Blow-up: magnified pretension?

Blow-up, Antonioni's masterpiece, was an absolutely revolutionary film in 1966 and, after more than 50 years, presents some elements indicative of what we now call liquid modernity.

The plot, based on a short story by Julio Cortázar, follows the life of a London fashion photographer. Dividing his work between artistic pictures (for a book) and a photo session with actual models, Thomas experiences a kind of fastidiousness for the complete liberation of manners, translated by psychedelic parties, free sex and drug use.

For a 21st-century viewer, what strikes the film is the stupid and totally inadequate way in which the photographer treats women: they are insulted, scolded, and abused in every way. It is as if the protagonist had experienced all possible pleasures and nothing else surprised or repressed him.

Photographing randomly in a park, he records the meeting of a couple whose nature of the relationship we will never know. However, the woman follows Thomas to his studio and tries in every way, even out of seduction, to force him to deliver the film roll. The photographer hands over a different film roll and the woman leaves informing her phone. False.

The revelation of the photos shows that a murder crime may have occurred. A blow-up reveals some details that can be investigated by the photographer and also by the curious audience: a concealed weapon and a body that, later, Thomas claims is still in place.

Upon returning home, Thomas checks that all evidence and negatives have been stolen. She walks around the city and looks at the enigmatic woman, Jane, in a movie line, but again with the spectators, the photographer loses sight of her.

Coming back once more to the park, where the body disappeared, Thomas is invited by a troupe of pantomime students to return a tennis ball to play an imaginary game. When he returns it, we hear the noise of the ball. Then Thomas disappears too.

#antonioni #review