About 20 minutes in, I thought, "Well, this is interesting, but I'm not sure I want to sit through another hour of it." Yet, AN OVERSIMPLICATION of HER BEAUTY's subtle immersive qualities got the better of me, and I'm very glad that I did finish it. It's one of relatively few films that I'll probably watch again, start to finish, in the very near future.AN OVERSIMPLICATION of HER BEAUTY begins as a mock-academic cause-effect examination of common everyday emotions. As Terence Nance humorously explains at the beginning, he adds the story of his in-and-out relationship with Namik Minter as a back-drop to give concrete detail and storyline to the original mini-film, "How Would You Feel?," which is included on the Special Features of the DVD, along with the 8-minute "Exorcising Rejection." {Both of the shorter films are well-worth watching on their own.} The mass of the film is narrated by Nance, but Minter also steps in with some valuable insights of her own.This film reminds me a little of 2004's WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!?, only it's more about psychology than physics. Like the earlier film, it also incorporates spiritual and metaphysical elements without any reaching or preaching. It alternates between everyday street scenes in NYC and animated dream and fantasy sequences which, along with being funny and entertaining, are quite breathtaking in a number of places. I must stress, however, that AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION of HER BEAUTY stands very much on its own. There is an exquisite imagination at work here, and the microcosmic view it affords us of universal ideas and situations makes it unique. In the end, the film is not just "all about" any one of its many subjects: love, human emotions, the rigors of everyday life, etc.There are a number of ways that AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION of HER BEAUTY could have been messed up. It could have been overly artsy, but Nance's accessible, often self-effacing narration avoids that. He uses mostly everyday language--the quote I use as my title is an exception--and the more complex sentences help to enliven the points he makes. It could have been overly subjective, but the sober, good-natured distance that Nance and Minter keep while describing their own relationship makes it universally about human relations. It could have been just plain boring, but the frequent variations between reality and cartoons, excellent camera work, and unique style and nature of the entire film make it just plain mesmerizing. By necessity, it's rather plot less and fragmentary, and the latter qualities are sometimes a little TOO much so. Along with a few needless repetitions, the entire film just doesn't have an entirely complete feel to it, an aspect that many viewers will find quite dissatisfying. Nevertheless, I'm not sure how it could have been completed, and I can say with perfect sincerity that even its more amateurish qualities enhance the film's personality to a certain extent. Most importantly, its heavily analytical nature could have made it a real downer, but it's anything but that. I went away from this film feeling GOOD! One way or another, AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION of HER BEAUTY deserves far more attention than it will likely receive.

This is another one of those films which I solely found out about by being a subscriber to Shadow and Act. Like many films I find out about on the site, there are no well-known names amongst the cast or even those behind the scenes. Albeit, some of the producers may have recognizable names, like ?uestlove, but outside of that you find yourself solely drawn to raw talent, which for this film, seems more refined than Writer/ Director/ Actor's Terence Nance's filmography would hint to.Characters & StoryThe film itself is very much like a visual novel about Terence Nance's adventures with love. It uses various film styles in order to help us visualize this, all with a poetic rhythm using two voice overs. Things start though with a simple story of a young man prepping his home for a lady who is to spend the night but, when she cancels, we are asked "How Would You Feel?" From there, the film seems to go into a loop with additional details added each time the story is retold. This is because the movie seems to be a combination of a short film and possible full- length movie to compose the narrative.As a whole though, the movie is about Nance's various love affairs leading to the complications of the most recent one in the film. It explores his, sometimes, lack of emotional depth past the superficial, and how this leads to ill decisions. Perhaps the film, if stripped down, is almost like a warning or self-help guide. One in which a person is warned about being emotionally distant, not speaking on your own feelings, and Nance is the one showing you all the negative effects from either waiting or keeping your mouth shut.PraiseWhat I like best about the film is that though Nance provides a beautiful vision by using animation and live action, you could just as well close your eyes and experience this beautiful story. Focusing on the eyes wide open approach though, it is visually beautiful, especially when it comes to the animation. To me, it seems a lot of the styles a film student would learn are experimented with and with the animation you can see the most time and effort, and I would dare say the animation pieces are perhaps the best part of the film visually. Also, I quite like how the overall story didn't fit a natural progression. Though easily this could be seen as an artistic romance film, it does try to dig deeper than that. It has a good amount of reflection which creates interesting ideas and thoughts, and said thoughts do make you want to have a conversation about what Nance wrote in the picture. Lastly, I feel I must note that while not the hugest fan, or one who fully understands, the beauty of cinematography, it is hard to not find beauty in the way the actors were shot and not find it to be as poetic as the words spoken throughout the film.CriticismWhen it comes to criticism, I do feel that any critiques I can come up with would be nitpicking. The reason I say this is, when you first start the film you can find reasons to dislike it, but as you begin to understand how the story is going to be told you adapt. For example, at first I didn't like the looping style of the film in which we kept going back to the moment we are asked "How Would You Feel" for it added only a handful of details and then we were back at that point. As time went on though, the style grows on you, and largely any issue I had was something I grew to adapt to and even like. Another example would be how we are introduced to Nance's exes. Many of them seem like random names or faces, but then the movie loops and provides more information and though this could be annoying or counterproductive to some, I find after watching the film to understand it and find it to be quite an interesting way of telling the story.Overall: Rental/ VODJust the amount of effort in the film, especially those animation scenes, are what drives me to recommending this. Though admittedly the plot isn't as straight forward as some may like, I find this sort-of character analysis to be quite brilliant. I won't say it is for everyone since it does require an open mind, to a point, but for those willing and able to find this movie, I do think you should rent it or watch it on Video on Demand. I won't say it is life changing, but I am left with my own feelings of reflection in such a way where I'm looking over my notes and wondering some things about how I lived my life thus far.

I saw this film as part of the Rotterdam Film Festival 2012 with mixed results. On the positive side: Powerful visuals, accompanied by an even so powerful sound track. On the negative side: Mixing cartoons (3/4 of the time??) and "normal" film is intriguing, leaving me unsure whether I hate it or love it. Halfway negative: Some meta jokes and stories, especially those in the beginning, contained some bright ideas, but they tend to wear a bit thin after a few repeats.Overall, I found the film chronologically confusing. This may be intentional, given the quote "Love is confusing time wise". The order of the scenes reflects that statement exactly.What I missed most is that we do not get the chance to really know the two main characters: what do they do, their interests/hobbies, and their purpose in life?? Probably I'm too rational in this, since love does not care for such trivialities (not my words). But still, I consider it a defect. I can accept that I'm alone in this, deemed overly rational by everyone I know. Anyway, it was the reason that I failed to get involved.The Q&A after the screening was very enlightening. We learned that actually writing the script only took a few hours. The real effort was put in the editing, in order to reduce many hours of footage to only 90 minutes. He dropped scenes he considered "too long" (very logical) plus some with less clothes on (otherwise people would wonder what was going on, distracting from the actual contents). The long production time, around 8 years, was caused by other obligations, like finishing school.

There really is a very good movie to be made from the film that's here. I'm not sure how long that film would be, but probably no more than half the length of the current film. In its current state, this is pretty much unwatchable. WAY too much repetition. The animation is very good. I was interested in the main character for the first 45 minutes or so. There is a lot of innovative stuff in the film and I thought it would be a wonderful film until about an hour into it, when I started to realize that this might be an interesting file to the filmmaker, but maybe not so much for others. But by the end, it was very hard to sit through.