"I saw Ernie Gehr's two films, MORNING and WAIT, twice. The first time they seemed like light events. On second viewing Gehr's films began to appear to be two light narratives. ... Two people sitting in a room. Silent. Nothing seemingly happens. They slightly change positions from time to time. Window. Room. Furniture. Action between the frames. And the light, between them, around them, over them. The story is not told by way of usual situations, happenings, actions, emotion clashes, because the story is not the usual one. It's happening on some mental level. The light, no doubt, is the key to it, it punctuates the events, it tells the story, it sets the tone."

"If WAIT were a 19th century 'narrative,' these two people who are now sitting in Gehr's room, no doubt, would be talking, exchanging some lines, performing, going through some psychological bits. No matter how disjointed, surrealistic, or cubist, still they would be going through lines and actions and expressions aimed at revealing their psychology, emotions, ideas. In a later 20th century or early 21st century film, which is where Gehr's film is, the event is transposed to another level and we don't give a damn about these people's emotions or their characters. We are following completely something else, something that cannot be told in words but can be revealed only through certain rhythms of light - emphases, and events of light - something that is happening on a mental level which communicates directly to your thought waves (nerves) and you won't get anything out of it if you try to react emotionally, if you look for psychological keys, or any of that bag. Yes, maybe we should use Richard Foreman's term: Ontological cinema has arrived."
- Jonas Mekas, The Village Voice