This is a really good short film. it has lots of strange cinematography, and it's silent. The antagonist is mysterious, and horrifying. The ending scene is startling, didn't expect that coming.

In the early 1940s, surrealist cinema films like this, wasn't as popular, as it was in the 1920s. Maybe, because many film studios & theaters chains didn't want, its audience, to question, their existence, during wartime. Yet, there was a few films with Freudian dream symbolism from that era, that continue to use shocking, irrational, absurd imagery to challenge the traditional function of art, in order to represent reality. Some of them, became classics like 1945's 'Lost Weekend', others like this Eleanora Derenkowskaia AKA Maya Deren's short film, have been forgotten by the sands of time. While, it's true that few movie goers are familiar with 'Meshes of the Afternoon'; it did leave an impact with a legion of film scholars in Hollywood for years to come. Names like David Lynch, Christopher Nolan, and David Fincher, often sighted, as filmmakers, whom embraced techniques that Deren help pioneered, such as jump cuts, superimposition, slow motion, and multiply exposures. Even the ominous mood & circular narrative of this short film are recycled in later films such as 2000's 'Memento' & 2001's 'Mulholland Drive'. It's sad, that the general public doesn't know, much about her, as I felt that she really does deserve more credit. She is one of the very few female directors at that time; when the majority were men. Her desire to make an avant-garde movie with her then-husband, Alexander Smahel AKA Alexander Hammid about one female's psychological problems at home, during wartime was also really bold, as the majority of the films were focus on uplifting the fighting spirits of the men fighting abroad. Not only that; but she have the film in completely silent in age of sound. Although, it was a big mistake for her part, as not a lot of people saw it & heard about it, literally. It still takes big ball to try that, in a world, full of 'talkie' comedies. Yet, later in 1959, Deren herself stated out, that having no sound was her biggest mistake of this film; thus, choosing to have an droning, percussive, unnerving soundtrack by her third-husband, Teiji Ito to add to the entire hallucinatory experience, even if the Japanese music doesn't really match, in what's happening on screen. Despite the movie having problems with the sound, I have to say, it really surprising that this movie was made in 1943. The visuals looks like some sort of LSD beatnik inspired film from the late 1950s or early 1960s. The array of potential repetitive symbolism bombards the viewer from the very start, leaving us with several repetitive motifs to think deep about, once the movie is done; such as the flowers in the driveway, a key falling, the knife & most of all, the shots of the grim reaper with the mirror. Since surrealism films like this, are based on theories of dreams and psychology, nothing is assured on what it truly means. Nevertheless, it didn't stop from some people from trying. Some film theorists see the movie as a metaphor attack of Hollywood, with the grim reaper representing the artistic, political and economic monopoly over the freedom of American cinema, with movie studios killing Deren's vision of the industry. Yet, others see the movie as a way for Deren to explore her struggles out of her long term dependence on amphetamines and sleeping pill that finally took her life in 1961. Then, there are those, who believe that the film has a feminist outlook, with its themes of gender identity and sexual politics. Who knows, the true reasons, why Deren made this bizarre hard to understand movie and follow it up with more disoriented & abstraction movies, like 1944's 'At Land'!? All, I know is that if seen today, 'Meshes of the Afternoon' will leave some viewers upset, and confused. So, in the end, while it's not a movie for everybody, but I do believe, those interested in filmmaking or storytelling does need to see it, to understand the movie's self-worth. After all, in 1990, 'Meshes of the Afternoon' was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant for good reason. There has to be some value. So check it out, if you can. It's worth your time.

Maya Deren wanted to show people that movies could use symbolism to convey a story. Here, through symbolic objects and surreal imagery, the story of a married couple is conveyed.There's more than there appears. The story is so true. Everyone struggles with their decisions. Deren wanted to demonstrate how to tell a story with symbolism using a story that everyone can relate with.The film begins with a hand setting down a flower on pavement. The flower represents a good start to the marriage. A woman picks it up and takes it home. She unlocks the door and goes into an empty house. And so the symbolism comes to life. A phone is off the hook, symbolizing an unworthy and unfulfilled feeling the woman is experiencing; a knife is in bread, symbolizing that feeling of "I didn't make that decision right" that has stung her.The woman goes upstairs and finds her record player is on. The music from the player represents a good life with the woman and her husband. But the woman turns it off, now unsure if her decision was right and if she will have a good life. Confused and uneasy, the woman sinks into her chair, and falls asleep. And then what should appear but a hooded figure with a mirror for a face walking down the path. The woman follows but the figure has vanished out of sight. The woman gives up and discovers she is at her own doorstep.What does the figure represent? It's the mirror for the face that tells us. The mirror is supposed to be reflecting the woman's dark inner feelings that tell her the decision she made wasn't good for her. The mirror reflects all these versions of the woman until they are too much and try to win over her. The woman almost wants this to happen; she chases the figure. She later repeats the same action after going in: she enters the house, walks upstairs and turns off the player once again. The woman sees herself sleeping in the chair. She goes over to the window and sees herself chasing the figure. As she watches she pulls the key out of her mouth, the same one she used to unlock the house. She will use it to free her dark inner desires. A moment later we see the woman running down the path also but she doesn't catch the figure. Then we see the woman come back inside, were she sees the figure walk upstairs and place the flower on her bed, before the figure disappears from view. We have labeled the figure as evil. The flower represents a good start to the marriage, but the figure has put this idea to sleep by laying the flower on the bed. The figure wants to take advantage of the protagonist.Again the woman sees herself sleeping in the chair and again she goes to the window. She again sees herself chasing the hooded figure. And out of her mouth comes the key. The key turns into the knife, telling us both are symbolic of evil, and that the woman is tempted to use them to free herself of her troubles.She falls for the trap and walks into the kitchen. At the table two other versions of herself sit. The third version sits down and sets down the knife which turns back into the key. The first two versions take the key, and every time it is replaced by an identical key. The first two versions each have a key, and the third version is left to do the dirty work. The third form picks up the key, when we see her palm is black!, symbolizing evil. The key in the woman's palm turns into the knife. The woman has a shocked expression on her face. She turns around. She has on black glasses. Evil has possessed her. She crosses the beach and sidewalk to reach the chair. Down comes the knife, coming right towards the woman, but then the woman awakes and sees her husband bending over her.The man bends over and puts the phone back on the hook. It again was off. The woman still has the feeling of uneasiness, this tells us, but the man is trying to put her at ease by putting the phone back. The man goes upstairs holding the flower. The woman follows. She sees the man put the flower on the bed like the figure. Maybe this tells us the man too is struggling with his decision. The woman lies on the bed, thinking the man is on the side of evil. She sees the knife and in an attempt to rid herself of her struggles she hits him in the face with the knife. His face shatters. It was a mirror. We see pieces of mirror fall into the ocean.At the end we see the man come into the house. He opens the door. Pieces of a mirror are strewn around the chair with seaweed. The woman lies in the chair. She is dead and blood is trickling from the corner of her mouth. When the woman tried to free herself she died. Evil had possessed her and she could no longer live. Let this be a lesson to all of us. We mustn't let ourselves be overcome by our evil sides. No, we must stand our ground and deal with our problems. The woman here failed to do so, and as a result evil came to possess her. I would certainly recommend this; it deals with a problem we are all familiar with, and shows us the consequences. Deren married three times; maybe she too, like the woman portrayed, struggled with marriage. Who knows?

Like many of the art films, Maya Deren's "Meshes in the Afternoon" defies description as well as a numerical rating. After all, how can you rate or adequately describe something that deliberately avoids being cinematic and is meant to confuse and provoke the viewer?!This film consists of a lot of bizarre camera-work--and Deren is the subject in most of the shots. But, it isn't until later in the film that you actually see her face--up until then, it's feet, hands and an eye that the camera shows the viewer. There also is an angel of death- like being with a mirror for a face and lots of strange camera tricks. So what does all this mean? You have to decide for yourself, though I think it's pretty clearly about alienation and death. But what do I know?!The bottom line is that like art films, this one is strange and probably won't appeal to the average person. But, it is impressively strange and unusual--and it's worth a viewing if your are the right sort of person who appreciates avant garde films.