Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact
a_film_by Main Page
Posts From the Internet Film Discussion Group, a_film_by
This group is dedicated to discussing film as art
from an auteurist perspective. The index to these files of posts can be found at http://www.fredcamper.com/afilmby/ The purpose of these files is to make our posts more accessible, for downloading and reading and to search engines.
Important: The copyright of each post below is owned by the
person who wrote the post, and reproducing it in any form requires
that person's permission.
It is possible to email the author of any post by finding a post
they have written in the a_film_by archives at
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/messages and
emailing them from that Web site.
9201
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 3:57pm
Subject: Re: Trailers, then and now
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
wrote:
> I sense that trailers from old movies presented info / scenes in
the
> same chronological order they appear in the film. There is an
> intrinsic interest in the story as told in the film. The story
> carries the film as told cinematically.
>
> Today's trailers seem to present the info / scenes in 'contrived'
> order to heighten interest in a story that might have no intrinsic
> strength. After seeing today's trailers, there may be less
interest
> in seeing the movie as many of the 'big scenes' are given away.
>
> I wonder if scenes never appearing in the movie are sometimes
> presented in trailers. I think that would be an interesting
change.
> Show some visual information in a trailer but then only refer to
the
> information verbally.
Trailers are full of scenes never appearing in the film. The reason
is, that the trailer is cut and prepared often before the final cut
of the film is edited; so often floorcuts are intact in the trailer.
There is actually little difference between trailers today and
trailers from the golden era. Todays trailers also "tell a story"
and for the observant viewer, one can almost recite the entire plot
and conclussion, alone from the trailer. What differs is, that
todays trailers are more aware of "catch phrases" and "tag lines".
Todays trailers are also more aware of what sells.
Look at the original trailer for "Casablanca" and "Wizard of Oz" and
then look at the rerelease trailers from the 90s.
Even "contemporary" trailers as the original "Star Wars" trailer
seems to be completely unaware of whats cool and whats not.
Especially in the 30s, trailers sold their product with Flash cards
(STUNNING - AMAZING - YOU WONT BELIEVE YOUR EYES), which returned
heavily with the B-flicks in the 50s. Today, these cards have been
replaced by catch phrases. Talking about catch phrases: I'll be
back - these 3 words alone can sell a movie.
I am not sure exactly when Trailers began to become good, in lack of
another term, but I suspect around 1989-1992, as it was then
Hollywood made a straight left towards the blockbusters.
While we are at it: My nominee for worst trailer ever is: The
italian trailer for "The good, the bad and the ugly". Not only is it
horrible kitchy, but it mixes up who is who.
9202
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 4:03pm
Subject: Re: What Ozu Left Out & Why (Was Reversible Erratum)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
"Many of the transition shots center around a pair of huge circular
structures in Tokyo - perhaps water towers. They are very geometric
and photogenic.
"The year before, Anthony Mann included similar large circular &
scaffolded stuctures at the start of his "T-Men" (1947). These LA
structures show up repeatedly in film noir, including "Armored Car
Robbery" (Richard Fleischer) and "Kansas City Confidential" (Phil
Karlson), if memory serves. I am not sure what they are in real
life - have never seen them discussed or identified in print
articles. The LA structures are a virtual symbol of film noir."
I was born and raised in LA and saw those structures all my life. We
called them the "water barrels" and at one time they were part of a
brewery that made a low-grade beer called Brew 102.
"Ozu's are so close visually, that one suspects he saw Mann's film,
and wanted to include something similar in his current work.
There are also echoes in "A Hen in the Wind" of another film
noir, "Kiss of Death" (Henry Hathaway, 1947). In that film, Victor
Mature's absense in prison puts intolerable strain on his wife's
effort to survive financially and raise their kid - just like the
wife and child in "A Hen in the Wind". And the notorious staircase
scene in "Kiss of Death" finds echoes here too. We know from
interviews that Kurosawa's film noir "Stray Dog" was inspired
by Jules Dassin's "The Naked City". One suspects that Ozu, who loved
American movies, was having similar influences here."
Very possible. He saw and admired both CITIZEN KANE and REBECCA.
Starting in 1946 Western films were imported into Japan (after
passing the US censors)beginning with MADAME CURIE and Borzage's HIS
BUTLER'S SISTER which became a huge hit. RKO seems to have struck a
distribution deal with the CIE and many of its pictures got expedited
through the censorship process. The CIE also arranged screenings for
Japanese filmmakers of some films that were banned outright like MR.
SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON and THE GRAPES OF WRATH (not screened in
Japan until 1960!) Also banned was GERMANY YEAR ZERO, and several
movies had cuts made for various reasons, including THE MARK OF
ZORRO,CASABLANCA and WATCH ON THE RHINE among others. After the
Occupation ended in 1952 US crime movies that had been forbidden
earlier flooded the market and became extremely popular.
The CIE at one point wanted to make a Japanese-American co-production
and had enlisted the cooperation of MGM, RKO and Warners Bros. as
possible producers of the American half of the movie. Ozu, Mizoguchi
and Kurosawa submitted ideas or treatments for the Japanese half
(there were submissions from many other Japanese filmmakers as well.)
All the Japanese suggestions were rejected: Ozu's idea concerned a GI
quartered with a Japanese family in the countryside as the second
half of a story that begins with the GI spending time with his family
in the US before departing for Japan. Kurosawa wanted to make a
movie about Townsend Harris, first US ambassador to Japan, with
Spencer Tracy as Townsend Harris (it was the subject of Huston's THE
BARBARIAN AND THE GEISHA with John Wayne as Harris.) Mizoguchi's
story was a comedy about a Japanese-American GI. Finally no co-
production was made during the Occupation.
Richard
9203
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 4:17pm
Subject: Re: Trailers, then and now intentionally
I should have said intentionally
I wonder if scenes never appearing in the movie are sometimes
INTENTIONALLY presented in trailers.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley" wrote:
> That happens a lot, but usually it's because a scene is cut out well
> after the trailer is in theaters.
>
> -Jaime
9204
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 4:21pm
Subject: Re: Trailers, then and now intentionally
> I wonder if scenes never appearing in the movie are sometimes
> INTENTIONALLY presented in trailers.
Welles did that quite often - about three quarters of the nine-minute
F FOR FAKE trailer fails to turn up in F FOR FAKE.
I can't think of any other examples from recent movies. It could
always be intentional some of those times.
-Jaime
9205
From: Jess Amortell
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 5:08pm
Subject: Re: What Ozu Left Out & Why (Was Reversible Erratum)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Just saw "A Hen in the Wind" (1948) tonight, as part of the touring Ozu
> retrospective.
> [...]
> Many of the transition shots center around a pair of huge circular structures
> in Tokyo - perhaps water towers. They are very geometric and photogenic.
> The year before, Anthony Mann included similar large circular & scaffolded
> stuctures at the start of his "T-Men" (1947).
> [...]
> The LA structures are a virtual symbol of film noir. Ozu's are so
> close visually, that one suspects he saw Mann's film, and wanted to include
> something similar in his current work.
But these tanks - or similar ones, anyway (?) - show up in much earlier Ozu films as well! ... see the frame enlargements from The Only Son and An Inn in Tokyo, e.g., in Bordwell's Ozu book. (Which isn't to say he couldn't have been inspired by earlier films from LA...)
So I'm tempted to say: Tanks but no tanks! ;-) ("Tanks" is what Bordwell calls them, anyway)
9207
From:
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:30pm
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
In a message dated 4/20/04 10:06:52 AM, jpcoursodon@y... writes:
> it always boils down to: he/she should have made a different film, the film
> I wanted to see, not what
> she/he made, which is not what I'm interested in seeing. Therefore the film
> is bad.
>
J-P, that's a good point and it's an issue my PC opera glasses struggle with
from time to time. I wonder, though, if the litany you voice above isn't
implicit in any film debunking, even ones informed by purely formal complaints.
Everyone Says I Love You, to choose an exmaple relevant to the discussion, is an
appallingly bad film and one of the reasons why is Allen's lazy direction.
There's a scene where Goldie Hawn is walking by a river with I forget who and
Allen's shoddy one-take take on the scene says "Let's get this scene done
quickly" rather than "I love you." He should have shot it differently and made the
film I wanted to see. Therefore Everyone Says I Love You is bad. But that
doesn't mean I would ignore people who don't think he should have shot it
differently. I would seek to find out why this is a film people wanted to see. In fact,
I'm very interested to find out if anyone on this list likes this film and
why.
As for the social aspects, it's a matter of frequency. By now, we have more
than enough films that impinge upon the formation or even de-formation of the
heterosexual couple. Hell, by 1930, we had more than enough of them. So I'm
upset when that's the payoff of a film.
And let me preface the following remarks by stating once again that I did not
hate Lost in Translation or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. I think
they're both undeniably gorgeous to stare at which is payoff enough for me at
the cinema. I'd heartily recommend both films to anyone. But they're never gonna
be dear to my heart or on a top ten list or whatever. All throughout
Translation, for instance, I kept saying to myself "Oh, please keep the relationship
ambiguous like this." And then that end scene. Friends have convinced me that
they kiss out of a beautiful confusion and I buy that. But the visual impact of
a man and a woman kissing at the end of a film and then bittersweetly parting
ways is what concerns me. It's a series of images that have been imprinted on
our retinas and overrides most narrative constraints, especially a narrative
as floaty as Transaltion's. In that respect, the image seemed rote to me,
automatic, groan-worthy. Same with Eternal but to a lesser extent. All those
pretty pictures and we wind up with the same duality, the same yin and yang.
Now please don't get me wrong. I definitely don't want to imply that there
have been no great films that end thusly. Now that I think of it, Avanti! is one
of my very favorite films and it's quite similar to Translation in many ways.
Why I worship one or shrug my shoulders at another is something I should
examine at a later point.
But I do know that one of the many, many things that fires me up about the
great Porn Theatre, which I'm obsessing on lately (and for once, I actually
prefer the English title), is that three people (the shock horror!) walk off into
the sunrise (that's another thread). Here's a film that functions like a
curiosity cabinet but contains none of the will to power/knowledge that description
implies. That film stays in my heart/Top Ten.
One other thing - there's a form/content spilt in what I've written above and
maybe we should wrassle that dichotomy to the ground. Some film theorists
claim that there is no way to split the two.
Kevin
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9208
From:
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 6:47pm
Subject: Re: PS FILM NOIR screenings (director) guest speaker
I have only seen a few of these, beyond the three mentioned as discussed (I
liked all three of these!):
THE NAKED KISS, KANSAS CITY CONFIDENTIAL
CITY THAT NEVER SLEEPS have been discussed in the past.
Others:
Ruthless (Ulmer). When seen years ago, seemed very eerie and disturbing, not
"fun". Still, would love to see it again. Any Ulmer film is worth studying.
Rogue Cop (Rowland) Depressing. Regularly shown on cable TV. Not my cup of
hot coffee.
So Dark the Night (Joseph H. Lewis) Would love to see this! Regularly cited
as a major Joseph H. Lewis film.
Street of Chance (Jack Hively) Would like to see this too. Often cited as one
of the earliest examples of film noir. Would want to study it to see what
noir features are present, which not. Have read the Cornell Woolrich novel on
which its based - middling Woolrich, plot full of holes, interesting amnesia
material. My father was fascinated by amnesia movies, a film noir gambit if there
ever was one.
Gunman in the Streets (Tuttle) Never heard of this! Tuttle's "This Gun for
Hire" (1942) is pretty good.
Lonley Place (Ackerman), Two of a Kind (Levin), The Strange Mr. Gregory
(Rosen) Never heard of these either.
Ray Bradbury - don't miss a chance to hear one of the great writers!
Mike Grost
9209
From:
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 6:57pm
Subject: Re: What Ozu Left Out & Why (Was Reversible Erratum)
Thanks very much for the info on the structures!
So it sure looks as if Ozu used his tanks completely independently of US
filmmakers.
I knew I would get in trouble when I skipped seeing "The Only Son" (1936) at
the Ozu retropspective! Ignorance is always a Bad Thing! (I did manage to see
"There Was A Father" - recommended).
Have never seen the LA "water barrels" in any film before "T-Men" (Anthony
Mann, 1947). That does not mean they might not be there.
In Mann and other film noir, "shooting on location in industrial and
engineering constructions" plays a major role in the noir genre. Noir films are often
shot on such locales, especially the semi-documentaries. So the water barrels
are not just something that occurs in the background by chance. They are a
"star" of the film, a major piece of visual subject matter.
Similarly Ozu's transition shots are full of striking buildings.
Mike Grost
9210
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:04pm
Subject: Leave-out/Cover-up
OK: This is what I have understood so far.
On the one hand there's the cover-up, which can be done
deliberately for various non-esthetic motives, or can be
unconscious, or the result of stupidity - that would be the school
that imagines Sofia Coppola, say, as someone not unlike Paris
Hilton.
On the other hand there's the leave-out, which is done for
esthetic or other noble reasons and somehow becomes part of
the structure it was left out of. That could be the case with
something that's covered up, too, in which case the film
"acquires value as a symptom."
Jean-Pierre's answer to charges of cover-up (say by Woody
Allen) is: He isn't making that kind of movie, and if he were, he'd
have included poor people (and if he had included poor people,
he'd be making another kind of movie). Near-tautology, but hard
to argue with.
Sam's answer re: Deer Hunter is that Cimino claimed to be
making a film about the Vietnam War, so his omission of the
North Vietnamese was a cover-up.
By the same token, couldn't we say that Woody Allen, by leaving
poor people out of a movie called Manhattan, was engaging in a
cover-up?
To my surprise I have learned, thanks to Robert, that the total
omission of any mention of Hiroshima in the films of Ozu, which I
thought was leave-out, actually had its origins in a cover-up by
the US military. Of course, Ozu could only be taxed with going
along with the cover-up if we assume that the subject of his films
is Japan, as westerners tend (wrongly) to do. But did
Hiroshima thereby become part of the structure of the films (or a
structuring absence)?
And as far as Coppola goes, if she wasn't making a film about
Japan, but about something else, does that let her off the hook
for not at least referring to a) poor people and/or b) Hiroshima? A
but not b? B but not a? We seem to have strongly differing
opinions on that.
9211
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:21pm
Subject: Re: Trailers, then and now
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Henrik Sylow"
wrote:
> .
>
> There is actually little difference between trailers today and
> trailers from the golden era. Todays trailers also "tell a story"
> and for the observant viewer, one can almost recite the entire plot
> and conclussion, alone from the trailer. What differs is, that
> todays trailers are more aware of "catch phrases" and "tag lines".
> Todays trailers are also more aware of what sells.
>
>
There is actually an enormous difference. In today's trailers,
there seems to be an unwritten rule (or perhaps it is written
somewhere)that no shot should last more than one second -- MTV-style.
This sort of hectic editing was unheard-of in the old days. Old
trailers actually gave you often fairly extended extracts from
scenes. I haven't seen a trailer in years where, for example, two
actors actually talk to each other (no time for that; we need to see
those cars exploding and those crashes through windows...)
JPC
9212
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:51pm
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> OK: This is what I have understood so far.
>
> On the one hand there's the cover-up, which can be done
> deliberately for various non-esthetic motives, or can be
> unconscious, or the result of stupidity - that would be the school
> that imagines Sofia Coppola, say, as someone not unlike Paris
> Hilton.
>
> On the other hand there's the leave-out, which is done for
> esthetic or other noble reasons and somehow becomes part of
> the structure it was left out of. That could be the case with
> something that's covered up, too, in which case the film
> "acquires value as a symptom."
>
> Jean-Pierre's answer to charges of cover-up (say by Woody
> Allen) is: He isn't making that kind of movie, and if he were, he'd
> have included poor people (and if he had included poor people,
> he'd be making another kind of movie). Near-tautology, but hard
> to argue with.
>
> Sam's answer re: Deer Hunter is that Cimino claimed to be
> making a film about the Vietnam War, so his omission of the
> North Vietnamese was a cover-up.
>
> By the same token, couldn't we say that Woody Allen, by leaving
> poor people out of a movie called Manhattan, was engaging in a
> cover-up?
>
Maybe it was unwise of Allen to call his movie "Manhattan". he
didn't realize that such a title made it compulsory to show ALL types
of Manhattan inhabitants, rich, poor, destitute, homeless, black,
yellow and so on... Sorry, no cover-up. I'll stand by my near-
tautology. Don't see the relationship with Cimino and Vietnam.
>
To my surprise I have learned, thanks to Robert, that the total
> omission of any mention of Hiroshima in the films of Ozu, which I
> thought was leave-out, actually had its origins in a cover-up by
> the US military. Of course, Ozu could only be taxed with going
> along with the cover-up if we assume that the subject of his films
> is Japan, as westerners tend (wrongly) to do. But did
> Hiroshima thereby become part of the structure of the films (or a
> structuring absence)?
Very valuable info, but I don't think Ozu would have brought up
the Hiroshima/Nagasaki (why is Nagasaki always forgotten?) bombings
even if there had been no censorship. They are too overwhelming
events, both physically and symbolically, to fit into his world-view;
bring them up and you put yourself on a soapbox. Not Ozu's style.
But I'm no Ozu or Japanese film specialist, so someone may be able to
prove me wrong.
>
And as far as Coppola goes, if she wasn't making a film about
> Japan, but about something else, does that let her off the hook
> for not at least referring to a) poor people and/or b) Hiroshima? A
> but not b? B but not a? We seem to have strongly differing
> opinions on that.
She had no reason to be on the hook in the first place. Mentioning
Hiroshima is a choice you have, not an obligation (and in her case it
would have been a ridiculous choice). As someone wrote here yesterday
or day before, if a Japanese director made a film in the States,
would he be required to mention Pearl Harbor? As for poor people, we
all have lots and lots of favorite films in which nary a poor person
is in view. So why suddenly dump on the likes of Allen and Coppola?
JPC
9213
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 0:04am
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
>
> That's the wrong approach - the idea that the
> privileged classes are
> inherently bad, or that films about them are
> inartistic or unworthy
> compared to the other films you mention. Making
> aesthetic judgments
> based on content rather than a film's approach to
> the content (which
> is a good enough reason to rail against Woody Allen,
> but also a much
> more responsible one).
But isn't this EXACTLY wha critics of LiT are doing --
claiming Sofia Coppola has no "right" to make the film
she's made because Hiroshima isn't mentioned?
>
> David, do you consider yourself as part of an
> economic class?
>
Yes. The poor.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9214
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 0:14am
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
Woody
> Allen's films are not and were not intended as
> "Grand Universal
> Statements" about "New York"
I beg to differ. "Manhattan" announces itself from
it's very opening narration -- visual as well as
verbal -- as being about New York, in the most
absolute manner possible.
In that sense Cassavetes' "Gloria" is a kind of
lef-handed answer to Allen's "Manhattan" -- and much
appreciated as such by me.
He just makes
> (made) films about
> the kind of people he knows, or knows best. "Write
> about what you
> know" they used to advise would-be writers. Is that
> so wrong?
Yes. When you know the wrong people.
I've
> always thought the kind of attack launched by
> Jonathan against
> Allen's films on such grounds was and is unfair and
> irrelevant. (I
> think we had a discussion on this topic here a few
> months ago).
Unfair, yes. Irrelevant, no.
And
> it sounds pretty much the same as the kind of
> putdown of Lost in
> Translation I've been reading here;it always boils
> down to: he/she
> should have made a different film, the film I wanted
> to see, not what
> she/he made, which is not what I'm interested in
> seeing. Therefore
> the film is bad.
>
Quite true.
And I'll have what Sofia's having.
> By the way, do we put down Shakespeare's or
> Racine's plays because
> most of their characters are (highly) "privileged"
> people? And why
> always the assumption that "privileged" people are
> somehow
> less '"real", less "human", less worthy of interest
> than the rest of
> the underprivileged world?
> > JPC
Not all of Shakespeare's characters areprivileged. The
conflict between Pince Hal and falstaff is in many
ways the class struggle that develops between an
"underling" and his "better" once that "better" has
given up slumming (see also "My Own Private Idaho")
Racine wrote science fiction.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9215
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:33am
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
"I don't think Ozu would have brought up the Hiroshima/Nagasaki (why
is Nagasaki always forgotten?) bombings even if there had been no
censorship. They are too overwhelming events, both physically and
symbolically, to fit into his world-view; bring them up and you put
yourself on a soapbox. Not Ozu's style. But I'm no Ozu or Japanese
film specialist, so someone may be able to prove me wrong."
After the end of the Occupation in April 1952 Ozu (or any other
Japanese filmmaker) could mentinon the bombings, yet no films were
made about them until the contaminated fishing boat incident of 1954
I mentioned in an earlier post. But Ozu never alluded to the
bombings the way he did to the MIAs and POWs with casual remarks or
overheard fragments from the radio program "Missing Persons" which
was dedicated to providing news about the MIAs. I think it was
because Ozu had been a POW himself that he touched on this subject,
and the incidental references were as close as he could come to
putting himself on a soap-box.
As to the atomic bombings, I agree that he could not comfortably fit
tragedies of such enormity into his world-view. He could have
included the sentimental pop song "The Bells of Nagasaki" coming from
a radio, (the song was inspired by a memoir of the same title
written by a physician who survived the bombing and treated victims
of it, himself dying of radiation poisoning shortly after the book
was published in 1951) but he didn't, and the fact that Japanese
filmmakers waited until the H-bomb test radiated the fishing boat
(and poisoned the fishing catch taken from South Pacific waters) to
make movies about it indicates that the A-bombings were perhaps too
much to cope with until the Japanese were subjected to a third, if
accidental, bombing. After 1954 the subject of the atomic bombings
was treated in films and other popular art much to the consternation
of the US and the Japanese right wing government of that Cold War
era.
Concerning Nagasaki,THE BELLS OF NAGASAKI was made into a movie, and
RHAPSODY IN AUGUST was about a Nagasaki bombing survivor, but that
bombing hasn't been treated as often as the Hiroshima one, perhaps
because it constitutes an unequivical war crime, whereas there's some
room for debate on the necessity of the Hiroshima bombing.
As far as structing absences go, read "Hiroshima in America: 50 Years
of Denial" by Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell. Let's not forget
the near psychotic reaction to the Smithsonian Institute's 50th
anniversary exhibit of 1995 when they dared to consider the effects
of the bombing on the civilian population. The 60th anniversary is
coming up next year and I expect to see the denial continued, in fact
I'm a little surprised (and pleased) that no one in this group has
made a case for the bombings.
As ever,
Richard
9216
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:02am
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
> > David, do you consider yourself as part of an
> > economic class?
> >
>
> Yes. The poor.
>
>
> David, how dare you? Don't you realize you are probably among the
1% or maybe 2% of the most privileged human beings on this planet?
Your statement is an insult to the true poor. Which is most of the
world's population (largely ignored, of course, by Woody Allen and
Sofia Coppola -- and now by you). Of course you and I are poor
compared to the obscene wealth that surrounds us, but still we're
incredibly wealthy compared to countless millions.Let's count our
blessings (instead of sheep).
JPC
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9217
From: Robert Keser
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:49am
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
One of the damnedest things I've ever seen on the screen was
"Aman" (1967), the Indian musical about Hiroshima, Nagasaki, AND
the fall-out contaminated fishermen. The story follows a young doctor
who wants to devote himself to treating the victims of the
A-bombs. He travels to London to seek the advice of Bertrand Russell
(playing himself and clearly unaware that he's appearing in a
Bollywood musical), who basically gives star Raj Kumar his basic
anti-nuclear war speech. There follows the doctor's tour of the
devastated cities in Japan plus authentic interviews with survivors,
whereupon he gets apprenticed to the doctor responsible for
treating the victims in Hiroshima.
By chance, this (supposedly Japanese) doctor has a comely daughter
(a rather pudgy Indian actress shockingly made up in
yellowface with her eyes taped to appear slanted) who just happens to
be obsessed with Indian culture. She spends her spare time
singing and dancing Bollywood numbers, even speaks Hindi, and affects
wearing a sari. Then the young doctor risks his life by sailing
into the cloud of fallout to rescue the stranded fishermen, but it
all ends badly with a stupendous public funeral through the streets
of Bombay.
At any rate, it makes a unique mix of the authentic and the bogus, of
admirable commitment and offensive stereotypes, of the
primitive and the sophisticated. I don't know that you can judge
this film in terms of leave-out, unless you figure that concentrating
on Hiroshima constitutes an excuse for not dealing with domestic
Indian problems. In a way, that's a reductio ad absurdum of the
kind
of references or "mentions" we are discussing. That's
entertainment!
--Robert Keser
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> a physician who survived the bombing and treated victims
> of it, himself dying of radiation poisoning shortly after the book
> was published in 1951) ... >
9218
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:11am
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> Everyone Says I Love You, to choose an exmaple
> relevant to the discussion, is an
> appallingly bad film and one of the reasons why is
> Allen's lazy direction.
> There's a scene where Goldie Hawn is walking by a
> river with I forget who and
> Allen's shoddy one-take take on the scene says
> "Let's get this scene done
> quickly" rather than "I love you." He should have
> shot it differently and made the
> film I wanted to see. Therefore Everyone Says I Love
> You is bad.
Well it's one flat scene -- not at all representative
of the picture as a whole
But that
> doesn't mean I would ignore people who don't think
> he should have shot it
> differently. I would seek to find out why this is a
> film people wanted to see. In fact,
> I'm very interested to find out if anyone on this
> list likes this film and
> why.
>
Well I like it. I find it a very interesting attempt
at a musical. Much preferable to Dennis Potter in many
ways. I'm not an Allen fan -- as is obvious from my
posts about "Manhattan." And I can't really mount some
sort of giant all-encompassing case for it -- thoug it
benefits from the fact that he acknowledges the class
to which hsi characters belong. I especially loved the
flying through the air dance with Goldie Hawn, and
Edward Norton's number in the jewelry shop. But this
purely has do with my desire for musicals for their
own sake.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9219
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:10am
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
> Sam's answer re: Deer Hunter is that Cimino claimed to be
> making a film about the Vietnam War, so his omission of the
> North Vietnamese was a cover-up.
Well, that's not really what I said. I said Cimino et al "don't know the
history," or don't want you to. I would not situate what they "cover
up" as "North Vietnam" necessarily.
I seem to be the only person on the planet without a strong opinion
on "Lost In Translation" so I guess I should form one. Do you all
think I should see the film first, or would that just confuse matters ? :)
-Sam
9220
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 0:12am
Subject: Woody Allen
I really like "Everyone Says I Love You" too and I know a number of
auteurists who feel likewise - David, Damien Bona, Bob Keser, just to name a few. I'm
preparing a post on the larger topic of this thread (class representations in
cinema), so I won't touch on that right now, except to say that I found
Allen's filmmaking to be really graceful in this film. I agree with Kevin that
Allen can become lazy with his long-take style, with all of its zooming around and
dependence on performance. (Parenthetically, that's why I found last fall's
"Anything Else" to be such a welcome break from his norm; it was Allen's first
film in 'Scope in twenty years and the change in screen dimensions forced him
to alter his visual style, to cut more creatively and dolly or track when he
might normally zoom.)
But, anyway, I didn't find his long-take style to be a detriment in the case
of "Everyone Says..." The air dance with Hawn is a genuinely magical scene,
matched by the fluidity of Allen's camera. I said I'd get to class issues
later, but "Everyone Says..." is interestingly an example of a film which could
probably in fairness be regarded as very snobby - and yet there's more warmth
for its characters here than just about anywhere else in Allen's cinema.
Woody's heyday as a critical favorite has long passed, it seems, but I'll
defend him so long as his work continues to be interesting. As I say, on the
basis of the utterly neglected, misread "Anything Else," it still is.
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9221
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:17am
Subject: Re: PS FILM NOIR screenings (director) guest speaker
> Ruthless (Ulmer). When seen years ago, seemed very eerie and disturbing, not
> "fun". Still, would love to see it again. Any Ulmer film is worth studying.
I loved that film. What I remember is a low rent Citizen Kane, and almost as
good.
> Rogue Cop (Rowland) Depressing. Regularly shown on cable TV. Not my cup of
> hot coffee.
I have dim memories of this from The Late Show (NYC). I think I liked,
although there was a period where if a film was B&W, had some crime
and it rained, I'd watch it ;-)
> So Dark the Night (Joseph H. Lewis) Would love to see this! Regularly cited
> as a major Joseph H. Lewis film.
If it's on the level of Gun Crazy & The Big Combo, then it's a must.
-Sam
9222
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:17am
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
> Woody
> > Allen's films are not and were not intended as
> > "Grand Universal
> > Statements" about "New York"
>
> I beg to differ. "Manhattan" announces itself from
> it's very opening narration -- visual as well as
> verbal -- as being about New York, in the most
> absolute manner possible.
>
So as such it has to be a failure, because no movie can really
be "about" a city. I don't even know what that might mean. it's about
some people who happen to live in that city. Not the same. And if you
show me shots of the Arc de Triomphe and the Eiffel Tower at the
beginning of a movie, that doesn't make it a movie "about" Paris.
>
> He just makes
> > (made) films about
> > the kind of people he knows, or knows best. "Write
> > about what you
> > know" they used to advise would-be writers. Is that
> > so wrong?
>
>
> Yes. When you know the wrong people.
>
> So David you have decided and know for sure what people
are "right" and what people are "wrong". How I envy your certainty!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Racine wrote science fiction.
>
>
> Please explain.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9223
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:44am
Subject: So Dark the Night
>>So Dark the Night (Joseph H. Lewis) Would love to see this! Regularly cited
>>as a major Joseph H. Lewis film.
>
> If it's on the level of Gun Crazy & The Big Combo, then it's a must.
It has defenders (I think Myron Meisel is one of them), but I don't
think it's one of Lewis's best. The faked accents and general
lugubrious tone sort of paralyzed the movie, to my mind - there's a
certain kind of leadenness that Hollywood reserves for dramas set in
European countries. - Dan
9224
From: Samuel Bréan
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:30am
Subject: RE: JJ and VG face to face
>From: David Ehrenstein
>Does he go into his rage at "Elephant" getting the
>Palme D'Or? And editor friend of mine at another
>publication talked with gallo recently about a
>possible interview and said Gallo was going off on
>Gus, saying that he saw him with Jury President
>Patrice Chereau and that Gus' win was a coup by the
>Gay Mafia.
OK, so you asked for it. These quotes are from a Vincent Gallo interview
published in another French magazine ("Technikart" n° 81, April 2004): "Last
year, there was an exhibition of my work at the Agnès B. gallery [in Paris]
and a guy comes sniffing me. I pushed him back like I would have any other
schmuck coming too close to me. A year after that, he's President of the
Jury at Cannes and he's fingering Gus [Van Sant]. They're fingering each
other with the dick of that blond guy from Elephant in their mouths...
Disgusting."
Later on: "When I say bad things about gays, I'm not having a homophobic
delirium. Sex between men doesn't even disgust me. It's just that I'm
against the way they have of setting themselves up as a an alternative power
force."
(Retranslated from French.)
Fortunately, he sometimes says things more interesting than that, or that
"Nixon was the most remarkable President of the USA"...
- Samuel
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger http://g.msn.fr/FR1001/866 : dialoguez en direct et
gratuitement avec vos amis !
9225
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:02am
Subject: Re: So Dark the Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> >>So Dark the Night (Joseph H. Lewis The faked accents and general
> lugubrious tone sort of paralyzed the movie, to my mind - there's a
> certain kind of leadenness that Hollywood reserves for dramas set
in European countries. - Dan
That even happens in his westerns after a while, although the
sculpturesque visual qualities still hold my interest. It's as if he
congealed after the two knockouts - became the opposite of the
dynamic, l'amour-fou-kinda-guy who made Gun Crazy. You want to use
words like constipation, not as a put-down, but as a diagnosis. You
know, when you have diarhea and get over it...too much!
9226
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:05am
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003" wrote:
> > Sam's answer re: Deer Hunter is that Cimino claimed to be
> > making a film about the Vietnam War, so his omission of the
> > North Vietnamese was a cover-up.
>
> Well, that's not really what I said. I said Cimino et al "don't
know the
> history," or don't want you to.
Cimino knows the history. He knows a lot of history -- it's his
favorite subject. So it's either leave-out or cover-up.
> I seem to be the only person on the planet without a strong opinion
> on "Lost In Translation" so I guess I should form one. Do you all
> think I should see the film first, or would that just confuse
matters ? :)
>
> -Sam
After hearing all this discussion, you'll probably have great
insights!
9227
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:12am
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
A quick recap on "Lost in Translation".
Last January, I panned the film here for having little plot, hardly any
characterization, and little visual style. Called such films "minimalist", and
suggested that quite a few "art films" of the past decade fell into this
unfortunate category. Just do not enjoy films done in what seems to be a deliberately
simple style. Much prefer the full-blown development typical of most world
narrative cinema in the pre-1980 era.
Few people on the list agreed (to put it mildly!).
Since then have tried to come to peace with LiT. Many people seem to love
this film. They deeply enjoy the friendship between the two main characters. I am
not trying to be a kill-joy, and have no objections to people having a good
time at the movies.
Having been reading reviews of LiT. People are either deeply in love with
this film, regarding it as one of the most lovable experiences in modern cinema;
OR they are as baffled as I about what seems to be a very thin experience. In
the latter camp is Chris Fujiwara, who dismissed the film in somewhat similar
terms in his 10 Best list in Senses of Cinema.
On politics:
Like most comedies, LiT does not mention the atomic bomb. I am not offended
by this, but do not see anything profound or significant about this either. In
general, the whole "Leave-out/Cover-up" approach seems not very productive as
a way of understanding cinema as a whole, IMHO. Most films leave something
out.
On cinema in general:
There are a lot of films out there that are not "shocking", that seem to be
"good movies" by many traditional criteria. The lack of attention they often
get from the world film community seems puzzling and frustrating. Films such as
"Nowhere in Africa" or "The Clay Bird" seem interesting, but seem to garner
little real attention.
Especially if we are trying to get viewers who rarely travel beyond the
muliplex to take up an interest in World Cinema, we need to concentrate on films of
genuine substance.
Mike Grost
9228
From: Samuel Bréan
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:49am
Subject: RE: Trailers, then and now
Recently I went to see THE NAKED DAWN (in a new print) at the Action
Christine theater. They don't usually present trailers (or commercials,
thankfully!), but this time there was the original trailer for Tourneur's
NIGHT (or CURSE) OF THE DEMON, which was re-released a few weeks afterwards
in the same theater. I was glad I had seen this movie before, because the
trailer pretty much showed *everything*, up to the last images! It was a
nice gesture to have unearthed the original trailer, but it was sure to
spoil the movie for those who hadn't seen it.
- Samuel
_________________________________________________________________
Trouvez l'âme soeur sur MSN Rencontres http://g.msn.fr/FR1000/9551
9229
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:07am
Subject: Re: Trailers, then and now
A favorite trailer:
"Tea for Two" (David Butler, 1950). Doris Day and Gordon MacRae sit at a
table, having tea and singing the story and cast of the film, to the melody of
"Tea for Two". It is civilized, low key and lots of fun.
Also enjoyed Hitchcock's tongue-in-cheek trailer for "Psycho", done in the
style of the introductions to his TV series.
In general, recent trailers reveal so much about movies that I have tended to
get to the theater at the last moment, in order to miss them. Current
Hollywood trailers also tend to be ear-splittingly loud, with the least melodious
rock music imaginable.
I used to enjoy trailers for "casts of thousands" movies in the early 1960's,
with armies of costumed extras surging across the screen. These films were
usually made in Italy, and dubbed. My folks loved them, and we saw lots of these
spectacles during my childhood. A favorite scene from one of these films (not
a trailer): In ancient Rome, the heroic hero knows both a sweet maiden, who
is secretly converted to the oulawed religion of Christianity, and a woman who
is the priestess at an evil pagan temple. The hero stands in front of the idol
at the temple, and the temple's sinister priest pulls a lever behind the
giant idol. A trap door in the floor opens up, plunging the hero down into a pool
of crocodiles. The hero successfully wrestles with a crocodile underwater
before escaping. When I was around 7 years old in 1960, I thought this was really
hot stuff!
If anyone knows the name of this film, please tell me!
Thanks,
Mike Grost
9230
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:10pm
Subject: RE: JJ and VG face to face
Oh that is just hilarious!
He's a an ideal subject for a documentary about
paranoia and megalomania.
--- Samuel Bréan wrote:
>
> OK, so you asked for it. These quotes are from a
> Vincent Gallo interview
> published in another French magazine ("Technikart"
> n° 81, April 2004): "Last
> year, there was an exhibition of my work at the
> Agnès B. gallery [in Paris]
> and a guy comes sniffing me. I pushed him back like
> I would have any other
> schmuck coming too close to me. A year after that,
> he's President of the
> Jury at Cannes and he's fingering Gus [Van Sant].
> They're fingering each
> other with the dick of that blond guy from Elephant
> in their mouths...
> Disgusting."
>
> Later on: "When I say bad things about gays, I'm not
> having a homophobic
> delirium. Sex between men doesn't even disgust me.
> It's just that I'm
> against the way they have of setting themselves up
> as a an alternative power
> force."
>
> (Retranslated from French.)
>
> Fortunately, he sometimes says things more
> interesting than that, or that
> "Nixon was the most remarkable President of the
> USA"...
>
> - Samuel
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> MSN Messenger http://g.msn.fr/FR1001/866 :
> dialoguez en direct et
> gratuitement avec vos amis !
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9231
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:13pm
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
.
> >
> > So David you have decided and know for sure
> what people
> are "right" and what people are "wrong". How I envy
> your certainty!
> >
Some of us just have the knack, J-P.
>
> >
> > Racine wrote science fiction.
> >
> >
> > Please explain.
> >
I was thinking specifically ofRuiz's "berenice" and
jean-Pierre Kalfon's production of "Andromache" in
Rivette's "L'Amour Fou." For me character and action
in Racine are so abstract as to be beyond any specific
relation to the "real world."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9232
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:18pm
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > David, how dare you? Don't you realize you are
> probably among the
> 1% or maybe 2% of the most privileged human beings
> on this planet?
> Your statement is an insult to the true poor. Which
> is most of the
> world's population (largely ignored, of course, by
> Woody Allen and
> Sofia Coppola -- and now by you). Of course you and
> I are poor
> compared to the obscene wealth that surrounds us,
> but still we're
> incredibly wealthy compared to countless
> millions.Let's count our
> blessings (instead of sheep).
>
I wasn't being mataphoric, J-P. I have no money.
Literally.
I'm squeaking by from freelance assignment to
freelance assignement. I have no insurance or health
coverage of any kind.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
9233
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:41pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > > Racine wrote science fiction.
> > >
> > >
> > > Please explain.
> > >
> I was thinking specifically ofRuiz's "berenice" and
> jean-Pierre Kalfon's production of "Andromache" in
> Rivette's "L'Amour Fou." For me character and action
> in Racine are so abstract as to be beyond any specific
> relation to the "real world."
>
>
> That's because something must be lost in translation. Racine
deals with very very real emotions, although they may seem unreal to
you because they're wrapped up in what sounds like very abstract
speech.
I haven't seen the Ruiz but I fell in love with my wife while
she was directing a production of "Berenice". I love the Rivette.
JPC
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9234
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:54pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> > I wasn't being mataphoric, J-P. I have no money.
>
> Literally.
>
> I'm squeaking by from freelance assignment to
> freelance assignement. I have no insurance or health
> coverage of any kind.
>
> ____Sorry, I thought you were being somewhat metaphoric.Still you
have a computer and a roof over your head and enough to eat I
imagine. Millions can't say the same.
_____________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
9235
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:57pm
Subject: Re: Trailer
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
A favorite scene from one of these films (not
> a trailer): In ancient Rome, the heroic hero knows both a sweet
maiden, who
> is secretly converted to the oulawed religion of Christianity, and
a woman who
> is the priestess at an evil pagan temple. The hero stands in front
of the idol
> at the temple, and the temple's sinister priest pulls a lever
behind the
> giant idol. A trap door in the floor opens up, plunging the hero
down into a pool
> of crocodiles. The hero successfully wrestles with a crocodile
underwater
> before escaping. When I was around 7 years old in 1960, I thought
this was really
> hot stuff!
> If anyone knows the name of this film, please tell me!
>
> Thanks,
> Mike Grost
It may be "Hercules Unchained" (1960). Its been ages since I've seen
it, but it has some evil egyptian cultists and crocs.
Henrik
9236
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:37pm
Subject: Re: So Dark the Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
.
>
> It has defenders (I think Myron Meisel is one of them), but I don't
> think it's one of Lewis's best. The faked accents and general
> lugubrious tone sort of paralyzed the movie, to my mind - there's a
> certain kind of leadenness that Hollywood reserves for dramas set
in
> European countries. - Dan
Count me among the defenders, although I have to agree about the
leadenness-- it is a flawed movie but a thoroughly fascinating one. I
haven't seen it in about 20 years unfortunately, but looking up my
Lewis essay in American Directors (vol 1) I just found to my surprise
that I wrote a much longer analysis of the film than I remembered. A
brief excerpt:
" Whereas in Julia Ross certain conventions were rather passively
accepted as necessary evils, in So dark the Night Lewis worked both
against and with the elements at his disposal, managing to create a
convincing composite, not at the level of surface realism (although
Bogdanovich curiously found the "French atmosphere" of the
film "remarkable") but through stylistic unity. While both the script
and the direction may seem erratic and cranky in the film's first
half or so, all the elements come together after the young girl has
been found murdered and geray takes charge of the investigation. Far
from becoming a straight whodunit from this point, the film proceeds
with the same moody quirkiness of detail, but a purpose for it begins
to emerge, and much of what seemed arbitrarily excentric in the first
part becomes illuminated in retrospect. The quaint directorial
flourishes of the aerly scenes manifested Lewis' deliberate choice of
an expressionistic rather than straightforward stylistic approach;
later on, this is revealed to be more than a mere formal option, the
only really valid way of dealing with the story's thematic content."
The film has a strong Oedipal strain-- the detective investigating a
murder unaware that he himself committed it is a direct reference to
the tragedy of Oedipus (enhanced by the "flatfoot"'s footprints in
the mud as an echo of Oedipus's own "swollen foot" -- both "clues".)
In the extraordinary climax Geray, who has realized who he really is,
smashes the window in which he has caught his reflection (a window
through which so many shots have been filmed throughout the movie)in
an echo of Oedipus'blinding himself after finding out the truth.
None of this is typical of your ordinary grade-B movie.
JPC
9237
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:50pm
Subject: Re: Trailer
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Henrik Sylow"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> A favorite scene from one of these films (not
> > a trailer): In ancient Rome, the heroic hero knows both a sweet
> maiden, who
> > is secretly converted to the oulawed religion of Christianity,
and
> a woman who
> > is the priestess at an evil pagan temple. The hero stands in
front
> of the idol
> > at the temple, and the temple's sinister priest pulls a lever
> behind the
> > giant idol. A trap door in the floor opens up, plunging the hero
> down into a pool
> > of crocodiles. The hero successfully wrestles with a crocodile
> underwater
> > before escaping. When I was around 7 years old in 1960, I thought
> this was really
> > hot stuff!
> > If anyone knows the name of this film, please tell me!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike Grost
>
> It may be "Hercules Unchained" (1960). Its been ages since I've
seen
> it, but it has some evil egyptian cultists and crocs.
>
> Henrik
Might also be (although it doesn't take place in Rome)"Maciste nella
valle dei re"/ "Le Geant de la vallee des rois" (US title: Son of
Samson) which had the incredibly sexy (in a delightfully cheap way)
Chelo Alonso as a wicked Egyptian queen. At the end she gets her just
deserts by falling into a crocodile pit.
JPC
9238
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:22pm
Subject: Re: Leave-out/Cover-up
Sam,
I'm with you... except that I have seen LIT and now
will see it again after all these posts!
Elizabeth
9239
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:26pm
Subject: Lost in po-mo translation
Dear friends - I thought LOST IN TRANSLATION was a fine little film -
although less ambitious and less formally interesting, in my view, than THE
VIRGIN SUICIDES, a film so different to LIT that very few people even try to
compare them - but I I remain to be convinced that there is a lot going on
'out of frame' there in a social-historical-political sense.
I'm not sure if anyone has said this so far in the discussion, but there is
one good explanatory reason why Sofia Coppola is NOT a political filmmaker.
She is the absolute postmodern gal, whose sensibility was absolutely formed
in the 80s. And what I understand by a 'postmodern sensibility' in this
sense - not a postmodern aesthetic, there is no single postmodern aesthetic
- is a particular, very ideologically loaded moment in recent cultural
history when people (mainly young, artistic people) figured they were free
of history and ideology and politics, that the traumas of the world had
ceased - of course, they may not have been too aware of what was going
outside their own zones of relative calm or privilege! September 11, the war
on Irak, NO LOGO and a hundred other things have really put the full stop to
the 'postmodern moment' in this sense.
But it's where Sofia Coppola comes from, and it's the sensibility her work
bears witness to, for better and for worse. Look at it this way: the Wong
Kar-Wai connection in LOST IN TRANSLATION - she even cited him at the
Oscars, for heaven's sake! Wong is another ultimate '80s sensibility po-mo
guy. There are 'shades' of history and politics in his work (the hand-over
of HK, etc), but he is all about celebrating the melancholy 'high' of
feeling adrift from time, history, subjectivity, etc. And how Sofia Coppola
translates all that Wong-ness is into the great po-mo icon: Tokyo, crazy
capital of lost-in-the flux-of-it-all hyper-media postmodernism! This is not
just a Western 'orientalist' projection, by the way: plenty of Japanese
po-mo art in all media (and Japanese '80s cultural theory, which was way
ahead of the West on this score) is also blissfully history-free - or
behaves, perhaps in furious denial mode, as if weighty history was never a
burden to anyone but their dreary ancestors. You have to watch something
like the extraordinary H-STORY to get the tortuous flip-side of this whole
sensibility.
Someone once gave me a tape of a 'magazine' TV series made by Sofia and Zoe
Cassavetes. It was a heck of a lot of silly fun, but it wasn't in the
remotest bit political. It was pop, pop, pop 'till you drop: 80s-style po-mo
once more. I think, as a filmmaker, Coppola is good at emotional and
relationship ambiguities - that's the theme that connects her first two
films - but nothing much wider than that.
Adrian
9240
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:28pm
Subject: Japan HIROSHIMA; USA ?
If Coppola 'was suppose to pay homage' to Hiroshima in LIT,
what ought foreign film-makers cite in films about the USA?
I am familiar with ACKERMAN's SUD.
9241
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:03pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
> But isn't this EXACTLY wha critics of LiT are doing --
> claiming Sofia Coppola has no "right" to make the film
> she's made because Hiroshima isn't mentioned?
I don't know. Are they? If so, that's kind of a stupid thing to say.
> Yes. The poor.
Um, yeah, right.
-Jaime
9242
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:04pm
Subject: Re: JJ and VG face to face
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> Oh that is just hilarious!
> He's a an ideal subject for a documentary about
> paranoia and megalomania.
And you're the ideal person to make this documentary!
-Jaime
9243
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:19pm
Subject: Re: Leave-Out/Cover-Up
An much-needed summation of a sprawling debate (just one of
yesterday's digests, printed out to read on the subway, came to 19
pages). There does seem to be something tautological about the
leave-out argument, by which the movie can be argued to be about
everything it's not. (If there were more academics here, I think the
term "structuring absence" would have come up by now.) For me,
though, I still need some indication of what's not being shown, some
sense of self-consciousness. What's (arguably) objectionable about
Woody Allen is not that he makes movies about upper-middle-class
white people (whose problems are just as, let's say, "valid" as any
one else's) but that his movies seem to be unaware that anyone else
exists. I remember a black comedian expressing astonishment that
Allen could shoot on the streets of NYC and still not film people of
color; his thesis was that Allen must be using digital technology to
morph them into lampposts, a la THE BED SITTING ROOM. The power of
Shakespeare's work would absolutely be diminished if he had similarly
limited himself: it's doubtful he could have arrived at King Lear
without going through Othello and Falstaff. (Henry IV part XXI?)
The reason I brought up SANS SOLEIL in relation to LiT was not just
because it's a movie with "political consciousness" (i.e. good) as
opposed to none (bad). (The idea that every movie made by an American
in or about Japan should perforce refer to Hirsohima sounds, frankly,
Stalinist.) It's because SS is so complex with regard to its own
spectatorship: Marker quite explicitly views Japan as if he's just
emerged from a spaceship, constructing fanciful narratives of found
images that are the more glorious for their acknowledged
artificiality. (And this after years of trying to understand the
culture.) Coppola, by contrast, either seems unaware of or satisfied
with the tourist-visa approach. Obviously she's satirizing her
characters' self-absorption, but it's a complacent satire designed to
kid those attitudes rather than take them apart. Unless you speak
Japanese, you're necessarily as at sea as Murray in the scenes where
the commercial director is yelling at him. Rhe statements made on
this list are a lot smarter than the movie itself. I do feel that in
their zeal to defend their fondness for a high-toned bittersweet
comedy, a great many people (and not just on this list) have made
claims for the movie that simply aren't supported by anything in (or
out of) the movie itself.
One note on an (I think) unanswered question about the movie:
Murray's role was written for and always intended for Murray (Coppola
went so far as to say she would never have made the movie without
him), but Murray did say that he based his character's self-loathing
grimace in the Suntory ads on similar Harrison Ford ads that were up
in Tokyo at the time they were filming.
Sam
9244
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:49pm
Subject: Re: Leave-Out/Cover-Up
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, samadams@e... wrote:
> An much-needed summation of a sprawling debate (just one
of
> yesterday's digests, printed out to read on the subway, came to
19
> pages). There does seem to be something tautological about
the
> leave-out argument, by which the movie can be argued to be
about
> everything it's not. (If there were more academics here, I think
the
> term "structuring absence" would have come up by now.)
Actually, I used it in the post that started this thread.
Re: the "ethnic cleansing" in Woody Allen's films: It would have to
be deliberate - make of it what you will. He named his first child
after a black baseball player - make of THAT what you will.
Re: Coppola. She has herself expressed amazement at
people's reactions to the film. I have offered a pretty
sstraightforward account of what's going on in both of her
features - re: Adrian's comment - which comes down to
comparing them to Blake's Songs of Innocence, poems that kind
of define the idea of "structuring absence" in a literary context,
and I think I'll stick by that.
Incidentally, Patrice Blouin did a piece in the Cahiers which I
summarized here at some length months ago comparing In the
Mood for Love and The Virgin Suicides in order to define the
elements of a po-mo esthetic, much as Oudart defined the
elements of the modernist esthetic in Un discours en defaut.
Re: Andy bringing up Hiroshima. I think it's a fruitful question with
respect to Coppola - who is NOT Paris Hilton, any more than
Michael Cimino is ignorant of history - and whose father made a
film about a criminal war against an Asian people. (In terms of
personality, I'd say, she seems to take after her mother more
than her father.)
Perhaps it's even fruitful re: Ozu. the discussion stimulated me
for the first time to at least ask about Ozu and Hiroshima, and I
have already been much instructed by Robert's replies to my
question. I find it a provocative juxtaposition to think about. It may
be ultimately a dead end - we'll see! Answers to good questions
don't always come three seconds after they're asked.
9245
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:14pm
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
Oooooooh, Adrian, dem's fightin' words!!!!
Many young people in the 80s (and this extended well beyond young artistic
people) never figured they were free of history and ideology and politics. It
became difficult to live in the present and thus politicize. Nostalgia for the
present, Jameson calls it, and you can skim tons of it running down the sides
of a great film like Heathers. We were constantly being told that our
generation had nothing to call its own, was derivative. And, of course, the category of
youth was extended to include aging Boomers mourning their failed cultural
revolution. Isn't that what Poltergeist is about? Here's a film centered around
the disappearance of youth, where children catch their parents smoking pot.
Isn't Carol Ann passing through her mother's body really just a fountain of
youth? 60s youth (and let's not forget the zones of relative calm or privilege
that helped so many hippies drop out) put their stamp on history but as they
became middle-aged in the 80s, far too many of them refused to let anyone else do
the same, refused to acknowledge what was unique about the 80s, refused to see
how something like digital technology not only changed our relationship to
history but allowed the 60s counterculture to continue stroking their moment in
a flood of reissue and box sets, on and fuckin' on.
If you doubt 80s youth political commitment, find some issues of Spin
magazine from 1985-1989. There's nary a page that doesn't acknowledge how everyone is
a product of ideology. They had a vigilant AIDS column every month. They
tried to find the revolutionary potential in house, rap and even cheese like Milli
Vanilli rather than lambast it as impure or somehow less free of capital than
Elvis-Beatles-Sex Pistols (oh that litany!!).
And, of course, one of the key characteristics of postmodernism is late
capitalism's successful convolution into boutique culture making it all the more
difficult to mount an attack on its insidious tunnelings. This is where No Logo
gives me pause. The 60s counterculture had their share of logos but there's a
theory that the seuxal revolution came into existence at precisely the point
where late capitalism needed more markets. Nevertheless, at precisely the point
where the subjectvities that germinated in the sexual revolution began to
become visible in a mass way, where youth culture slowly started eeking out of
the counterculture's shadow, we get No Logo. Just as various disenfranchised
groups make headway in the marketplace, we get an Adornoesque reminder of how
thoroughly capital has rationalized our lives. Let's keep in mind what Adorno
said about women's lib: great - now you have just as much right to be exploited
too.
For me, some of the best political energy of the 80s recognized the
productive potential of late capitalism and the unproductive griping about its
totality. Because the question is what is the way out of its inequities? Dropping out
and living in the woods (and what inequities would be, and have been,
reproduced there)? Or is the only out moving directly through it?
Sofia Coppola may be a product of the 80s but certainly not this energy.
AARRRGGHHHHH!!
Kevin
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9246
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:51pm
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
Absolutely fascinating. I know Naomi Klein's book No Logo, but I
had no idea it was this widely discussed. Could someone
please explain what it spawned and how it impacts -- undercuts,
if I've understood correctly - the 80s generation?
This generational in-fighting is really, really interesting stuff. I
just dealt with a whole editorial board at CdC (now gone) who
set out to define a film sensibility for a generation - Blouin's
article about Wong Kar-Wai and Sofia Coppola was part of that -
and now we have another one: One of the new writers praised
Runaway Jury (w/out mentioning the director's name) as a
contemporary film in the March issue because of the interplay
between the Hackman and Hoffman icons (60s) and Cusack
(80s) - not picking up, as I recall, on the fact that Cusack starred
in The Grifters, which is the reference point for his role in
Runway Jury.
I wrote a rave review of Flirting with Disaster for Cannes as a
Generation X identity picture: Stiller first re-parenting himself with
a Reaganite family in San Diego, then with a profane working
class guy like the truck driver at the end of Spanking the Monkey,
and finally with his real 60s family (they finally name the kid after
Jerry Garcia). Then one of Wave 3 of 90s editors panned the
movie in a capsule when it opened.
My demented mentor Harold Bloom talks about these matters in
another way: anxiety of influence, killing the (artistic) father. But
this discussion is really about something else, the politics of the
60s and what came after. For the record, I don't teach, so I don't
have daily contact with young people, but I know a few, and they
have never struck me as apolitical.
As for the politics of the 60s, that's a big discussion. Being an
old hippy fart, I do astrology, and our generation is known to
astrologers as the Pluto in Leo generation. That will do as a
myth for me: People who born while Pluto is in Leo seize power
before they're ready to handle it, fuck up, and get a second crack
at it when they're much older. It's nice to know that our
spectacular flameout is still causing anxiety in our descendants,
but I view Bush fascism and its prequels under Reagan and
Bush I as part of a heavily financed, well-organized war on the
60s. That's the main problem we confront today.
Re: digital technology - It's going to revolutionize everything, and
it's also going to produce a monumental amount of garbage, just
like the electric guitar, which produced one Jimi Hendrix for every
10,000 shitty bluesboys.
9247
From: Craig Keller
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:10pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
> Re: digital technology - It's going to revolutionize everything, and
> it's also going to produce a monumental amount of garbage, just
> like the electric guitar, which produced one Jimi Hendrix for every
> 10,000 shitty bluesboys.
And a Graham Coxon, a Jonny Greenwood, and a Thurston Moore as
post-1980 correctives to the obscene 10,000-bluesboys-in-one-body
figures of Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, and Carlos Santana.
Speaking of Mr. Greenwood, I wanted to note that while I haven't read
'No Logo' yet, I'm fairly certain that a large part of the book's
influence on members of my generation (I can never keep it straight if
I'm Generation Y or Generation X.5) is due in good measure to its
frequent invocation in interviews by the various members of Radiohead
-- often in the self-initiated context, I should add, of how to
reconcile the tenets of promotion/distribution on a major record label
(Capitol Records) with a worldview otherwise highly charged by media
subversion and the critique of governments and blood-capital. The
group's very interesting, very idiosyncratic, and fairly notorious
website also contains a page of links (at http://www.radiohead.com )
that's in-line with the anti-capitalist/-marketeering approach of Naomi
Klein's book... although this latest version doesn't seem to contain
the amount of links available on previous incarnations of the site.
craig.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9248
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:20pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
> I wasn't being mataphoric, J-P. I have no money.
>
> Literally.
>
> I'm squeaking by from freelance assignment to
> freelance assignement. I have no insurance or health
> coverage of any kind.
One of your better aphorisms is worth the entire Calendar
Section of the LA Times for a week.
I wonder how many of us in the group are in the same shape.
9249
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:26pm
Subject: one more word re: TCM trailers
While watching one of the many movies I've recorded from Turner
Classic Movies, I was reminded that many of their own program
advertisements (about upcoming films or film series, specific to TCM)
can be much better than many of the original trailers they play. The
station will take an old movie like ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES or
WUTHERING HEIGHTS and edit together a trailer that is contemporary in
sound and feel - but always appropriate to the film in question; thus,
the WUTHERING HEIGHTS ad is completely non-tongue-in-cheek, compared
to the movie itself, really ups the "windswept gothic doomed romance"
aspect.
The best I've seen is the one they did for a series called "Every
Great Western (Except SHANE)," a montage of classic and not-so-classic
westerns to the tune of Radiohead's "I Could Be Wrong." Although the
one covering a Doris Day series and the Ealing Studios "retro," using
an alt-rock cover of "Whatever Will Be, Will Be (Que Sera Sera)" is
pretty good, too.
-Jaime
9250
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:28pm
Subject: I want the Kool-Aid concession on Mel's next movie...
'Tis the season to remake William A. Graham tv movies: While
Scorsese is finishing his remake of The Amazing Howard
Hughes, Spielberg has announced he's remaking 21 Hours in
Munich, Graham's film about the Black September massacre of
Israeli atheletes at the Munich Olympics-- the one that bizarrely
enjoyed a smash hit theatrical release in Beirut. Is Mel Gibson
ordering up a copy of Guyana Tragedy: The Jim Jones Story as
we speak?
9251
From: Craig Keller
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:50pm
Subject: Re: one more word re: TCM trailers
> The best I've seen is the one they did for a series called "Every
> Great Western (Except SHANE)," a montage of classic and not-so-classic
> westerns to the tune of Radiohead's "I Could Be Wrong."
Indeed -- it's actually called "I Might Be Wrong." =) Great commercial
though. TCM's graphic design and presentation sensibility is really
spot-on; they operate from the starting point that all the cinema is in
some sense "the cinema of nightfall." Contrast and compare with AMC
(which, of course, isn't even the same channel it was when it was still
"American Movie Classics" -- although even then they chopped up the
films with commercial breaks although... I could be wrong). Good
website too. It would be pretty dreamy to have a job at TCM, except
that they're in Atlanta.
craig.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9252
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:36pm
Subject: Re: Re: JJ and VG face to face
From your lips to some moneyed someone's ear!
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> wrote:
> > Oh that is just hilarious!
> > He's a an ideal subject for a documentary about
> > paranoia and megalomania.
>
> And you're the ideal person to make this
> documentary!
>
> -Jaime
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9253
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:54pm
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
That's because something must be lost in
> translation. Racine
> deals with very very real emotions, although they
> may seem unreal to
> you because they're wrapped up in what sounds like
> very abstract
> speech.
Partly. But unreal also because they're so heightened.
Worlds are falling apart because of love.
> I haven't seen the Ruiz but I fell in love
> with my wife while
> she was directing a production of "Berenice". I love
> the Rivette.
>
Now THAT'S incredibly romantic -- and a great subject
for a movie.
I'd pick Manoel De Oliviera to direct it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9254
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:57pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> > I wasn't being mataphoric, J-P. I have no money.
> >
> > Literally.
> >
> > I'm squeaking by from freelance assignment to
> > freelance assignement. I have no insurance or health
> > coverage of any kind.
>
> One of your better aphorisms is worth the entire Calendar
> Section of the LA Times for a week.
>
> I wonder how many of us in the group are in the same shape.
Good question. I think I hover precariously just above the poverty
level (as defined by the US). We live above our means, it's less
expensive (I think this is a line, possibly misquoted, from a movie;
anybody?)
JPC
9255
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:59pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
> That's because something must be lost in
> > translation. Racine
> > deals with very very real emotions, although they
> > may seem unreal to
> > you because they're wrapped up in what sounds like
> > very abstract
> > speech.
>
> Partly. But unreal also because they're so heightened.
> Worlds are falling apart because of love.
>
> > I haven't seen the Ruiz but I fell in love
> > with my wife while
> > she was directing a production of "Berenice". I love
> > the Rivette.
> >
> Now THAT'S incredibly romantic -- and a great subject
> for a movie.
>
> I'd pick Manoel De Oliviera to direct it.
>
>
> Not Sofia?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9256
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:59pm
Subject: Re: one more word re: TCM trailers
I'm reminded of the time Joe Dante and Alan Arkush
put in cutting trailers for Roger Corman at New World
before being given a shot at directing with "Hollywood
Boulevard." There was one movie made in the
Phillipines that has a shot of an exploding helicopter
in it. It was so great that Joe and Alan put it in all
the trailers -- regardlss of the film. As a result Joe
says his basic principle of film editing is "When in
doubt, cut to the shot of the exploding helicopter."
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> While watching one of the many movies I've recorded
> from Turner
> Classic Movies, I was reminded that many of their
> own program
> advertisements (about upcoming films or film series,
> specific to TCM)
> can be much better than many of the original
> trailers they play. The
> station will take an old movie like ANGELS WITH
> DIRTY FACES or
> WUTHERING HEIGHTS and edit together a trailer that
> is contemporary in
> sound and feel - but always appropriate to the film
> in question; thus,
> the WUTHERING HEIGHTS ad is completely
> non-tongue-in-cheek, compared
> to the movie itself, really ups the "windswept
> gothic doomed romance"
> aspect.
>
> The best I've seen is the one they did for a series
> called "Every
> Great Western (Except SHANE)," a montage of classic
> and not-so-classic
> westerns to the tune of Radiohead's "I Could Be
> Wrong." Although the
> one covering a Doris Day series and the Ealing
> Studios "retro," using
> an alt-rock cover of "Whatever Will Be, Will Be (Que
> Sera Sera)" is
> pretty good, too.
>
> -Jaime
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
9257
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:02am
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> One of your better aphorisms is worth the entire
> Calendar
> Section of the LA Times for a week.
>
From your lips to La Times' ear.
Though my standing with them should diminish even
further with the appearance of my "L.A. Weekly"
article tomorrow.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9258
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:10am
Subject: Re: Re: Leave-Out/Cover-Up
--- samadams@e... wrote:
I remember a black comedian expressing
> astonishment that
> Allen could shoot on the streets of NYC and still
> not film people of
> color; his thesis was that Allen must be using
> digital technology to
> morph them into lampposts, a la THE BED SITTING
> ROOM.
Oh I'm crazy about THE BED-SITTING ROOM, a sorely
neglected Richard Lester film of Spike Milligan's
handiwork. I especially love the climax when the room
says "Quick! Put a sign in the window: 'No colored.No
Children. And Above all NO COLORED CHILDREN!' "
It also features the lovely, and now long-gone from
AIDS, Richard Warwick.
> The reason I brought up SANS SOLEIL in relation to
> LiT was not just
> because it's a movie with "political consciousness"
> (i.e. good) as
> opposed to none (bad). (The idea that every movie
> made by an American
> in or about Japan should perforce refer to Hirsohima
> sounds, frankly,
> Stalinist.) It's because SS is so complex with
> regard to its own
> spectatorship: Marker quite explicitly views Japan
> as if he's just
> emerged from a spaceship, constructing fanciful
> narratives of found
> images that are the more glorious for their
> acknowledged
> artificiality. (And this after years of trying to
> understand the
> culture.)
But "San Soleil" (which I adore -- it's an absolute
masterpiece) is a first-person essay film (though it
uses a thrid person framing device.) The same can't be
said of LiT which is a straightforward comedy-drama
with no narration. As auteurists we morph Sofia into a
picture that doesn't require authorial presence to be
properly understood.
> Unless you speak
> Japanese, you're necessarily as at sea as Murray in
> the scenes where
> the commercial director is yelling at him.
A Japanese friend tells me that the director is giving
Murray very precise instructions that his translator
ignores.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9259
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:13am
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > Not Sofia?
> >
You need a filmmaker with a younger spirit than she
has.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9260
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:41am
Subject: Re: Leave-Out/Cover-Up
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- samadams@e... wrote:
> I remember a black comedian expressing
> > astonishment that
> > Allen could shoot on the streets of NYC and still
> > not film people of
> > color; his thesis was that Allen must be using
> > digital technology to
> > morph them into lampposts, a la THE BED SITTING
> > ROOM.
Allen shoots in neighborhoods where you see very few "people of
color". He didn't need digital technology.
(the following remark is about text at the bottom of this post!):
This speaks in favor of Sofia's honesty. But the Japanese dialogue
(monologue rather) should have been subtitled. By the way, the gag
about very long speeches being translated by an interpreter with just
a few words, and vice versa, has been used many times. It's still
funny but it's one of the least original aspects of her film.
JPC
> Oh I'm crazy about THE BED-SITTING ROOM, a sorely
> neglected Richard Lester film of Spike Milligan's
> handiwork. I especially love the climax when the room
> says "Quick! Put a sign in the window: 'No colored.No
> Children. And Above all NO COLORED CHILDREN!' "
> It also features the lovely, and now long-gone from
> AIDS, Richard Warwick.
>
I love The Bed Sitting Room and all the stuff from that crazy gang
going back to "Son of Fred". My video of the film is unfortunately
shitty.
> > Unless you speak
> > Japanese, you're necessarily as at sea as Murray in
> > the scenes where
> > the commercial director is yelling at him.
>
> A Japanese friend tells me that the director is giving
> Murray very precise instructions that his translator
> ignores.
>
>
> My comment on this is above! JPC
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9261
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:49pm
Subject: Re: William A. Graham (was I want the Kool-Aid concession)
Bill Krohn writes:
'Tis the season to remake William A. Graham tv movies: While Scorsese is
finishing his remake of The Amazing Howard Hughes, Spielberg has announced he's
remaking 21 Hours in Munich, Graham's film about the Black September massacre
of Israeli atheletes at the Munich Olympics
Did not see these. But am very fond of some other William A. Graham TV works.
In a previous post believe Bill Krohn praised Graham's Batman episode "True
or False Face / Super Rat Race" (1966). This is the one in which False Face can
impersonate anyone, in an instant. One minute he looks like a cowboy, the
next he's a double for Commisioner Gordon. Very funny and clever, and genuinely
surreal in execution. (Of course, when he's Gordon, he's played by regular
Gordon actor Neil Hamilton. I grew up watching Hamilton on Batman, had no idea he
was the star of such great D.W. Griffith films as "America" and "Isn't Life
Wonderful").
Three good TV movies by Graham:
Congratulations, It's a Boy (1971)
Magic Carpet (1972)
Birds of Prey (1973).
Magic Carpet is about a tour agency in Rome. Birds of Prey opens with a
lengthy and dazzling helicopter chase over Salt Lake City - one of the best long
helicopter sequences in the movies.
Mike Grost
PS Hope Scorsese is planning to serve banana ice cream at the concession
stands for Howard Hughes.
9262
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:52am
Subject: re: lost in po-mo translation
Thanks, Kevin, for your terrific post. It prompts me to make myself clearer,
because I did not mean my thoughts to be 'fighting words' against 'youth',
or youth in the 80s. As a matter of fact, I was a youth in the 80s myself!!
And in fact, I wasn't trying to attack or criticise even the postmodernist
aspect of that time, actually more trying to describe it 'from the inside' -
as my own writing of that time was part of that sensibility and, as some
some angry old lefties occasionally tell me, may still be!!
I wasn't saying that all 'youth' of the 80s were postmodern, nor that all
art of the 80s was postmodern. BUT there was a very particular slice of
self-consciously named 'postmodern culture' that did indeed revel in 'the
end of history', freedom from ideology, etc etc - I remember it well! In
Australia, there was a specific art/avant-garde movement called Popism - it
had echoes in other countries in the 80s - which had a charismatic guru
named Paul Taylor (who died of AIDS in the late 80s), editor and figurehead
of a wildly influential magazine called ART AND TEXT. I observed at that
time - and still see many traces of - a kind of 'popist' film culture that
set off in reaction to the 'hard line' of SCREEN theory, and also in
reaction to a certain school of militant political filmmaking. It was a
period - with all due disclaimers for polemical excess - where De Palma was
suddenly seemed more important than Kluge, and teen movies seemed more fun
than the Dziga-Vertov group! And, in the realm of theory, Deleuze and co.
seemed much freer and more inspiring than Althusser and Lacan (I still
believe this!). This 'popist' sensibility of course draws a lot from the
nouvelle vague - in many respects, in its heyday, another affluent,
hyper-playful, dreamy, 'end of ideology' moment/sensibility - some of the
politics these days attributed to the Nouvelle Vague retrospectively (eg, by
Godard) is pure wishful thinking and historical opportunism. So, the kind of
postmodernism I'm talking about in 80s film and beyond picks up speed
through Carax, moves on to Wong Kar-Wai (Bill, thanks for the reminder about
the Sofia Coppola-Wong piece in CAHIERS), and takes in a lot of super-cool
Asian (and 'Asia-phile') filmmaking.
It's great what you say, Kevin, about SPIN magazine and a whole other
tradition in music, film, culture, etc, more keyed in to explicit politics,
coming through the 80s. Of course, to talk of any decade in block terms is a
silly abstraction: there many 80s, many threads, many traditions, all
contesting each other simultaneously. I get a sense of that kind of warring
historical richness when I read 'A Film By' posts on the 60s, for instance!
Adrian
9263
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 0:54am
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> > > Not Sofia?
> > >
> You need a filmmaker with a younger spirit than she
> has.
>
> I appreciate your aphorisms and paradoxes as much as the next
fellow, but I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
Oliveira films of the past few years. But then I probably should make
that film myself. I'm so much younger than he is...
JPC
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9264
From:
Date: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:01pm
Subject: Re: one more word re: TCM trailers
TCM's trailer for "Les Vampires" was terrific. It managed to convey the
extraordinary mood of Feuillade, educate viewers about the director, and serve as a
great "step right up and see the movie" trailer, all in one combo.
They did a great job too for "Ace of Hearts" (Wallace Worsley, 1921).
The sheer atmospheric qualities and vivid visuals of silent movies, really
lend themselves to trailers.
Just rented a DVD of "A Fool There Was" (1915), the film which made Theda
Bara a star, and which made "Vamps" a household word. Will watch it soon. Can
Theda have done a better job than Bebe Daniels, who played classic vamp "Satan
Synne" in De Mille's "The Affairs of Anatol"? Can anything top Bebe's red "Queen
of the Spiders" dress in that film? Stay tuned. The verdict of history is
coming in soon...
I'd never heard of Radiohead before all the current posts.
Mike Grost
who is mainly a classical music fan, but eager to learn about all kinds of
music.
9265
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:42am
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- hotlove666 wrote:
I view Bush fascism and its prequels under
> Reagan and
> Bush I as part of a heavily financed, well-organized
> war on the
> 60s. That's the main problem we confront today.
>
SING OUT LOUISE!
I found it amazing the way Clinton was turned by this
relentless propaganda machine into an emblematic 60's
figure --even though he was a totally marginal person
during that period. "Killing" Clinton was equivalent
to "Killing" the 60's in this mindset.
Of course the 60's they always complain about is
really the early 70's. The bulk of the 60's was
largely apolitical until May 68.
In that sense Wong kar Wai et.al. is a throwback to
the REAl 60's -- Warhol cool, Frank O'Hara's poetry,
Joe Brainard's "I Remember" etc.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9266
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:00am
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- hotlove666 wrote:
> I view Bush fascism and its prequels under
> > Reagan and
> > Bush I as part of a heavily financed, well-organized
> > war on the
> > 60s. That's the main problem we confront today.
> >
> SING OUT LOUISE!
>
> I found it amazing the way Clinton was turned by this
> relentless propaganda machine into an emblematic 60's
> figure --even though he was a totally marginal person
> during that period. "Killing" Clinton was equivalent
> to "Killing" the 60's in this mindset.
>
> Of course the 60's they always complain about is
> really the early 70's. The bulk of the 60's was
> largely apolitical until May 68.
>
> The sixties started in '68 and ended in the early 70's and are
legend, like the past always is. I lived there and had no idea what
was going on. I lived in "the past" (1964 or such) and the glory
of "Berenice". Then I was in the middle of students revolts at
Columbia and CCNY. Still didn't have a clue, although I grew long
hair. I was writing my great Buster Keaton book, and the Coursodon-
Tavernier opus. It was the best of times it was the worst of times.
Oh well...
JPC
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9267
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:27am
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > The sixties started in '68 and ended in the
> early 70's and are
> legend, like the past always is.
Well MY 60's started in 62 and ended in 68 -- with the
Major Road Bump of Frank O'Hara's death in '66.
And yes, it was the stuff of legend.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9268
From: cjsuttree
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 4:45am
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
Adrian Martin wrote:
>I understand by a 'postmodern sensibility' in this
>sense - not a postmodern aesthetic, there is no single postmodern
aesthetic
>- is a particular, very ideologically loaded moment in recent
cultural
>history when people (mainly young, artistic people) figured they were
free
>of history and ideology and politics, that the traumas of the world
had
>ceased ...
>
>But it's where Sofia Coppola comes from, and it's the sensibility her
work
>bears witness to, for better and for worse. Look at it this way: the
Wong
>Kar-Wai connection in LOST IN TRANSLATION - she even cited him at the
>Oscars, for heaven's sake! Wong is another ultimate '80s sensibility
po-mo
>guy. There are 'shades' of history and politics in his work (the
hand-over
>of HK, etc), but he is all about celebrating the melancholy 'high' of
>feeling adrift from time, history, subjectivity, etc.
I cannot disagree more. I haven't been following these threads and
hope I am not duplicating what others have already said. I'll
also keep this short.
How is Wong an "ultimate '80s sensibility po-mo guy"? Wong is
is probably 20 years older than Coppola. He grew up in the 60's,
not 80's. He immigrated to Hong Kong from Shanghai at age 5, and
those times (the 60's) happened to be the most traumatic, turbulent
time in the colony's history. The 80's was a pivotal decade too,
dominated by talks between Britain and China concerning the future
of Hong Kong. Neither party bothered to ask the residents about
their own fate. The ambiguity and uncertainty about past and
future is reflected in all of Wong's films and come to dominate them.
For example, the absence of parents, the sensibility of being an
orphan, is a major theme in his work. If an elderly biological
parent shows up, he or she usually stays just long enough to reject
the offspring. So Jackie Cheung's parents disown him in _As Tears
Go By_, and he throws the air conditioner down the hill. In _Days
of Being Wild_ Leslie Cheung fights with his foster mother and
goes to the Philipines, but his birth mother rejects him and
he never sees her face. In a twist, Maggie Cheung only sees
her son's backside in _Ashes of Time_. Tony Leung's father
hangs up on him in _Happy Together_. _In the Mood for Love_
contrives to exclude Maggie Cheung's birth mother too. However,
it does represent a substantial breakthrough, a major reconciliation;
Cheung not only turns to face her son, but actually calls him
by his first name. _Fallen Angels_ is the only other film
that is benign to birth parents.
When Western critics see the father-son relationship in _The
Return_ they don't brand the director an artist who is "all about
celebrating the melancholy 'high' of feeling adrift from time,
history, subjectivity, etc". It is equally off the mark to
label Wong in this way. In fact, I know of no Hong Kong filmmaker
who makes films as deeply heartfelt about the ex-colony past,
present, and future (waiting for Cannes _2046_!) as Wong Kar-Wai.
His films are not merely technically marvels. They are nothing
short of being the "great cinematic novels" of the city. One
only needs to consider the loving care he takes to recreate and
preserve on film the locales of the 60's in _In the Mood_ and
_Days of being Wild_. To me, who grew up with Wong's generation,
these films are really the final word when it comes to the experience
of growing up and living in Hong Kong.
In interviews Wong cites French New Wave cinema (and the Italian
masters of the 60's and 70's) as his cinematic influence.
But he is an avid reader, indebted to literature and writings.
In the book edited by Lalanne he mentions his affinity towards
"existential" ideas, and laments that no one talks about
those anymore. (I can't find that passage now). Existentialism
is certainly not post-modern. In fact I have never, ever,
heard him praise postmodernism. Sophia Coppola doesn't
share any of these traits. One person who frequents this list
memorably told me that, when asked by Charlie Rose what books she
has been reading, she pulled a George W. Bush and drew a blank.
Finally, there are numerous reminders of non-ethnic Chinese
(_Chungking Express_) and Southest Asia countries (Cambodia,
the Philipines, Singapore, Taiwan ...) in Wong's films. This
shouldn't be a surprise. Hong Kong is probably the only city
in the world where world news always preceed local news in
its TV newscast! It would be unthinkable for Wong to portray
a young like the Johanson character in LiT who luxuriates
in her arrogant ignorance of the local culture in a foreign
country. In fact we already know how Wong portrays strangers
in a strange land. The film is _Happy Together_ - and it is
lightyears ahead of _Lost in Translation_ in every way.
9269
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 4:51am
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> > > The sixties started in '68 and ended in the
> > early 70's and are
> > legend, like the past always is.
>
> Well MY 60's started in 62 and ended in 68 -- with the
> Major Road Bump of Frank O'Hara's death in '66.
>
> And yes, it was the stuff of legend.
Depends on where you were. Summer of '65 in LA the Grateful Dead
played at the old Trooper's Hall in Hollywood, the Pranksters held an
acid test in the San Frenando Valley and Watts burned. I was 14 at
the time and living in the Valley and buying Film Culture at the the
left-wing Dialogue Bookshop in Van Nuys around the corner from the
apartment building where the Satan's Slaves mortorcyle club had its
headquarters. When I read "Howl" I thought it was about 1965, 1955.
For me the avant garde, the political and the psychedlic were all of
a piece.
Richard
9270
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:23am
Subject: am i a popist? (was: po-mo translation)
well, after this post i'm considering myself a "popist"...
A) De Palma vs. Kluge
Well, I've only seen a couple of Kluges, none great, somewhat good. If you
say Syberberg, there's a match, Fassbinder is probably my major 70s
director, but as for Kluge I'd take De Palma anytime.
B) Dviga-Vertov Gruop vs. teenage-movies
John Landis, Amy Heckerling and John Hughes are more politically relevant,
if you consider who they spoke to, than Dviga-Vertov Group films. Not to say
I don't like them. Difficult for me not to like anything by JLG. But these
films live today through form, not political content.
C) Deleuze vs. Lacan
The only use of hegelians is to serve as wood for the stake, and Lacan's a
hegelian (as you can see, I'm deeply deleuzian).
D) Wong Kar-wai
Like his films a lot. Prefer Hou Hsiao-hsien though, and the historical Hou
of City Of Sadness, Time To Live, Puppet Master et al., as well as also
historical but also "pop" Goodbye South Goodbye and Flowers Of Shanghai.
ruy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Martin"
To: "A Film By"
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 9:52 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] re: lost in po-mo translation
> Thanks, Kevin, for your terrific post. It prompts me to make myself
clearer,
> because I did not mean my thoughts to be 'fighting words' against 'youth',
> or youth in the 80s. As a matter of fact, I was a youth in the 80s
myself!!
> And in fact, I wasn't trying to attack or criticise even the postmodernist
> aspect of that time, actually more trying to describe it 'from the
inside' -
> as my own writing of that time was part of that sensibility and, as some
> some angry old lefties occasionally tell me, may still be!!
>
> I wasn't saying that all 'youth' of the 80s were postmodern, nor that all
> art of the 80s was postmodern. BUT there was a very particular slice of
> self-consciously named 'postmodern culture' that did indeed revel in 'the
> end of history', freedom from ideology, etc etc - I remember it well! In
> Australia, there was a specific art/avant-garde movement called Popism -
it
> had echoes in other countries in the 80s - which had a charismatic guru
> named Paul Taylor (who died of AIDS in the late 80s), editor and
figurehead
> of a wildly influential magazine called ART AND TEXT. I observed at that
> time - and still see many traces of - a kind of 'popist' film culture that
> set off in reaction to the 'hard line' of SCREEN theory, and also in
> reaction to a certain school of militant political filmmaking. It was a
> period - with all due disclaimers for polemical excess - where De Palma
was
> suddenly seemed more important than Kluge, and teen movies seemed more fun
> than the Dziga-Vertov group! And, in the realm of theory, Deleuze and co.
> seemed much freer and more inspiring than Althusser and Lacan (I still
> believe this!). This 'popist' sensibility of course draws a lot from the
> nouvelle vague - in many respects, in its heyday, another affluent,
> hyper-playful, dreamy, 'end of ideology' moment/sensibility - some of the
> politics these days attributed to the Nouvelle Vague retrospectively (eg,
by
> Godard) is pure wishful thinking and historical opportunism. So, the kind
of
> postmodernism I'm talking about in 80s film and beyond picks up speed
> through Carax, moves on to Wong Kar-Wai (Bill, thanks for the reminder
about
> the Sofia Coppola-Wong piece in CAHIERS), and takes in a lot of super-cool
> Asian (and 'Asia-phile') filmmaking.
>
> It's great what you say, Kevin, about SPIN magazine and a whole other
> tradition in music, film, culture, etc, more keyed in to explicit
politics,
> coming through the 80s. Of course, to talk of any decade in block terms is
a
> silly abstraction: there many 80s, many threads, many traditions, all
> contesting each other simultaneously. I get a sense of that kind of
warring
> historical richness when I read 'A Film By' posts on the 60s, for
instance!
>
> Adrian
>
9271
From:
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 6:00am
Subject: Re: Bed Sitting Room
Just a quick note on the film. Doing a small freelance piece on it, I
learned that MGM has completed a video transfer, and has it (very)
tentatively scheduled for DVD release in 2005. I had the luck to see
a nice print of it recently, and some of the imagery is just
stunning. That pile of mismatched shoes is both a comic absurdity and
a moving monument to the dead.
Sam
9272
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:43pm
Subject: Re: Reversible Erratum
I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
> Oliveira films of the past few years.
Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
9273
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:46pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- Richard Modiano wrote:
> For me the avant garde, the political and the
> psychedlic were all of
> a piece.
>
Me too. That's why "The Cockettes" is such an
important film, IMO. It captures it all.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9274
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:48pm
Subject: Re: Lost in po-mo translation
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cjsuttree" wrote:
> Adrian Martin wrote:
>
> >I understand by a 'postmodern sensibility' in this
> >sense - not a postmodern aesthetic, there is no single postmodern
> aesthetic
> >- is a particular, very ideologically loaded moment in recent
> cultural
> >history when people (mainly young, artistic people) figured they
were
> free
> >of history and ideology and politics, that the traumas of the world
> had
> >ceased ...
> >
> >But it's where Sofia Coppola comes from, and it's the sensibility
her
> work
> >bears witness to, for better and for worse. Look at it this way:
the
> Wong
> >Kar-Wai connection in LOST IN TRANSLATION - she even cited him at
the
> >Oscars, for heaven's sake! Wong is another ultimate '80s
sensibility
> po-mo
> >guy. There are 'shades' of history and politics in his work (the
> hand-over
> >of HK, etc), but he is all about celebrating the melancholy 'high'
of
> >feeling adrift from time, history, subjectivity, etc.
>
> I cannot disagree more. I haven't been following these threads and
> hope I am not duplicating what others have already said. I'll
> also keep this short.
>
> How is Wong an "ultimate '80s sensibility po-mo guy"? Wong is
> is probably 20 years older than Coppola. He grew up in the 60's,
> not 80's. He immigrated to Hong Kong from Shanghai at age 5, and
> those times (the 60's) happened to be the most traumatic, turbulent
> time in the colony's history. The 80's was a pivotal decade too,
> dominated by talks between Britain and China concerning the future
> of Hong Kong. Neither party bothered to ask the residents about
> their own fate. The ambiguity and uncertainty about past and
> future is reflected in all of Wong's films and come to dominate
them.
> For example, the absence of parents, the sensibility of being an
> orphan, is a major theme in his work. If an elderly biological
> parent shows up, he or she usually stays just long enough to reject
> the offspring. So Jackie Cheung's parents disown him in _As Tears
> Go By_, and he throws the air conditioner down the hill. In _Days
> of Being Wild_ Leslie Cheung fights with his foster mother and
> goes to the Philipines, but his birth mother rejects him and
> he never sees her face. In a twist, Maggie Cheung only sees
> her son's backside in _Ashes of Time_. Tony Leung's father
> hangs up on him in _Happy Together_. _In the Mood for Love_
> contrives to exclude Maggie Cheung's birth mother too. However,
> it does represent a substantial breakthrough, a major
reconciliation;
> Cheung not only turns to face her son, but actually calls him
> by his first name. _Fallen Angels_ is the only other film
> that is benign to birth parents.
>
> When Western critics see the father-son relationship in _The
> Return_ they don't brand the director an artist who is "all about
> celebrating the melancholy 'high' of feeling adrift from time,
> history, subjectivity, etc". It is equally off the mark to
> label Wong in this way. In fact, I know of no Hong Kong filmmaker
> who makes films as deeply heartfelt about the ex-colony past,
> present, and future (waiting for Cannes _2046_!) as Wong Kar-Wai.
> His films are not merely technically marvels. They are nothing
> short of being the "great cinematic novels" of the city. One
> only needs to consider the loving care he takes to recreate and
> preserve on film the locales of the 60's in _In the Mood_ and
> _Days of being Wild_. To me, who grew up with Wong's generation,
> these films are really the final word when it comes to the
experience
> of growing up and living in Hong Kong.
>
> In interviews Wong cites French New Wave cinema (and the Italian
> masters of the 60's and 70's) as his cinematic influence.
> But he is an avid reader, indebted to literature and writings.
> In the book edited by Lalanne he mentions his affinity towards
> "existential" ideas, and laments that no one talks about
> those anymore. (I can't find that passage now). Existentialism
> is certainly not post-modern. In fact I have never, ever,
> heard him praise postmodernism. Sophia Coppola doesn't
> share any of these traits. One person who frequents this list
> memorably told me that, when asked by Charlie Rose what books she
> has been reading, she pulled a George W. Bush and drew a blank.
>
> Finally, there are numerous reminders of non-ethnic Chinese
> (_Chungking Express_) and Southest Asia countries (Cambodia,
> the Philipines, Singapore, Taiwan ...) in Wong's films. This
> shouldn't be a surprise. Hong Kong is probably the only city
> in the world where world news always preceed local news in
> its TV newscast! It would be unthinkable for Wong to portray
> a young like the Johanson character in LiT who luxuriates
> in her arrogant ignorance of the local culture in a foreign
> country. In fact we already know how Wong portrays strangers
> in a strange land. The film is _Happy Together_ - and it is
> lightyears ahead of _Lost in Translation_ in every way.
WOW!
9275
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:51pm
Subject: Oliveira vs. Douglas
> I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
>>Oliveira films of the past few years.
>
> Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
That would be pretty cool! Douglas may not have been a very even
director, but I think he did some amazingly good films: KISS TOMORROW
GOODBYE and YOUNG AT HEART at the top of my list. - Dan
9276
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 1:52pm
Subject: Re: Re: Reversible Erratum
Ah, so you like "The Detective" as much as the late,
great Roger Tailleur of "Positif" did !
--- hotlove666 wrote:
> I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
> > Oliveira films of the past few years.
>
> Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9277
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:18pm
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
> >>Oliveira films of the past few years.
> >
> > Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
>
> That would be pretty cool! Douglas may not have been a very even
> director, but I think he did some amazingly good films
So did Oliveira: Amor de Perdicao, Francisca and O Dia de Despespero,
all by the same writer, Castelo Branco, and 5 or 6 others that I
love, the last in date being Party. It's sad that we only know
Castelo Branco through Oliveira's work, as we only know Galdos
through Bunuel. Both are brilliant writers.
9278
From: Michael Lieberman
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:31pm
Subject: The Pirate on TCM tonight
I'd been wanting to see "The Pirate" again for ages, and it'll be on TCM tonight (April 22nd) at 10:00 PM est.
Mike
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
9279
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:30pm
Subject: Bravo
Thank you for removing Wong Kar Wai from the chic po-mo poster and re-
positioning him in the concrete context of his personal background in
all its political and cultural specificities. It is those
specificities that are what distinguish Wong Kar Wai's films from
LOST IN TRANSLATION, a 90 minute series of ready-made cinematic
posturings that's vapid at the center.
On the other hand, I can't necessarily agree that HAPPY TOGETHER is
that much of an improvement on LiT, though I'd be willing to give it
another try...
Kevin
(who identifies most with David Walsh's paragraph on the
sensesofcinema.com symposium on Wong
(http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/13/wong-symposium.html),
even if it's somewhat unfair that he got the last word)
9280
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:47pm
Subject: Re: Bravo
--- Kevin Lee wrote:
It is
> those
> specificities that are what distinguish Wong Kar
> Wai's films from
> LOST IN TRANSLATION, a 90 minute series of
> ready-made cinematic
> posturings that's vapid at the center.
>
I find it rather odd that Sofia Coppola requires so
much defense. That she's not as good a filmmaker as
Wong Kar Wai is obvious -- espeically to her. She made
a nice little movie that many people enjoyed. Had it
been a better year overall LiT wouldn't have stood out
the way it did. Frankly I consider it to constitute
the Bare Minimum for an acceptable film.
It was attractive;y made with good performances. I was
diverted and even mildly touched. That's all.
And I think that's all that Sofia was looking to do
anyway.
> On the other hand, I can't necessarily agree that
> HAPPY TOGETHER is
> that much of an improvement on LiT, though I'd be
> willing to give it
> another try...
>
We do because now we'retlaking MAJOR film. I never
dreamed in amillion years that a stright artist could
comprehend gay relationships so astutely. This one is
pareticularly fascinating in that there's no
possibility of switching over to the "just friends"
stage as the passion that fueled the affair was so
intense. Add to this the strangers-in-a-strange-land
plot coupled with the rern of Hong Kong and you've got
yourself one hell of a movie. And that's before een
saying one word about Chris Doyle's cinematography or
Wong's obsession with Frank Zappa music cues.
I never thought of Zappa as being a romantic composer
until this film.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9281
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 6:26pm
Subject: Re: Bravo
Thanks to Kevin for directing me to a site that directed me to a site
where David Walsh does political film criticism from an openly
socialist perspective. Agree or disagree, you can read him at
http://www.wsws.org/cgi-bin/search/search.pl
9282
From: filipefurtado
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 6:53pm
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
>
> So did Oliveira: Amor de Perdicao, Francisca and O Dia de Despespero,
> all by the same writer, Castelo Branco, and 5 or 6 others that I
> love, the last in date being Party. It's sad that we only know
> Castelo Branco through Oliveira's work, as we only know Galdos
> through Bunuel. Both are brilliant writers.
>
Amor de Perdição is a great book
(haven´t seen the film), to bad that
Castelo Branco isn't translated to
english.
Filipe who is more than a little
enthusiastic about Oliveira recent
films (with the exception of the
likable but vastly overated I'm Going
Home).
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
---
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br
9283
From: filipefurtado
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:07pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in Translation
Does anyone has any idea about how the
film was received by Japanese critics
and audiences? I'm very curious to
know that. What seems to havwe being
forgot in this whole discussion is
that the film is as well liked by most
of foreign press as it is by the
americans critics. It get raves by
nearly all brazilian papers, and it
was cover at both Cahiers and El
Amante (Jean-Pierre wrote a positive
review at Positif too). And almost
nobody I know was bothered by the way
Japan is shown. As for myself, I was
more annoyed by the scenes with the
husband and the actress than with ones
with the japanese, but I do agree that
its lack of curiosity towards Tokio is
a flaw of imagination and limits the
film in some ways (Coppola works
wonders with the leading actors but
she can't make nothing with the city
outside some cliche images on
alienation). Still, I do think it's a
very good movier, but I prefer The
Virgin Suicides.
---
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br
9284
From: Robert Keser
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:36pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lost in Translation
The Japan Times has the following articles that give us some
information about LIT's reception on its "home" ground:
*Article about picture of Japanese TV in LIT:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?fd20030914pb.htm
*Editorial about Japan and the Oscar nominations:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?ed20040201a1.htm
*Composite review of LIT with comments by various writers, both
Japanese and not:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?ff20040414a1.htm
*Piece about the hotel where LIT was filmed (the walls have
drawings by Fellini!):
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?ff20040414a6.htm
*Interview with the producer of LIT (who mentions that Japanese
reaction to the cross-cultural content of the picture was more
favorable than non-Japanese reaction):
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?ff20040414a4.htm
--Robert Keser (big fan of De Oliveira's A Talking Picture)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "filipefurtado" wrote:
> Does anyone has any idea about how the
> film was received by Japanese critics
> and audiences?
9285
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:43pm
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
Bill,
Party is the last in date you liked or the last in date you've seen? After
Party (which I haven't seen), this popist guy loves deepfully Incertitude, A
Carta, O Princípio da Incerteza, Porto da Minha Infância (unless
english-speaking people call the city of Porto Oporto, "Oporto" is a
non-existent word) and lately Um Filme Falado.
ruy
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 11:18 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > > I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
> > >>Oliveira films of the past few years.
> > >
> > > Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
> >
> > That would be pretty cool! Douglas may not have been a very even
> > director, but I think he did some amazingly good films
>
> So did Oliveira: Amor de Perdicao, Francisca and O Dia de Despespero,
> all by the same writer, Castelo Branco, and 5 or 6 others that I
> love, the last in date being Party. It's sad that we only know
> Castelo Branco through Oliveira's work, as we only know Galdos
> through Bunuel. Both are brilliant writers.
9286
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:27pm
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Bill,
> Party is the last in date you liked or the last in date you've
seen? After
> Party (which I haven't seen), this popist guy loves deepfully
Incertitude, A
> Carta, O Princípio da Incerteza, Porto da Minha Infância (unless
> english-speaking people call the city of Porto Oporto, "Oporto" is a
> non-existent word) and lately Um Filme Falado.
>
> ruy
>
Since I was the party who originally said that I didn't care much
for recent Oliveira (in response to a little joke by David) let me
state that I found A Carta (The Letter) both borderline ridiculous
and profoundly boring. Its gimmicky premise (it's a modern adaptation
of "La Princesse de Cleves", a wonderful and ground-breaking 17th
century novel set in the 16th!)makes it impossible to believe in
anything about it -- plot, characters, emotions. Yet the film is
widely (and wildly) admired -- by people who indeed admire everything
Oliveira ever does. Perhaps it's the very artificiality of the film
that attracted them. "Party" was much better although somewhat
puzzling (but then Oliveira always is). I haven't seen Principio da
Incerteza or Porto.
JPC
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "hotlove666"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 11:18 AM
> Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
>
>
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt
wrote:
> > > > I must say I have been less than enthralled by the
> > > >>Oliveira films of the past few years.
> > > >
> > > > Oliveira has become the Portugese Gordon Douglas.
> > >
> > > That would be pretty cool! Douglas may not have been a very
even
> > > director, but I think he did some amazingly good films
> >
> > So did Oliveira: Amor de Perdicao, Francisca and O Dia de
Despespero,
> > all by the same writer, Castelo Branco, and 5 or 6 others that I
> > love, the last in date being Party. It's sad that we only know
> > Castelo Branco through Oliveira's work, as we only know Galdos
> > through Bunuel. Both are brilliant writers.
9287
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 0:01am
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> Since I was the party who originally said that I
> didn't care much
> for recent Oliveira (in response to a little joke by
> David) let me
> state that I found A Carta (The Letter) both
> borderline ridiculous
> and profoundly boring. Its gimmicky premise (it's a
> modern adaptation
> of "La Princesse de Cleves", a wonderful and
> ground-breaking 17th
> century novel set in the 16th!)makes it impossible
> to believe in
> anything about it -- plot, characters, emotions. Yet
> the film is
> widely (and wildly) admired -- by people who indeed
> admire everything
> Oliveira ever does. Perhaps it's the very
> artificiality of the film
> that attracted them. "Party" was much better
> although somewhat
> puzzling (but then Oliveira always is). I haven't
> seen Principio da
> Incerteza or Porto.
>
> JPC
I hope I'm not the only person on the list to see "Mon
Cas." That's the film that won me over to Oliviera.
And I'm crazy about "I'm Going Home" -- which seems to
be getting "Lit" treatment 'round these parts.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9288
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 0:08am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Bill,
> Party is the last in date you liked or the last in date you've
seen? After
> Party (which I haven't seen), this popist guy loves deepfully
Incertitude, A
> Carta, O Princípio da Incerteza, Porto da Minha Infância
(unless
> english-speaking people call the city of Porto Oporto, "Oporto"
is a
> non-existent word) and lately Um Filme Falado.
>
> ruy
I thought Incertitude was piffle, and haven't seen the rest, so I'm
possibly being unfair. (There are two Dick Tracy vs. Cueballs
since Party that I HAVE seen, however.) I liked O caxia (sp?) a lot
- but that was before Party, I think.
9289
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 0:12am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--Oh, Carta is The Letter? When I met Chiara Mastroinai she
introduced herself as having recently done "La lettre, le film le
plus chiant de l'annee." I had to agree.
Boy were there a lot of those in a short period! Zulawski and
Sophie Marceau did it ("Fidelity"), also keeping it modern times,
but more bevlievably -- she's a Catholic and apparently IS faithful
to Z. And Eyes Wide Shut was number 3.
9290
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 0:22am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
>
> I hope I'm not the only person on the list to see "Mon
> Cas." That's the film that won me over to Oliviera.
I saw it at Venice (and thru an odd set of circumstances wrote
the CdC review). It has never played here as far as I know. It's
Oliveira's The Big Mouth -- great!
But I only saw it once.... I was a big booster of MO until I resaw
No, or the Vain Glory of Command and The Cannibals and
realized that they didn't hold up on a second viewing. They're
high-concept film-gags which are fun once. Whereas I could see
Francisca over and over. Ditto Ill-Fated Loves, or some of the
early films - Benilde, for example.
It's just since he became so productive that he has become
uneven, and who can blame him for striking while the iron is hot
- most of the films are fun one time, at least, and when
inspiration strikes, often in the form of a novel like Francisca or a
play like Mon Cas, he's dynamite. Then there are just
adaptations he's doing because he can: Le soulier de satin, Le
Val d'Abraham, La Lettre. Boring, IMO.
9291
From:
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 9:11pm
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
I love "I'm Going Home" too, David. I'm getting the sense that it's not
considered a major work even by many de Oliveira fans, although there was
Jonathan's wonderful four-star review of it a few years back. Anyway, briefly, I just
felt it was a wonderful, evocative film, and so utterly lodged within one of
my cherished 'genres' - that of the 'late film' or 'old man's film' - that I
find it a little irresistible. So I admit to some bias there, perhaps, but
it's a bias that also endears me to "7 Women," "Filming Othello," and "The Human
Factor," so that's pretty good company to keep.
Unfortunately, many or most pre-1990s de Oliveira films are unavailable on
videotape in the United States, so my experience of his work is strictly through
things like "Party" and "I'm Going Home" and "The Uncertainty Principle." So
while I've not seen enough to be able to talk that intelligently about him, I
think I have seen enough where I consider him one of the great filmmakers.
Who else today would shoot a dialogue scene from the point-of-view of a pair of
shoes?
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9292
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 1:11am
Subject: Oliveira
Unfair it is then. Or maybe we have very different tastes towards Oliveira,
even if we tend to agree on Bunuel greats (Nazarin, Illusion viaja en
tranvia, etc. I have two texts on community, religion and desire in his
mexican films, I'll send them to you (in ptgs) together with the Cela
s'Appelle tape).
Saw twice NON and PORTO and LETTER and INQUIETUDE, all in theaters, and they
held up pretty well for me. The film you're referring to is A CAIXA/LA
CASSETTE/THE BOX. Didn't see it.
Have no trouble with artifficialism in his films, in fact, love it; and yes,
it's clearly intentional (how would you place Pedro Abrunhosa's shoes in the
Princesse de Clèves novel?).
ruy
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 9:08 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Bill,
> Party is the last in date you liked or the last in date you've
seen? After
> Party (which I haven't seen), this popist guy loves deepfully
Incertitude, A
> Carta, O Princípio da Incerteza, Porto da Minha Infância
(unless
> english-speaking people call the city of Porto Oporto, "Oporto"
is a
> non-existent word) and lately Um Filme Falado.
>
> ruy
I thought Incertitude was piffle, and haven't seen the rest, so I'm
possibly being unfair. (There are two Dick Tracy vs. Cueballs
since Party that I HAVE seen, however.) I liked O caxia (sp?) a lot
- but that was before Party, I think.
Yahoo! Groups Links
9293
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 1:43am
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Who else today would shoot a dialogue scene from the
> point-of-view of a pair of
> shoes?
>
> Well Raul Ruiz, actually.
But who else is making films at 97 years of age?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9294
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 1:58am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Who else today would shoot a dialogue scene from the point-of-view
of a pair of
> shoes?
>
> Peter
>
> Anybody who had a pair of shoes and had the guts.
JPC
>
9295
From:
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
"Voyage to the Beginning of the World" has interesting camera movements,
traversing down lanes in the countryside.
But I just did not "get" Party or I'm Going Home. Clearly, I need to see a
lot more.
Mike Grost
PS I liked "Dick Tracy Versus Cueball" (Gordon Douglas). It's a nice little B
movie, with comedienne Gladys George as saloon keeper Filthy Flora... You
have to be in the right mood.
9296
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:03am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- ptonguette@a... wrote:
>
> > Who else today would shoot a dialogue scene from the
> > point-of-view of a pair of
> > shoes?
> >
> > Well Raul Ruiz, actually.
>
> But who else is making films at 97 years of age?
>
>
> It's certainly admirable, but are we supposed to make
allowances for old age?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
> http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9297
From: Fred Camper
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:07am
Subject: Re: Oliveira
I haven't seen all the late Oliveiras. I tend to agree with Ruy's posts,
and with Peter's about "I'm Going Home." One interesting question for
auteurism is that Oliveira has less of a signature style than most
auteurs. The early "Aniki-Bobo" is great in part for its editing. The
lush "The Satin Slipper" (perhaps still my favorite) and "Mad Love" are
almost Sirkian in their use of sets. "Valley of Abraham" has echoes of
Bresson, and "Oporto" of Ivens, perhaps. I'm choosing here among my very
favorite Oliveira films too; like Ruy, I don't think "No" is a great
one. There are things that these films have in common, but they're
fairly "abstract" and hard to identify.
- Fred C.
9298
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:17am
Subject: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> "Voyage to the Beginning of the World" has interesting camera
movements,
> traversing down lanes in the countryside.
> But I just did not "get" Party or I'm Going Home. Clearly, I need
to see a
> lot more.
>
> Mike Grost
> PS I liked "Dick Tracy Versus Cueball" (Gordon Douglas). It's a
nice little B
> movie, with comedienne Gladys George as saloon keeper Filthy
Flora... You
> have to be in the right mood.
That's it, you have to "get" Oliveira -- just as you have to get
Duras or Straub; and mostly I don't get O. especially in his late
period. Gordon Douglas' late "masterpiece" might be The Detective
(although it eschews most of what was interesting in the novel, but
that's movies for you). Do check out the infamous I Was a Communist
for the FBI, though. And his Kiss of Death remake as a western (The
Fiend Who Walked the West.) His best movie might be Rio Conchos, and
let's not forget Them!. And let's not forget this is the guy who had
the guts to remake Stagecoach (and why not?). Oliviera never remade
Stagecoach.
JPC
9299
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:48am
Subject: Re: Re: Oliveira vs. Douglas
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > It's certainly admirable, but are we supposed to
> make
> allowances for old age?
> >
What I like about De Oliviera is that we DON'T.
That and the fact that he uses Catherine Deneuve and
John Malkovich as supporting players.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
9300
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:53am
Subject: re: Wong
Thanks very much, cj (sorry, I can't figure out from your postings or the
members' list what your first name is!), for your impassioned post about
Wong Kar-Wai. Kevin salutes you, and so do I.
But: there are a few issues here. Firstly, I believe that a director is not
only 'what's in his films', but also what is MADE of his films in all kinds
of diverse contexts - even when what is made of them is in some sense
'wrong', misinformed, or misguided.
Wong is a BIG case in point here - as is Godard, and a hundred others. In
Australia, for instance, Wong is for many of his fans - and I'm not speaking
here of the especially knowledgeable HK cinema students or aficionados - the
fashionable po-mo guy who made CHUNGKING EXPRESS and FALLEN ANGELS - which
are, I would think, his LEAST politically/socially/historically tinged films
(DAYS OF BEING WILD and ASHES OF TIME never got a proper release here). I
can show you a hundred short and long films from all over the world which
testify to that particular kind of 'Wong-ness' (as I facetiously called it
in my original post), not the deeper, more locally-specific Wong you were
describing. Maybe we could call it 'Wong filtered by Quentin Tarantino', the
purest Popist guy on the globe!!! I have also been to events all over the
world where the life-is-a-po-mo-zip Motorola commercial or the
life-is-a-melancholic-blur BMW short are enthusiastically presented - and
devoured - as 'the latest Wong Kar-Wai', never mind whether he's just doing
it for the dough or to try out some new jazzy equipment. LOST IN TRANSLATION
is also this kind of 'superficial' translation of Wong's cinema. Like it or
not, Wong IS the 'po-mo poster boy', and not just because I mentioned it in
'A Film By'!!
Then there are the films themselves. I grant you all your points, cj, but I
also wonder about some of the arguments. I still cannot yet bring myself to
regard WKW as much of a political filmmaker - even though I have read many
eulogies from the cultural-studies wing along that line (including a recent
intriguing book on HAPPY TOGETHER from a HK Uni Press). You say, and of
course it's palpably evident even to an Aussie like me, that Wong captures
certain times and places of HK history lovingly, preserving them, etc. But
if that were the mark of a political filmmaker, Barry Levinson would be a
political filmmaker. (Hasty disclaimer: I am not saying that being a
'political filmmaker' or not equates with being a GOOD or BAD filmmaker.
Wong is a a filmmaker I rate very highly as an artist - not just for his
'technical marvels' - but that's got nothing to do with what we're
discussing here.)
Then there's the 'existentialism' you raise. Well, beyond the Sartrean
extension of existentialism into the theory of 'engagement' and so on, there
is an enormous existentialist legacy which is incredibly apolitical: just
think of Sofia Coppola, once again, and her bloodless take on
Antonioni-esque 'ennui' (and people framed within city architecture, etc,
etc), which I'm sure SHE thinks is VERY existential in some pop-American
way. And this is partly the line that comes from the Nouvelle Vague straight
into Carax and Wong. That's the particular kind of 60s legacy (with
Antonioni again thrown in for good measure) that Wong made 'cool' for so
many viewers in the 80s. (Of course, I wasn't saying WKW 'grew up' or 'came
of age' or whatever in the 80s - but his aesthetic seems to be me very
marked by a certain 80s influence and sensibility.)
Lastly: yes, that is a fascinating business about the parental figures in
WKW's films, you've teased it out well in a few words, and I know it is
taken up in many 'allegorical' readings of his films - sometimes forced,
over-allegorical readings, as if any HK film (by WKW, Woo, Hark, anyone) can
only be made 'significant' if it can be demonstrated to be an allegory about
relations to the Mainland, etc!! But once, again, I think there is, or can
be, a political limit to this. Lord knows, it takes more than having
unresolved feelings about Mummy and Daddy to be a political artist! -
although a psycho-social kind of politics might START there, or involve that
ambivalence. The reason I described (some of ) Wong's films as having a
'melancholy high' - and I do believe that is what many of his fans love his
films for - is precisely because they play to what Gilberto Perez once
described as a somewhat fashionable 'sentimental homelessness' that
permeates one of the cultural sensibilities of our time (that's in Clara
Law's films also). IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE, one of his weakest films in my
view, plays to this kind of 'mood' in a big way.
Of course, there's another kind of politics in one important Wong film,
which I bracket off as a special case: the queer politics of HAPPY TOGETHER,
which is impressive (along the lines David was talking about). Like Tsai
Ming-liang - whose work I value more than Wong's but who I also think is an
essentially apolitical artist! - it's in this queerness that the 'radical'
element lies. But as to where and how political radicality sits on any other
level of the work, I need more convincing!
PS to Ruy - I hereby beknight you - from the other side of the world and
deep within a nostalgic, sentimentally homeless memory of the '80s - as a
Honorary Popist !!!
Adrian
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact