originally meant as an argument against imperfection and social problems highlighted in Danish documentaries the film is now renowned as one of the finest pieces of filmmaking of its time, so much so that Lars Von Trier challenges Leth to remake the film but under a number of limitations… ‘The Five Obstructions’.
Before I discuss the obstructions Leth faces I think it is important to determine the role of the viewer or observer and the fact that they are supposedly viewing and experiencing the perfect human. What does it really mean to view the perfect human? The film challenges the viewer’s conceptions of this model as Leth asks many questions of the way in which the characters carry out simple everyday tasks that usually we would not scrutinise. This puts the viewer in a varied position of both power and confusion; the viewer is empowered as they are seeing something which is apposed to the mainstream and makes them query more of what they are seeing, but also confused as the questions which Leth asks are not answered within the film leaving the viewer to comprise their own opinions and potential outcomes.
The answers to these questions are part of the first challenge Von Trier sets Leth the first obstruction is that the film is made in Cuba no set can be used, each cut must be at most 12 frames and the questions in the original film must be answered.
Leth is put into a position where he has to deconstruct cinema and the values of his original film in order to prevail against Von Trier’s limitations. Although at first Leth seem to be troubled by these new rules the finished film shows his skill as a filmmaker. The 12 frames per edit allows Leth to establish a new set of cinematic rules within the piece creating a feel of stop motion animation but more jolted and unpolished. The ease at which Leth is able to convey this change in the way of reading film to the viewer is demonstrated by the acceptance of images in front of you to flow as if they were following conventional cinematic values something which I personally found as early as halfway through the film. The two other limitations seem easier for Leth to overcome; he intertwines the icon of the Cuban Havana cigar into the film itself. Like the 12 frame limit this reference is uncompromising to the film and can even not be recognised by the viewer showing that the power relationship is now centred largely with the director. This change is the relationship does not affect the way in which the viewer is reading the film compared with the original as there is still querying of what they are viewing but the changes due to the limitations mean that the form of the film is less recognisable and therefore the viewer is more easily influenced. Leth uses the limitations as a spring board for creative drive and vision; this is something I must try and do within my work to avoid not only living within my comfort zone but also to try and create something that doesn’t fall into a repetitive mainstream model.
