V

		normally exhibited by age-old trees and formidable craters. Whereas in other films the faces refer us back to the soul of the characters, here the drama of the film is located exclusively on the surface of the skin. And the person that elsewhere I would call "Joan" or "Ren e" fades behind the dramatic intensity of her features which cry, suffer, and beg for mercy. They are the ones that call upon me to intervene and help. They force me to pay attention. I see and respond to them as I see and respond to the "stoniness" of the stone.

		In contrast, in most films as well as in everyday life, masks are worn. "Those we encounter" in normal circumstances, Levinas writes, "are clothed beings. . . . [They have] washed away the night and the traces of its instinctual permanence from [their] face. . . . What does not enter into the forms [of propriety] is banished from the world. Scandal takes cover in the night, in private buildings, in one's home places which enjoy a sort of extra-territoriality in the world." 82 Everyday movie faces hence do not let on that which makes them truly human: the "scandals" they perpetrate in the middle of the night when no one is watching. They do not allow themselves to become the mirrors in front of which we too would recognize our own "scandalous" existence. Contrariwise, ostranenie rips conventionality from someone's safe presentation. It lets faces be faces. And it can do the same for every body or object on the face of the earth. When we fail to see things then, it is not because the world has nothing more to offer us or we have exhausted their dramatic potential, it is because we do not take enough of a long look. We have become lazy. Ostranenie can help us fight our lethargy.

		XIII

		To shoot a film is to go to battle. The real war that is taking place is not between the director and the crew, the actors, or the location, it is rather an internal struggle for the soul of the director, a clash between the rational and the unconscious. In the Laser disc version of El Mariachi (1992), Robert Rodriguez provides a nonstop commentary on the shooting of the film. The monologue tells us about the practical and aesthetic problems he encountered during the shooting and how he solved them. Truly, Rodriguez must be thanked for being candid about his work and what he says cannot but benefit aspiring filmmakers. Especially important is that he demonstrates it is not necessary to spend thirty million dollars to shoot