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.
10601
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:24am
Subject: Re: Petric, Peterlic
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > My impression is that Vlada Petric, the curator of the Archive,
> > was an old-fashioned formalist a la Arnheim
>
> His idol was Slavko Vorkapich, and he was a tireless advocate of
"pure
> cinema." Taking his class was a great way to be exposed to a lot
of
> museum classics that were quickly falling out of the canon. I
didn't
> see things his way, but he was an amiable sort. Is he still
teaching
> classes there?
No, I don't think so. The current faculty seems to consist of
J.D. Connor, Lucien Taylor, Eric Rentschler, and
Guiliana Bruno. I haven't heard of them, but I'm not especially
familiar with the people in film studies. David Rodowick is a
visiting professor. I liked his book, "The Crisis of
Political Modernism," but it's a theory book; it contains
no discussion of particular films.
Elvis Mitchell is a visiting lecturer. I never read his reviews in
the New York Times. I got the impression from Lopate's book
that he was a follower of Kael. Hal Hartley, Yvonne Rainer, and
Alfred Guzetti were visiting lecturers in 2003/04 teaching
film/video production.
Paul
10602
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:49am
Subject: ZERO DAY (Ben Coccio, USA)
ZERO DAY (Ben Coccio, USA)
I searched the archives back a few thousand posts and didn't find ZERO
DAY which I saw yesterday and today found high up on Dan S's list.
Zero Day is quite effective, and I think so (separate from the
emotionally-laden content) because it is focused on THE ARMY OF TWO and
their plan; what is there extraneously extended beyond its purpose
(birthday party, prom) and could even have been edited. Otherwise, a
quite focused and tense rendition of what might have been.
While the lads claim there is no explanation for their behavior, the
tapes left behind suggest MEDIA is an important element. Interesting
that since the Nick Berg news, I've read about teens beheading /
slashing the necks of children in Philadephia, and just today, a 12
year Japanese girl slashing the neck of a class mate. I do think the
news filters down.
Elizabeth
10603
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:58am
Subject: Re: Re: Petric, Peterlic
--- Paul Gallagher wrote:
The current faculty seems to
> consist of
> J.D. Connor, Lucien Taylor, Eric Rentschler, and
> Guiliana Bruno. I haven't heard of them, but I'm not
> especially
> familiar with the people in film studies.
Eric Rentschler's area if expertise is Geran film and
German culture in general. He's excellent.
David
> Rodowick is a
> visiting professor. I liked his book, "The Crisis of
>
> Political Modernism," but it's a theory book; it
> contains
> no discussion of particular films.
Rodowick has written for "Camera Obscura" -- the
feminist fiulm studies journal.
>
> Elvis Mitchell is a visiting lecturer. I never read
> his reviews in
> the New York Times. I got the impression from
> Lopate's book
> that he was a follower of Kael.
Yes, he's a Paulette.
Hal Hartley, Yvonne
> Rainer, and
> Alfred Guzetti were visiting lecturers in 2003/04
> teaching
> film/video production.
>
>
Yvonne's a teriffic filmmaker.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10604
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:58am
Subject: Re: Petric, Peterlic
> Elvis Mitchell is a visiting lecturer. I never read his reviews in
> the New York Times. I got the impression from Lopate's book
> that he was a follower of Kael.
What was your impression of Mitchell as a lecturer?
-Jaime
10605
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:15am
Subject: Re: Academic Territoriality
Kevin's guess about my conference anecdote:
"Let me guess, he wasn't David Bordwell? (God forbid if Bordwell was in that
room, and given the topic my hunch is he probably was?)"
Quick disclaimer here: NO, it wasn't Bordwell! (He wasn't there.) In fact,
Bordwell's latest work is all about trying to REVIVE mise en scene studies
in terms of a study of 'staging' in cinema, something flagged in his
intriguing if troublesome ON THE HISTORY OF FILM STYLE book a few years
back.
The person in my story who muttered the comment was more a
post-colonial-cultural-gender-studies-historiography type. Hence, that was
the agenda meant to replace form-style-mise-en-scene-auteur-genre and all
that OUTMODED OLD-FASHIONED STUFF WE ALL FINISHED WITH TWENTY YEARS AGO,
apparently!
Of course, it doesn't have to be a war, as so many discussions on this list
have proved: you can have your mise en scene and your ideology too!!!! In
fact, the more of both unearthed (and interrelated) in any one film, the
better.
Adrian
10606
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:22am
Subject: Re: Too Many Films will see / avoided, wanted to see
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
> wrote:
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> > wrote:
> > > And???
> >
> >
> > I just want to move on. You know the feeling.
>
> Sure I do, but when I got back from promoing Hitchcock au travail I
> immediately watched Fahrenheit 451 to see if I got anything new out
> of it (still so great...), and a few weeks later I was back at the
> Herrick plowing through the Family Plot files, finding wonderful
new
> surprises. But that's the incredible thing about Hitchcock -- he is
> endlessly pleasurable. It's virtually impossible for me to get
tired
> of him, unlike, say, Lang. It is at the heart of his "secret."
Yes of course. But in this case I was only the lowly translator,
you know.
The book with Tavernier, we've been rewriting it for nearly half
a century.
The Keaton book: the second version was a lot different.
Etc...
10607
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:37am
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
Evariste Galois is 21 years old and tomorrow he will be shot dead in
duel. Alexandre Astruc (in 1965) films his very last moments. At his
desk, Galois tries to get his ideas straight, and put on the paper
the final comments to what will be understood a few decades later as
a major contribution to mathematical science. That's very short,
and, in a way, the romanticism of the character overtakes this
unique expression of moving intelligence (is that inspiration
anyway?), but I have always been quite impressed by the filmic
representation of thought. (In a different manner, Astruc did better
with the 'Pit and the Pendulum', where the inner space of Maurice
Ronnet spreads over the screen).
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> > CHARULATA, the only film ever that can manage to really film an
act
> of
> > inspiration, is on my top 20...
>
> God knows they keep trying: "You've nailed it, Pollock!" I like
> Barton's long-awaited breakthrough in Barton Fink, though --
partly
> because it's clear from the last line ("and it won't be a
postcard!")
> that he still hasn't totally licked his sophomore slump.
10608
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:38am
Subject: Re: Naruse
I'm very found of "Traveling actors", which he made in 40. My
favourite Naruse. I'm sorry that he did so few comedies (as far I
know and considering what's surviving). Simple humor and fresh
acting. That's very funny and – Naruse is still Naruse - the
distress is never far away...
"Hideko the bus conductress" (39) is also pretty good
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > They have MOTHER, WHEN A WOMAN ASCENDS THE STAIRCASE and his lat
one,
> > MIDAREGUMO.
>
> The last one has the English title SCATTERED CLOUDS. A wonderful
film.
> - Dan
10609
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 2:13am
Subject: Re: Naruse; Ray
> For those who live in NYC and can stay alive for a few more years, Japan
> Society has begun to plan another Naruse retrospective. - Dan
Next year appears to be the centenary of his birth; shouldn't they step up their efforts?
> Ray is one of the giants of the cinema. I would love to get caught up with
> all of his films. As for Daney's comments: It is not just 25 year olds who are
> having trouble seeing all the great films. We 50 year olds are struggling, too!
>
> Mike Grost
Even if Ray didn't always approach the heights of Pather Panchali, Charulata and more, when I saw the details of the 35(?)-film USCS retrospective last year
I almost breathed a sigh of relief at not being there, knowing I'd have wanted to see everything (but couldn't have come close). In any case, I wonder if
these are ever coming to NY in any form? -- I see that a shorter edition recently played Toronto.
10610
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 2:18am
Subject: Re: Naruse; Ray
> USCS retrospective last year
Sorry, I meant (i think) UCSC.
10611
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 2:24am
Subject: Re: Academic Territoriality
Whoever it was that said earlier that irony doesn't carry over well in these
posts, he was right! Bordwell is Mr. Formalism. The amazing thing is that he
makes it so sexy to read about. What did you find troubling about HISTORY
OF FILM STYLE?
> The person in my story who muttered the comment was more a
> post-colonial-cultural-gender-studies-historiography type. Hence, that was
> the agenda meant to replace form-style-mise-en-scene-auteur-genre and
all
> that OUTMODED OLD-FASHIONED STUFF WE ALL FINISHED WITH
TWENTY YEARS AGO,
> apparently!
>
> Of course, it doesn't have to be a war, as so many discussions on this list
> have proved: you can have your mise en scene and your ideology too!!!! In
> fact, the more of both unearthed (and interrelated) in any one film, the
> better.
In other words, people should watch more Hou Hsiao Hsien!
Kevin "I'll sleep with any critical theory that moves" Lee
10612
From: Damien Bona
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 2:34am
Subject: Re: Petric, Peterlic
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> Elvis Mitchell is a visiting lecturer. I never read his reviews in
> the New York Times. I got the impression from Lopate's book
> that he was a follower of Kael. Hal Hartley, Yvonne Rainer, and
> Alfred Guzetti were visiting lecturers in 2003/04 teaching
> film/video production.
>
Elvis Mitchell is no longer at the Times, the dreary A.O. Scott
having been made official first-stringer, the experiment of the
unwieldly Mitchell-Scott-Stephen Holden triumvirate now acknowledged
after several years as a failure. (Though why Dave Kehr hasn't been
made chief critic -- what a no-briner that would be -- shows that the
powers-that-be at the Times have a profound misunderstanding of and
lack of appreciation for movies and serious film criticism.)
Elvis Mitchell is becoming an executive at a newly-rejuvenated
TriStar. I never paid much attention to his reviews, but with his
emphasis on, and love for, pop culture (including comic books and
video games), he seemed like an odd fit at the Times.
10613
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 2:42am
Subject: Re: Too Many Films will see / avoided, wanted to see
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
> Yes of course. But in this case I was only the lowly translator,
> you know.
I hope you meant that in irony: lowly. There are a few professions in
the history of mankind without which we'd be totally lost. One of
them is the translator. This should go without saying. Bravo to a
good translator.
-Jaime
10614
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:00am
Subject: Re: Naruse; Ray
>
>
> Even if Ray didn't always approach the heights of Pather Panchali,
Charulata and more, when I saw the details of the 35(?)-film USCS
retrospective last year I almost breathed a sigh of relief at not
being there, knowing I'd have wanted to see everything (but couldn't
have come close).
We had a good retrospective here - that's when Sharmilla came - and I
saw everything. I don't see any of the lesser known Rays, whose name
is legion, are low points or even minor works. He doesn'yt "do"
minor, except for the kid films and the two detective stories, which
are deliberately so. His socially critical films (Big City,
Middleman, Distant Thunder) are as good as that genre can get, and
for every Days and Nights in the Forest there are two more on the
bench just like it that almost never get shown and probably only
exist in one print each. (Come to think of it, there may only be one
print of Days and Nights in the US - the Harvard mess.) Even the
little stuff was amazing: one of his last films was a short made for
television about an upper-caste couple who cause the death of an
untouchable and can't move his corpse from their front yard because
they can't touch him! Unbelievably subversive.
The only bad Ray I've seen is his documentary about Tagore.
Otherwise, we're talking about a team that could take home pennants
as long as the game is being played.
10615
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:02am
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
> Evariste Galois is 21 years old and tomorrow he will be shot dead
in
> duel. Alexandre Astruc (in 1965) films his very last moments.
Maxime, I have never seen one single Astruc film. They simply aren't
shown here. I hear he's dynamite.
10616
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:15am
Subject: Re: Re: Petric, Peterlic
--- Damien Bona wrote:
(Though why Dave
> Kehr hasn't been
> made chief critic -- what a no-briner that would be
> -- shows that the
> powers-that-be at the Times have a profound
> misunderstanding of and
> lack of appreciation for movies and serious film
> criticism.)
>
Indeed. They despise professionalism. And talent.
They're still allowing the sub-human Judith Miller to
file stores!
> Elvis Mitchell is becoming an executive at a
> newly-rejuvenated
> TriStar. I never paid much attention to his
> reviews, but with his
> emphasis on, and love for, pop culture (including
> comic books and
> video games), he seemed like an odd fit at the
> Times.
>
Not at all. he used to work for Michael Keaton when
Keaton was big.
So what are theyreviving Tri-Star for?
"Look Who's Talking III" ?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10617
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:22am
Subject: Re: Petric, Peterlic
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
>
> > Elvis Mitchell is a visiting lecturer. I never read his reviews in
> > the New York Times. I got the impression from Lopate's book
> > that he was a follower of Kael.
>
> What was your impression of Mitchell as a lecturer?
>
> -Jaime
I never heard him speak. But here's the course description:
American Film Criticism
Elvis Mitchell
Half course (spring term). Th. 1–4 pm
Designed to acquaint those daring enough to immerse themselves
in the discipline of film criticism with the rigorous thinkers —
Manny Farber, Pauline Kael, Parker Tyler, Andrew Sarris —
who fashioned the field as we've come to know it. And also
a generous soaking of those writers who toiled briefly,
but memorably in criticism — James Agee, James Baldwin and
Graham Green [sic] — and made an impact not quite as well
recognized but certainly noteworthy.
---
10618
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:47am
Subject: Astruc: the camera-stylo lives on!
Astruc - whose writings on film go back to the 1940s, right? - is still
alive and working. Ruiz said in Rotterdam that he was probably about to sign
on to do one part of a 3 part TV adaptation of (I think) Balzac's 'Story of
13' (which was the launching-off point for Rivette's OUT ONE). The other two
directors are Breillat and Astruc! Raul made it clear he was doing it partly
to make sure that Astruc actually got to direct something new.
Adrian
10619
From:
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:19am
Subject: Re: Re: Historicizing/Shopping
In a message dated 6/2/04 6:16:39 PM, alsolikelife@y... writes:
> hey all you anti-rockists, here's a question: what are your thoughts on the
> concept of "Selling Out"? Heavenly commandment, overused cliche, what?
>
The term "selling out" barely exists in my book. It implies, for instance,
that one couldn't POSSIBLY make great art AND appear in the style section of the
New York Times Magazine, love your Upper East side tailor, snort coke, be
rich, etc.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10620
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 4:20am
Subject: Re: Astruc: the camera-stylo lives on!
Ruiz said in Rotterdam that he was probably about to sign
> on to do one part of a 3 part TV adaptation of (I think)
Balzac's 'Story of
> 13' (which was the launching-off point for Rivette's OUT ONE). The
other two
> directors are Breillat and Astruc! Raul made it clear he was doing
it partly
> to make sure that Astruc actually got to direct something new.
>
> Adrian
Heavy! Maybe it will actually be released here...
10621
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 4:24am
Subject: Guzzetti
> Hal Hartley, Yvonne Rainer, and
> Alfred Guzetti were visiting lecturers in 2003/04 teaching
> film/video production.
Guzzetti was full-time faculty there back in the 70s. No auteurist he:
I remember him asking me my favorite filmmakers, then wrinkling his nose
and waving at me to stop when I said something like "Hawks, Ford,
Hitchcock...." - Dan
10622
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 4:44am
Subject: Satyajit Ray
>>I've always had a pretty modest response to Ray, for some reason. -
>
> It would be interesting to know the reason. He's on my top five
> director's list.
I don't have a good handle on it. There's nothing about him that hits
me the wrong way. I often have the impression that, despite the
restrained and detailed acting in his films, the overall emotional
result is obvious, not penetrating. I do like PATHER PANCHALI and a few
other of his films, but not madly.
Robin Wood, one of my favorite writers, also adores Ray. - Dan
10623
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 4:45am
Subject: Rossellini
> Tag's huge RR book and I watched ALL of his films (including the TV
> stuff) in the process. Except, as it happens, "Anno Uno".
Did you get to see VIVA L'ITALIA? How does one see it? - Dan
10624
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 4:58am
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
>>Much like the pre-anaesthesia surgery mentioned in
>>the stern introductory title cards of THE GREAT MOMENT, poverty is
>>posited as a subject beyond the scope of cinema, evoked to contextualize
>>the function of the movie. - Dan
>
> and yet the whole point of the film is to challenge this assumption.
I'm not without my reservations about SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS, but I don't
think the film ever works the other side of this fence. The point of
view remains Sullivan's, and he's pretty much on the outside of things
until his climactic misfortune. At this point, the film becomes less
subjective, and we start watching Sullivan instead of watching things
with him. Dialogue falls away, the storytelling becomes montage-y and
fragmented. It's certainly implied that Sullivan becomes a person who
understands suffering through experience, but I don't see that it's
trying to make us understand it in any meaningful way.
> and certainly don't
> take McCrea's final quasi-defeatist sentiments at face value.
I don't think Sturges sees this final sentiments as defeatist. Seems to
me Sturges never thought it possible to eliminate or even reduce human
suffering, unlike the Sullivan of the first reel. So he depicts
Sullivan's final-reel opinion as the coming of wisdom, not as a defeat.
- Dan
10625
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 5:02am
Subject: Naruse
>>For those who live in NYC and can stay alive for a few more years, Japan
>>Society has begun to plan another Naruse retrospective. - Dan
>
> Next year appears to be the centenary of his birth; shouldn't they step up their efforts?
I can't remember the exact date, but I think it was 2006 or 2007. I got
the feeling that the process was a lengthy one. I believe some prints
will be restored and subtitled.
Susan Sontag tried to get Naruse's rare HUSBAND AND WIFE for her
upcoming critic's choice series at Japan Society, but no one could find
a subtitled print (though Sontag remembers seeing one). She did program
two other, less rare Naruses (can't remember the titles). The Sontag
series happens this fall. - Dan
10626
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 5:05am
Subject: Re: ZERO DAY (Ben Coccio, USA)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Elizabeth Nolan wrote:
"While the lads claim there is no explanation for their behavior, the
tapes left behind suggest MEDIA is an important element. Interesting
that since the Nick Berg news, I've read about teens beheading /
slashing the necks of children in Philadephia, and just today, a 12
year Japanese girl slashing the neck of a class mate. I do think the
news filters down."
William Burroughs made the same observation in a late 1960s interview
when asked if there was any form of commercial communication that
directly influenced behavior. He answered the news media, and cited
the mass murder of women in a Texas beauty parlor by a man who was
inspired by reading about the Chicago nurse killer Richard Speck, and
that the man who shot Rudy Deutchke ("Rudy the Red") got the idea
from seeing a tv news report about Arthur Bremer's attempted
assasination of Geotge Wallace.
Richard
10627
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 5:23am
Subject: Re: Guzzetti
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > Hal Hartley, Yvonne Rainer, and
> > Alfred Guzetti were visiting lecturers in 2003/04 teaching
> > film/video production.
>
> Guzzetti was full-time faculty there back in the 70s. No auteurist he:
> I remember him asking me my favorite filmmakers, then wrinkling his
nose
> and waving at me to stop when I said something like "Hawks, Ford,
> Hitchcock...." - Dan
Sorry -- I made a mistake. Guzzetti is in fact a tenured professor in
the department.
Paul
10628
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 6:18am
Subject: Re: Satyajit Ray
the overall emotional
> result is obvious, not penetrating.
You mean that what you feel watching is predictable? conventional? I
just can't apply that idea to The Music Room, which is probably more
complex in its treatment of history than Ford, although the cultural
references aren't as available to us here. There is also a political
Ray whose films are often wrenching, but I don't feel a need to
complicate the emotional impact of Distant Thunder, say, or The
Middleman -- any more than I would the impact of Nazarin, to take an
example that's ready to hand....
Yeah, I have his excellent Apu Trilogy book. By the way, have you
looked at the Rio Bravo monograph that appeared recently?
10629
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 6:31am
Subject: Re: Re: Satyajit Ray
> the overall emotional
>>result is obvious, not penetrating.
>
> You mean that what you feel watching is predictable? conventional? I
> just can't apply that idea to The Music Room, which is probably more
> complex in its treatment of history than Ford
I'm not talking about predictability on a macro, philosophical level; I
feel it more on a micro, behavioral level. Something about the way the
characterizations don't surprise me in the way they fit into the
identification structure.
> any more than I would the impact of Nazarin, to take an
> example that's ready to hand....
NAZARIN feels naturally complex to me. The title character is
hilariously secular in tiny ways.
I've never been sure that I wasn't just missing the boat with Ray.
> By the way, have you
> looked at the Rio Bravo monograph that appeared recently?
No, I haven't. - Dan
10630
From: Noel Vera
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 6:47am
Subject: Re: Naruse, Ray
Naruse's great, and his Floating Clouds (well, that's
the translation I know) is a masterpiece but for some
strange reason, I prefer The Echo (Setsuko Hara
berated--have you ever seen the like?!).
Far be it for me to put down Ray, but Ritwik Ghatak
I'd count as at least an equal and then there's Mrinal
Sen, among many others. Then the commercial
filmmakers--Raj Kapoor, Mehboob, Bimal Roy, Guru Dutt,
and that's just the short list. Ray doesn't exactly
stand alone in Indian cinema, not even as a neorealist.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10631
From: Noel Vera
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 6:50am
Subject: Re: Naruse
Correction: I was thinking of Floating Clouds and
Scattered Clouds as the same film. Forgot Scattered is
a late work in color.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10632
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 6:57am
Subject: Wood's RIO BRAVO
"have you
looked at the Rio Bravo monograph that appeared recently?"
I know you weren't asking me the question, Bill, but I can nonetheless
answer it from where I sit: it's a lovely book, very detailed, very
personal.
I kept thinking, as I read it, about a strange irony of certain national
film cultures and cultural styles having never had their rightful encounter:
Daney and Wood, we could say two of the great gay film critics, both with a
rich love for a wide span of cinema and an enormous body of analytical and
critical work that they have generated - and both adore(d) RIO BRAVO above
all other movies. But I gather from Wood's book he probably knows nothing of
this, or has never looked into it - including Sylvie Pierre's great piece
"Rio Daney Bravo" in the special 'after and with Daney' issue of TRAFIC. A
pity, because I feel the reference/reflection could only have made his book
even richer and still more personal and thoughtful ...
Adrian
10633
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:27am
Subject: Re: Wood's RIO BRAVO
I gather from Wood's book he probably knows nothing of
> this, or has never looked into it - including Sylvie Pierre's great
piece
> "Rio Daney Bravo" in the special 'after and with Daney' issue of
TRAFIC. A
> pity, because I feel the reference/reflection could only have made
his book
> even richer and still more personal and thoughtful ...
>
> Adrian
I think Wood's pretty locked into his own universe. Serge certainly
knew of Wood, but I doubt if he ever read him. And I can't imagine
what he'd make of Sylvie's piece, which is one of the most amazing -
and surprising - written tributes to soemone I've ever read.
The parallels were particularly striking at the point when Wood wrote
about La Cecilia and Numero Deux in Film Comment. He and Cahiers,
under Daney, were right in synch - although I assume the encounter
was at least partly mediated for Wood by Screen. Anyway, it was a
very pleasant shock to read Wood, whose Hitchcock and Hawks books
were among my early film reading, expounding his own version of
those "Tel Quelist" positions.
10634
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:35am
Subject: Re: Naruse, Ray
Ray doesn't exactly
> stand alone in Indian cinema, not even as a neorealist.
Ford doesn't stand alone in our cinema, but he stands above most of
it. One thing I picked up when I heard Sharmilla Q and A'ing was that
Ray used to chew on his scarf while directing, too! He had great
admiration for Ghatak (one of my favorite directors, on the basis of
the four films I've seen) as the creator of an epic cinema that was
quite different from his, and I'm sure he respected the work of the
other directors you mention. I certainly do. But still...
10635
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 0:58pm
Subject: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
Wee Willie Winkie
by Graham Greene
The owners of a child star are like leaseholders -
their property diminishes in value every year. Time's
chariot is at their back; before them acres of
anonymity. What is Jackie Coogan now but a matrimonial
squabble? Miss Shirley Temple's case, though, has
peculiar interest: infancy is her disguise, her appeal
is more secret and more adult. Already two years ago
she was a fancy little piece (real childhood, I think,
went out after "The Littlest Rebel"). In "Captain
January" she wore trousers with the mature
suggestiveness of a Dietrich: her neat and
well-developed rump twisted in the tap-dance; her eyes
had a sidelong searching coquetry. Now in "Wee Willie
Winkie," wearing short kilts, she is completely totsy.
Watch her swaggering stride across the Indian
barrack-square; hear the gasp of excited expectation
from her antique audience when the sergeant's palm is
raised; watch the way she measures a man with agile
studio eyes, with dimpled depravity. Adult emotions of
love and grief glissade across the mask of childhood,
a childhood skin-deep. It is clever, but it cannot
last. Her admirers - middle-aged men and clergymen -
respond to her dubious coquetry, to the sight of her
well-shaped and desirable little body, packed with
enormous vitality, only because the safety curtain of
story and dialogue drops between their intelligence
and their desire. 'Why are you making Mummy cry?' -
what could be purer than that? And the scene when
dressed in a white nightdress she begs grandpa to take
Mummy to a dance - what could be more virginal? On
those lines her new picture, made by John Ford, who
directed "The Informer," is horrifyingly competent. It
isn't hard to stay to the last prattle and the last
sob. The story - about an Afghan robber converted by
"Wee Willie Winkie" to the British Raj - is a long way
after Kipling. But we needn't be sour about that. Both
stories are awful, but on the whole Hollywood's is the
better.
"Wee Willie Winkie" (USA, Twentieth Century Fox, I937)
Dir.: John Ford. Cast: Shirley Temple, Victor
McLaglen, C. Aubrey Smith, June Lang, Michael Whalen,
Cesar Romero, Constance Collier, Gavin Muir. From
Night and Day, 28 October 1937.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10636
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: Astruc: the camera-stylo lives on!
Jean-Gabriel Albicocco's "The Girl with the Golden
Eyes" (circa 1959, I think) is another adaptation of
Balzac's "Story of the 13."
A revival is long overdue.
--- hotlove666 wrote:
> Ruiz said in Rotterdam that he was probably about to
> sign
> > on to do one part of a 3 part TV adaptation of (I
> think)
> Balzac's 'Story of
> > 13' (which was the launching-off point for
> Rivette's OUT ONE). The
> other two
> > directors are Breillat and Astruc! Raul made it
> clear he was doing
> it partly
> > to make sure that Astruc actually got to direct
> something new.
> >
> > Adrian
>
> Heavy! Maybe it will actually be released here...
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10637
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 1:51pm
Subject: Re: Rossellini
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > Tag's huge RR book and I watched ALL of his films (including the
TV
> > stuff) in the process. Except, as it happens, "Anno Uno".
>
> Did you get to see VIVA L'ITALIA? How does one see it? - Dan
VIVA L'ITALIA is great -- one of my favorite Rossellinis (I'm not
an unconditional admirer though, although Tag tried hard to turn me
into one!). Tag sent me a video (tape) of it, very good quality,
although some sequences have such scope that they should be seen on
the big screen.
JPC
10638
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 3:39pm
Subject: Indian cinema
> Far be it for me to put down Ray, but Ritwik Ghatak
> I'd count as at least an equal and then there's Mrinal
> Sen, among many others. Then the commercial
> filmmakers--Raj Kapoor, Mehboob, Bimal Roy, Guru Dutt,
> and that's just the short list. Ray doesn't exactly
> stand alone in Indian cinema, not even as a neorealist.
I've been looking for the work of filmmaker/critic Kumar Shahani ever
since I saw his remarkable TARANG. Does anyone know his films?
It took me a while to like Sen - something about his visuals doesn't
seem expressive to me - but now I do. A very smart fellow.
Shyam Benegal certainly has some worthy films - THE SEEDLING and THE
ROLE are quite good. Mani Kaul is consistently worthwhile. I'm very
interested in this guy Ghosh, whose CHOKHER BALI was on the festival
circuit last year - his 1999 film THE LADY OF THE HOUSE will play AMMI
in NYC on June 25.
Don't know if he ever made another movie, but Mahapatra's MAYA MIRIGA
was worthy. A lot of Indian filmmakers seem to get only one film
screened internationally, and then vanish from foreign sight.
Among the Bollywood directors, Amrohi, who did PAKEEZAH, certainly had
an eye and a sense of mood.
Somebody entered a lot of info on Indian cinema into the IMDb in 1991,
and then stopped!
- Dan
10639
From: Dave Garrett
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 5:16pm
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> Wee Willie Winkie
> by Graham Greene
When "Graham Greene On Film" was published, didn't Temple
sue to prevent this piece from appearing in it? I seem to
recall an explanatory note inserted in its place indicating
that it had been removed due to litigation.
It was included in its entirety in the more recent compilation
of Greene's film criticism that was published a few years ago.
Dave
10640
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 5:34pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- Dave Garrett wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> wrote:
>
> > Wee Willie Winkie
> > by Graham Greene
>
> When "Graham Greene On Film" was published, didn't
> Temple
> sue to prevent this piece from appearing in it? I
> seem to
> recall an explanatory note inserted in its place
> indicating
> that it had been removed due to litigation.
Quite true.
>
> It was included in its entirety in the more recent
> compilation
> of Greene's film criticism that was published a few
> years ago.
>
I got it from John Boorman's annual, "Projections."
Read it carefully. Objectively speaking Greene was
stating a very simple, almost obvious, truth
But anyone who speaks the truth is bound to suffer for it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10641
From: Noel Vera
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 7:26pm
Subject: Re: Ray, Ghatak
> Ford doesn't stand alone in our cinema, but he
> stands above most of
> it.
I'd call Ghatak India's Hawks to Ray's Ford. He's
wider ranging in dealing with genres, for example. You
might say Ajantrik is science fiction.
> He had great
> admiration for Ghatak (one of my favorite directors,
> on the basis of
> the four films I've seen) as the creator of an epic
> cinema that was
> quite different from his
Not everything he did was epic; he uses a lot of
Brechtian techniques as well.
>I'm sure he respected
> the work of the
> other directors you mention. I certainly do. But
> still...
I'm sure they influenced him too--maybe Bimal Roy's
work, in particular.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10642
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 7:50pm
Subject: Re: Rossellini
fwiw, here's something I posted earlier this week that explains my
love for Rossellini:
http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000010/thread/8878111?d=8913807#8913807
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > > Tag's huge RR book and I watched ALL of his films (including
the
> TV
> > > stuff) in the process. Except, as it happens, "Anno Uno".
> >
> > Did you get to see VIVA L'ITALIA? How does one see it? - Dan
>
>
> VIVA L'ITALIA is great -- one of my favorite Rossellinis (I'm
not
> an unconditional admirer though, although Tag tried hard to turn me
> into one!). Tag sent me a video (tape) of it, very good quality,
> although some sequences have such scope that they should be seen on
> the big screen.
>
> JPC
10643
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 7:59pm
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
Objectively speaking Greene was
> stating a very simple, almost obvious, truth
>
> But anyone who speaks the truth is bound to suffer for it.
That aside, I repeat - read Child Star. She's our kind of gal.
10644
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:01pm
Subject: Re: Rossellini
>
>
> VIVA L'ITALIA is great -- one of my favorite Rossellinis (I'm not
> an unconditional admirer though, although Tag tried hard to
turn me
> into one!). Tag sent me a video (tape) of it, very good quality,
> although some sequences have such scope that they should
be seen on
> the big screen.
>
> JPC
It was projected on video once in LA. Outasight.
10645
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:04pm
Subject: Re: Ray, Ghatak
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Noel Vera
wrote:
>
> > Ford doesn't stand alone in our cinema, but he
> > stands above most of
> > it.
>
> I'd call Ghatak India's Hawks to Ray's Ford. He's
> wider ranging in dealing with genres, for example. You
> might say Ajantrik is science fiction.
It'sstrange to hear that - the usual comparison is to Nick Ray. But
you're right - there's a lot of variety in what I've seen. "Epic" is a
two-edged word, because Brecht appropriated it for his theatre.
10646
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:12pm
Subject: Re: Rocco
First of all David, this this was a far too gracious reply than I
deserved! You should be more like Jaime! ;-p
You may have a more accurate and informed view of Visconti (an
aristocrat who was at his best when dealing with his own kind and not
the neorealist rabble), but I simply don't think I want to accept
it. Given my interpretation of SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS, I see a pattern
developing in my inclinations...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
10647
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:17pm
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
what are your thoughts on, say, Scorsese's LIFE LESSONS or
Minnelli's LUST FOR LIFE in regards this topic?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> > CHARULATA, the only film ever that can manage to really film an
act
> of
> > inspiration, is on my top 20...
>
> God knows they keep trying: "You've nailed it, Pollock!" I like
> Barton's long-awaited breakthrough in Barton Fink, though -- partly
> because it's clear from the last line ("and it won't be a
postcard!")
> that he still hasn't totally licked his sophomore slump.
10648
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:40pm
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
wrote:
> what are your thoughts on, say, Scorsese's LIFE LESSONS or
> Minnelli's LUST FOR LIFE in regards this topic?
The moment in SANS SOLEIL in which the narrator talks about making
lists of things that "quicken the heart" is a pretty potent example
of inspiration on film. And it's not the only one in the film, let
alone Marker's career.
-Jaime
10649
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 8:49pm
Subject: Re: Historicizing/Shopping
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/2/04 6:16:39 PM, alsolikelife@y... writes:
>
>
> > hey all you anti-rockists, here's a question: what are your
thoughts on the
> > concept of "Selling Out"? Heavenly commandment, overused cliche,
what?
> >
> The term "selling out" barely exists in my book. It implies, for
instance,
> that one couldn't POSSIBLY make great art AND appear in the style
section of the
> New York Times Magazine, love your Upper East side tailor, snort
coke, be
> rich, etc.
> Kevin John
>
If such were NOT the case, then I would agree with you, but as it
stands, I have to call 'em as I see 'em. Dylan did not sell out when
he went electric in Newport. Wes Anderson did sell out when he went
pedantic in Manhattan. The proof is in the results.
Kevin "I pick up my own dry cleaning, that is when I can afford dry
cleaning (and it's really my wife's anyway, oh how I spoil her)" Lee
10650
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:05pm
Subject: Re: Re: Rocco
--- Kevin Lee wrote:
> You may have a more accurate and informed view of
> Visconti (an
> aristocrat who was at his best when dealing with his
> own kind and not
> the neorealist rabble), but I simply don't think I
> want to accept
> it.
Not entirely. He was an aristocrat with enormous
empathy for those outside his class. "La Terra Trema"
has been referenced a lot, but "Ossessionne" (his
version of "The Postman Always Rings Twice") is more
to the point in its combination of "realism" and
mannerism.
By the Way, someone was mentioning how Visconti cuts
awy during the murder scene in "Rocco." I took out my
DVD las night and looked at it again. He cuts from
Simone killing Nadia to Rocco winning the fight.
Rocco's triumph is scotched by Simone's defeat. The
good brother and the bad are inextricably linked.
Rememeber too that the title "Rocco and his Brothers"
is a deleberateecho of Mann's "Joseph and his
Brothers."Note too that Rocco's goodness is derived
fromprince Myshkin in Dostoyevsky's "The Idiot" --
another work of literature of enormous importance to
Visconti.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10651
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:07pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> >>Much like the pre-anaesthesia surgery mentioned in
> >>the stern introductory title cards of THE GREAT MOMENT, poverty
is
> >>posited as a subject beyond the scope of cinema, evoked to
contextualize
> >>the function of the movie. - Dan
> >
> > and yet the whole point of the film is to challenge this
assumption.
>
> I'm not without my reservations about SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS, but I
don't
> think the film ever works the other side of this fence. The point
of
> view remains Sullivan's, and he's pretty much on the outside of
things
> until his climactic misfortune. At this point, the film becomes
less
> subjective, and we start watching Sullivan instead of watching
things
> with him. Dialogue falls away, the storytelling becomes montage-y
and
> fragmented. It's certainly implied that Sullivan becomes a person
who
> understands suffering through experience, but I don't see that it's
> trying to make us understand it in any meaningful way.
I haven't completely thought this through and I don't want to get too
esoteric... but something about how Sullivan becomes a surrogate for
the audience to experience "the poor"... which makes Sullivan a
metaphor for socially-conscious cinema, how it works, how it
doesn't. I want to know what the "it" in your last sentence stands
for. If it stands for "poverty" well I don't think the movie is
trying to say anything directly about poverty so much as it's trying
to raise awareness and understanding of how movies in general try to
relate to and represent poverty and other social conditions deemed
undesirable by the majority. In that regard it has a lot to say
about how most of us experience poverty, that is, voyeuristically,
which is as valuable in its own way as a film from someone
who's "been there".
> I don't think Sturges sees this final sentiments as defeatist.
Seems to
> me Sturges never thought it possible to eliminate or even reduce
human
> suffering, unlike the Sullivan of the first reel. So he depicts
> Sullivan's final-reel opinion as the coming of wisdom, not as a
defeat.
> - Dan
I maintain that the film ends on a dissonant note, between
endorsing "doing the things that we do well, no more, no less"
(making others laugh and thus feel a sense of comfort and
consolation) and feeling frustration about it's inability to do
something more overtly activist (inspiring people to work towards
changing the conditions that inflict their suffering in the first
place). As I said to Bill, I see it in the last line "There's a lot
to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that that's all some
people have in this cockeyed caravan?" (the quesion is, does
the "some people" refer to the poor, or to himself?) And I see this
in that deranged display of laughing faces floating around Sullivan's
pensive mug. They represent the sum total of his contribution to the
world, and they're laughing at him in a way I find nightmarish and
taunting.
10652
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:17pm
Subject: Re: Rocco
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> > Rememeber too that the title "Rocco and his Brothers"
> is a deleberateecho of Mann's "Joseph and his
> Brothers."Note too that Rocco's goodness is derived
> fromprince Myshkin in Dostoyevsky's "The Idiot" --
> another work of literature of enormous importance to
> Visconti.
>
Which illustrates precisely the problem I have with this film, the
same problem Walsh has with MYSTIC RIVER. That is, when artists take
rich contemporary subject matter and try to art it up along a grand
established tradition. Not to say that a great film should be devoid
of rich interpretive connections with other works, but sometimes this
becomes too much of an end in itself. (again, my problem with KILL
BILL). These movies suffer too much from art and not enough from
life.
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10653
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:19pm
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
"The moment in SANS SOLEIL in which the narrator talks about making
lists of things that "quicken the heart" is a pretty potent example
of inspiration on film. And it's not the only one in the film, let
alone Marker's career."
It's taken from "The Pillow Book of Sei Shonagon," a brilliant stroke
on Marker's part.
Another outstanding example of inspiration on film is Rikyu's flower
arrangement at the beginning of RIKYU and the fatal one near the end
of the film. RIKYU was Teshigahara's first film after taking over
his father's kado school.
Richard
10654
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:26pm
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> >
> > > CHARULATA, the only film ever that can manage to really film an
> act
> > of
> > > inspiration, is on my top 20...
> >
What about Erice, Bill?
10655
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:38pm
Subject: Re: Re: Rocco
--- Kevin Lee wrote:
These movies suffer too much from art and
> not enough from
> life.
>
Ah but where does "art" end and "life" begin? Consider
the Roger Hanin character in "Rocco" -- very much a
Visconti self-portrait.
/
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10656
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:38pm
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
> >
> > Read it carefully. Objectively speaking Greene was
> stating a very simple, almost obvious, truth
>
>
> Sure, yet it is safe to say that not one moviegoer out of several
thousands at the time was aware of this simple truth, and millions
would have been horrified to hear that Shirley could be viewed in
such a "perverted" way. How many raincoat-wearing dirty old men were
in the audience of a Shirley Temple movie?
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10657
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:41pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
How many raincoat-wearing
> dirty old men were
> in the audience of a Shirley Temple movie?
> >
You're looking for a ballpark figure?
Greene identifies a goodly portion of them as
belonging to the clergy.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10658
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:44pm
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
> How many raincoat-wearing
> > dirty old men were
> > in the audience of a Shirley Temple movie?
> > >
> You're looking for a ballpark figure?
>
> Greene identifies a goodly portion of them as
> belonging to the clergy.
If they were catholic priests then they didn't need a
raincoat.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10659
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 9:58pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> If they were catholic priests then they didn't
> need a
> raincoat.
> >
If they were Catholic priests they preferred Freddie Bartholomew.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10660
From: Noel Vera
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 10:07pm
Subject: Re: Ray, Ghatak
> > I'd call Ghatak India's Hawks to Ray's Ford. He's
> > wider ranging in dealing with genres, for example. You
> > might say Ajantrik is science fiction.
>
> It'sstrange to hear that - the usual comparison is to Nick Ray.
Y'know, comparing Ghatak and Ray to Ford and Hawks and Nick Ray may
be misleading--their combined output probably never produced a hit,
or at least a film familiar to the masses, unlike Ford, Hawks, Nick
Ray's output...
That's one thing the "Bollywood" directors were able to do--at their
best they were embraced by the masses, at the same time producing
something not altogether unrecognizable as art.
10661
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 10:23pm
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
>>It's certainly implied that Sullivan becomes a person
> who
>>understands suffering through experience, but I don't see that it's
>>trying to make us understand it in any meaningful way.
> I haven't completely thought this through and I don't want to get too
> esoteric... but something about how Sullivan becomes a surrogate for
> the audience to experience "the poor"... which makes Sullivan a
> metaphor for socially-conscious cinema, how it works, how it
> doesn't. I want to know what the "it" in your last sentence stands
> for. If it stands for "poverty" well I don't think the movie is
> trying to say anything directly about poverty so much as it's trying
> to raise awareness and understanding of how movies in general try to
> relate to and represent poverty and other social conditions deemed
> undesirable by the majority. In that regard it has a lot to say
> about how most of us experience poverty, that is, voyeuristically,
> which is as valuable in its own way as a film from someone
> who's "been there".
The "it" referred to "suffering." I think what you say is true.
> I maintain that the film ends on a dissonant note, between
> endorsing "doing the things that we do well, no more, no less"
> (making others laugh and thus feel a sense of comfort and
> consolation) and feeling frustration about it's inability to do
> something more overtly activist (inspiring people to work towards
> changing the conditions that inflict their suffering in the first
> place). As I said to Bill, I see it in the last line "There's a lot
> to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that that's all some
> people have in this cockeyed caravan?" (the quesion is, does
> the "some people" refer to the poor, or to himself?) And I see this
> in that deranged display of laughing faces floating around Sullivan's
> pensive mug. They represent the sum total of his contribution to the
> world, and they're laughing at him in a way I find nightmarish and
> taunting.
I guess I don't register the nightmarish-taunting feeling. Those faces
have been contextualized already - we've seen them before. They were
established as suffering people experiencing momentary relief from
suffering. Sturges seems to conclude that that's the best thing film
can do. It's as close as the American cinema gets to a philosophical
conservatism. - Dan
10662
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 10:55pm
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> >
> > If they were catholic priests then they didn't
> > need a
> > raincoat.
> > >
>
> If they were Catholic priests they preferred Freddie Bartholomew.
>
>
> Just as I suspected.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10663
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 11:03pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
>> I guess I don't register the nightmarish-taunting feeling. Those
faces
> have been contextualized already - we've seen them before. They
were
> established as suffering people experiencing momentary relief from
> suffering. Sturges seems to conclude that that's the best thing
film
> can do. It's as close as the American cinema gets to a
philosophical
> conservatism. - Dan
I got the same nightmarish feeling in the original movie laughing
scene. The way Sturges shoots this, it's like Sullivan is in a kind
of hell, surrounded by a bunch of criminals and salt-of-the-earth
folksy folks laughing their mugs off (a little TOO heartily, I would
say -- there's something off about the tone of this scene that I
would actually argue is deliberate) at something as simplistic as
Pluto chasing his tail. It reminds me of the SIMPSONS episode when a
suddenly-enlightened Homer rails against a movie audience audibly
enraptured by the programmized cliches of a Julia Roberts vehicle.
And then the really chilling moment comes: Sullivan starts laughing
too, maniacally, as if brainwashed (and again, McCrea's laughter
seems forced, adding to the feeling of conditioning). I find this
whole sequence creepier than the brainwashing sequence in CLOCKWORK
ORANGE.
10664
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 11:42pm
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
--- Kevin Lee wrote:
>
> And then the really chilling moment comes: Sullivan
> starts laughing
> too, maniacally, as if brainwashed (and again,
> McCrea's laughter
> seems forced, adding to the feeling of
> conditioning). I find this
> whole sequence creepier than the brainwashing
> sequence in CLOCKWORK
> ORANGE.
>
>
Really? Then what do you think of the ending of
Vidor's "The Crowd"? Cause that's where Sturges got
the idea.
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10665
From:
Date: Thu Jun 3, 2004 10:20pm
Subject: This and That!
On inspiration: Loved Ken Russell's "Savage Messiah".
On Marcel L'Herbier: the only film here seen is the charmingly strange
dream-comedy, "La Nuit fantastique". Would love to see "L'Argent" (1928) and all the
rest. Kevin Brownlow's documentary on European silent film had a clip from a
"making of" documentary, "Autour de L'Argent", if memory serves. Proves that
they were filming "making of" movies back in 1928, in the silent era!
The recent DVD of "Die Niebelungen" has an extra, roughly 5 minute clip of
Fritz Lang directing the movie. Very surreal to see Lang in modern clothes,
among thousands dressed as Huns!
Have wanted to see an Astruc for 30 years! Where are they?
On Ray: My favorite of the Apu trilogy is the middle.
"Bunny Lake is Missing" was definitely letter-boxed - maybe for the first
time ever on TV! "Bunny Lake" (the movie) is no longer missing! Have it all on
tape, watched the first half live. Preminger's camera is remarkable...
"The Pillow Book of Sei Shonagon" is one of the best books I have ever read
(in Ivan Morris' translation). Make sure to get the hardback - the paperback is
cut (for length). "In the spring, it is the dawn that is most beautiful."
Mike Grost
10666
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 2:41am
Subject: Re: Too Many Films
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>
> This is a real problem that will only grow increasingly out of
> control. They keep making more movies, four thousand new titles a
> year worldwide. This makes the construction of canons (and
> history-based theories) all the more valuable because they
> provide guidance through the entire range of international
> cinema from year zero to the continuously moving present.
> Amazon.com provides a crude model: "If you liked Hiroshima,
> mon amour, you might like India Song". This helps on one
> level, but unavoidably contributes to splitting filmgoing
> into special interest "boutiques".
I've been thinking about Elizabeth Anne Nolan's question about
people decide what to see. Since I like to see films in the
theater, the theater programmers make a lot of choices for me.
But I do stick to the familiar -- directors I know, titles I
know.
>
> This also makes it a fight to get playdates for more
> sophisticated works. Supposedly, the number of unreleased titles
> has been growing exponentially, with 1988 as a turning point
> when "the number of American films which failed to make it
> into the cinemas went over the 50% mark for the first time
> …up from only 27% only four years earlier".(That's from
> Patrick Robertson's "Film Facts").
>
I didn't realize that. Do they end up on TV or direct to video?
Are a lot of films never seen at all?
> Most people (understandably) seem to think that film history began
> when they started to notice films, so each generation has a larger
> and larger backlog of works to absorb (or ignore!) and the
> critic's job to some extent becomes to hack out paths through the
> thicket of titles.
>
I think I was different. When I first started became interested in
the movies, my interest was almost entirely in older films.
It was only years later that I got interested in recent films.
Paul
10667
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 5:16am
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
I see it in the last line "There's a lot
> to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that that's all
some
> people have in this cockeyed caravan?" (the quesion is, does
> the "some people" refer to the poor, or to himself?) And I see
this
> in that deranged display of laughing faces floating around
Sullivan's
> pensive mug. They represent the sum total of his contribution to
the
> world, and they're laughing at him in a way I find nightmarish and
> taunting.
Sounds like your insight is well is on its way to being a strong
analysis in direct line of descent from the Rereading Classical
Cinema articles the CdC ran in the 70s. There are many Sturges films
I like better, but this is the one that uncorks the genii of self-
consciousness and ends up meaning things it didn't mean to mean. And
its subject - can someone make a film about a reality he can never
experience first hand? -- is a very important one. Many films, and
not just Visconti's (Kiarostami's, for instance), are caught up in
the vortex of that question.
10668
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 5:18am
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > CHARULATA, the only film ever that can manage to really film
an
> > act
> > > of
> > > > inspiration, is on my top 20...
> > >
>
> What about Erice, Bill?
I didn't say that. Charulata does it, but so do other films - I
mentioned Barton Fink, which is of course a bit perverse!
10669
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 5:20am
Subject: Re: The Greatest Piece of Film Criticism of All Time
I am aroused watching Young People, but as she says in Child Star,
that's when she was already starting to have her breasts. It's also a
great movie -- I sometimes get those things mixed up.
10670
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 5:23am
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
>
> And then the really chilling moment comes: Sullivan starts laughing
> too, maniacally, as if brainwashed (and again, McCrea's laughter
> seems forced, adding to the feeling of conditioning). I find this
> whole sequence creepier than the brainwashing sequence in CLOCKWORK
> ORANGE.
More reminiscent of the ending of 1984: "I love Big Brother!"
10671
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 6:40am
Subject: Re: Filming inspiration CAGED
SPOILER
While it is not artistic inspiration, in CAGED, when Marie Allen has maintained
her determination to 'stay straight / legit' instead of joining the shoplifting ring,
the cell block is visited by the local 'do-gooders club' women. One woman,
dressed in mink and other expensive items lingers; Marie in her prison garb
approaches the bars separating her from the well-to-do woman. Marie
can either be pleading, identifying or whatever with the woman, but no words
are spoken; the woman can't tolerate looking at Marie and hurries away. At
that moment, Marie Allen decides to join the band of theives. She wants
what the well-dressed woman has and realizes that she will always be
seen as an ex-con and never be legit, so why not join the band of theives.
Not a word is spoken. Great visual story-telling. At least it made me feel
like a screenwriter to "see" so much in that scene. It is a moment of inspiration
for Marie to pursue a life of crime. And a moment of inspiration for me!
10672
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 6:45am
Subject: THE BLOODY OLIVE 12 minute shot... anybody seen it? terrific
10673
From: George Robinson
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 10:05am
Subject: Very interesting interview with Marcel Ophuls
In the Guardian at:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,6737,1223347,00.html
He has some fascinating things to say about his father and, of course, about
his own career.
George Robinson
Our talk of justice is empty until the
largest battleship has foundered on the
forehead of a drowned man.
--Paul Celan
10674
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 0:42pm
Subject: Re: THE BLOODY OLIVE 12 minute shot... anybody seen it? terrific
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
wrote:
>
What is it?
-Jaime
10675
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 2:51pm
Subject: Re: THE BLOODY OLIVE 12 minute short... anybody seen it? terrific
THE BLOODY OLIVE is a 12 minute short that was shown at the
start of the FILM NOIR FESTIVAL in Palm SPRINGS. If I say more,
it will definitely SPOIL it for you.
It was made a few years ago and can be found on IMDB.com.
Anyone who has seen it, knows why I'm hesitant to comment,
except to say as in all Film Noir, things never are as they are.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley" > wrote:
> What is it?
10676
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 3:49pm
Subject: Dreyer Schedule on TCM
Something tells me that in the note about the Dreyer spotlight on TCM
in the US I posted a few days ago, I might have said it was "this
month" -- if so, that info is incorrect.
The Dreyer spotlight and films will air on TCM in the US across the
month of -September-.
Sorry for any confusion..!
craig.
10677
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 4:08pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
I would love to read those CdC back issues, that is if they're
available in English (or Chinese).
In an earlier post I had mentioned Kiarostami's THE WIND WILL CARRY
US as another film about a filmmaker slumming in the boondocks, but
jp didn't think there was much correlation. I think both films deal
heavily with the question "o brother, how shalt I film you?" which
for me is one of the most crucial issues of cinema.
since BARTON FINK is being discussed elsewhere, I'll say that LA
TERRA TREMA is a glorious slap in the face to the Coens' assertion
that a cloistered artist can't possibly connect with the fishmongers.
I'd might as well link to my big fat rant as to why LA TERRA TREMA is
100 times better than ROCCO:
http://www.alsolikelife.com/FilmDiary/Rantsandraves/neorealism.html
Kevin
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> I see it in the last line "There's a lot
> > to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that that's all
> some
> > people have in this cockeyed caravan?" (the quesion is, does
> > the "some people" refer to the poor, or to himself?) And I see
> this
> > in that deranged display of laughing faces floating around
> Sullivan's
> > pensive mug. They represent the sum total of his contribution to
> the
> > world, and they're laughing at him in a way I find nightmarish
and
> > taunting.
>
> Sounds like your insight is well is on its way to being a strong
> analysis in direct line of descent from the Rereading Classical
> Cinema articles the CdC ran in the 70s. There are many Sturges
films
> I like better, but this is the one that uncorks the genii of self-
> consciousness and ends up meaning things it didn't mean to mean.
And
> its subject - can someone make a film about a reality he can never
> experience first hand? -- is a very important one. Many films, and
> not just Visconti's (Kiarostami's, for instance), are caught up in
> the vortex of that question.
10678
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 4:22pm
Subject: Re: Dreyer Schedule on TCM
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> Something tells me that in the note about the Dreyer spotlight on
TCM
> in the US I posted a few days ago, I might have said it was "this
> month" -- if so, that info is incorrect.
>
> The Dreyer spotlight and films will air on TCM in the US across the
> month of -September-.
>
> Sorry for any confusion..!
>
> craig.
You did say September and gave play dates. It was message #10494.
10679
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 6:21pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
-
> since BARTON FINK is being discussed elsewhere, I'll say that
LA
> TERRA TREMA is a glorious slap in the face to the Coens'
assertion
> that a cloistered artist can't possibly connect with the
fishmongers.
Well, Barton DOES finally connect, in a weird sort of way.
The Young Mr. Lincoln piece is in the BFI CdC collection edited
by Nick Brown. I think that collection also contains the Morocco
piece. Those are both just about "meaning what you didn't mean
to mean." The only Rereading article on a political film is the one
about La vie est a nous, the collective film Renoir did for the
Popular Front, and I don't think it has ever been translated.
It's possible that Oudart on Four Nights of a Dreamer and
Oudart-Daney on Death in Venice made it into that collection -
both very interesting on the situation of the filmmaker in
bourgeois society. Also, it may contain Oudart's Un discours en
defaut, which is about Bresson as a model for modernist
filmmakers who "simulate" a political discourse that dead-ends
in Four Nights.
Stay away from the articles by Oudart on Suture and Theory of
Representation. Not that they're bad, but they aren't really
relevant to what you're thinking about, and they'd probably just
frustrate you if you turned to them first.
By and large the most interesting reflections on the problem of
filming poor people are by the filmmakers themselves. If you
haven't seen it, get Bunuel's incredible Land Without Bread. Just
watch out if your English version has an American accent -- it's a
very deceptive mistranslation of the French and Spanish original
soundtracks, which has led to a lot of misguided writing about
"the unreliable narrator" and so on. The English version with a
British accent is not ideal, but it isn't full of misleading howlers
like the one with the American accent, which dates back to the
30s. Both lack the Popular Front postscript Bunuel added in
1936 and left on when he restored the French version of the film
in 1965. I know no better film on your subject. In fact, you can turn
off the sound after a first viewing and be astonished just by the
images and editing.
10680
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 6:36pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
Thanks for the leads to those articles. I have seen LAS HURDES and
dagnabbit you called me out, I did see the American version and I did
react as you described. I thought it was a satire of condescensing
qualities of the travelogue/social humanist documentary aesthetic.
So what is the effect of the French and Spanish versions, if
not "unreliable narration"?
Have you read my biographical article on Jia Zhang-ke? It's very
much in line with these preoccupations that seem to be defining me.
(I'll have you all know that in addition to being fascinated with the
ethical dilemmas of self-reflexive cinema, I'm also a very good
cook.)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> -
>
> By and large the most interesting reflections on the problem of
> filming poor people are by the filmmakers themselves. If you
> haven't seen it, get Bunuel's incredible Land Without Bread. Just
> watch out if your English version has an American accent -- it's a
> very deceptive mistranslation of the French and Spanish original
> soundtracks, which has led to a lot of misguided writing about
> "the unreliable narrator" and so on. The English version with a
> British accent is not ideal, but it isn't full of misleading
howlers
> like the one with the American accent, which dates back to the
> 30s. Both lack the Popular Front postscript Bunuel added in
> 1936 and left on when he restored the French version of the film
> in 1965. I know no better film on your subject. In fact, you can
turn
> off the sound after a first viewing and be astonished just by the
> images and editing.
10681
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 7:13pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
Thanks for the leads to those articles. I have seen LAS
HURDES and
> dagnabbit you called me out, I did see the American version
and I did
> react as you described. I thought it was a satire of
condescensing
> qualities of the travelogue/social humanist documentary
aesthetic.
> So what is the effect of the French and Spanish versions, if
> not "unreliable narration"?
The tone is still very dry in French, but no shots are blatantly
misdescribed ("As we enter the village we are greeted by a choir
of idiots"). Also, the smoke entering the frame when the goat
falls is part of a consistent policy of being upfront about
manipulation: all the shots where a hand comes into frame to
uncover something or point up something, for instance. When
the boy writes "Respect the property of others" on the board,
we're told that the filmmakers found a book at random, opened it
and asked him to write a maxim it contained on the board. The
absurdity is shown, and the manipulation that shows it is also
described.
Most telling is the scene with the dwarves and idiots, especially if
you've seen the jaw-dropping newsreel documentary of King
Alphonso XIII beneficently touring Las Hurdes with an entourage
of imbedded journalists in 1922. (I believe he did it to shore up
support after a disastrous military misadventure in the Middle
East, but he was gone before the end of the year...) Besides
focusing largely on the King and the journalists (plus ca
change...), the piece contains a horrifying moment where two
dwarf herdsmen pass the newsreel caravan and a journalist
hops off, runs up to them and literally tries to shoo them in front
of the camera. Later several dwarves are rounded up and forcibly
hauled in front of the camera to pose uncomfortably.
In Bunuel's film the dwarf sequence ends with an
over-the-shoulder shot of someone talking to a dwarf while the
French soundtrack explains that dwarves and idiots are very shy,
and it was only after a Hurdano colleague talked to them that
they calmed down and allowed themselves to be filmed. The
impeccable Third World filmmaking manners aren't surprising,
given that the crew was three communists and two anarchists.
Both the voiceover and the Brahms have been called parodic, but
I think they just clash with each other. Brahms' Fourth isn't the
Trout Quintet; it's one of Brahms' last and darkest compositions,
and serves to express the heroism of the Hurdanos for holding
on, while the voice gives the point of view of a sociologist
describing a doomed culture -- a dichotomy Unamuno evokes in
his 1914 essay on Las Hurdes. In a militant documentary about
the Spanish Civil War Bunuel made in 1936 he uses a mincing
waltz from Beethoven's First for the military dictatorship that
preceded the Republic, but he uses the Egmont Overture for the
Civil War.
And as Randall Conrad points out in a Cineaste piece, Espagne
1937 DOES use the images to undercut the narration (by Gaston
Modot) when it is describing enthusiastically the progressive
measures of the first, bourgeois version of the Republic, and you
see a loop of shots of stuffed shirts descending steps in front of
official buildings, or starving kids being described as
"enthusiastic." Bourgeois viewers would have been comforted by
the legitimate-looking officials and reassured by the
commentary, and communists (like Bunuel and Pierre Unik, who
also cowrote the narration of Land Without Bread) would see the
contradiction. But there's nothing like that in Land Without Bread,
which is more like Night and Fog in its formal strategies -- or vice
versa.
> Have you read my biographical article on Jia Zhang-ke?
No - where can I see it?
> (I'll have you all know that in addition to being fascinated with
the ethical dilemmas of self-reflexive cinema, I'm also a very
good cook.)
You don't sound like someone with one string to his bow.
re: Kiarostami, our view of him is systematically distorted by the
fact that his "early, engaged ones" (made under the Shah) are
never screened here and aren't available on tape. My favorite
Kiarostami is Experience, whose making is a textbook case of
how to do what you're talking about.
10682
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 7:22pm
Subject: Italian DVDs
Hello everyone,
Does anyone happen to know of a reliable store on the web that sells
Italian DVDs? Apparently Rossellini's SOCRATE is available on Region 2
DVD with English subtitles. The transfer looks fabulous--too great to
pass up.
Vielen Dank,
-Matt
10683
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 8:26pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
Thank you for that wealth of information/analysis. Makes me want to
see that film again.
It's rather unfortunate that my musings on Jia Zhangke are more
available than any Shaw-era Kiarostami. I'll have to consult the
Rosenbaum/ Saeed-Vafa book to see if it has a synopsis and details of
EXPERIENCE.
Anyway: http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/directors/03/jia.html
Kevin
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> Thanks for the leads to those articles. I have seen LAS
> HURDES and
> > dagnabbit you called me out, I did see the American version
> and I did
> > react as you described. I thought it was a satire of
> condescensing
> > qualities of the travelogue/social humanist documentary
> aesthetic.
> > So what is the effect of the French and Spanish versions, if
> > not "unreliable narration"?
>
> The tone is still very dry in French, but no shots are blatantly
> misdescribed ("As we enter the village we are greeted by a choir
> of idiots"). Also, the smoke entering the frame when the goat
> falls is part of a consistent policy of being upfront about
> manipulation: all the shots where a hand comes into frame to
> uncover something or point up something, for instance. When
> the boy writes "Respect the property of others" on the board,
> we're told that the filmmakers found a book at random, opened it
> and asked him to write a maxim it contained on the board. The
> absurdity is shown, and the manipulation that shows it is also
> described.
>
> Most telling is the scene with the dwarves and idiots, especially
if
> you've seen the jaw-dropping newsreel documentary of King
> Alphonso XIII beneficently touring Las Hurdes with an entourage
> of imbedded journalists in 1922. (I believe he did it to shore up
> support after a disastrous military misadventure in the Middle
> East, but he was gone before the end of the year...) Besides
> focusing largely on the King and the journalists (plus ca
> change...), the piece contains a horrifying moment where two
> dwarf herdsmen pass the newsreel caravan and a journalist
> hops off, runs up to them and literally tries to shoo them in front
> of the camera. Later several dwarves are rounded up and forcibly
> hauled in front of the camera to pose uncomfortably.
>
> In Bunuel's film the dwarf sequence ends with an
> over-the-shoulder shot of someone talking to a dwarf while the
> French soundtrack explains that dwarves and idiots are very shy,
> and it was only after a Hurdano colleague talked to them that
> they calmed down and allowed themselves to be filmed. The
> impeccable Third World filmmaking manners aren't surprising,
> given that the crew was three communists and two anarchists.
>
> Both the voiceover and the Brahms have been called parodic, but
> I think they just clash with each other. Brahms' Fourth isn't the
> Trout Quintet; it's one of Brahms' last and darkest compositions,
> and serves to express the heroism of the Hurdanos for holding
> on, while the voice gives the point of view of a sociologist
> describing a doomed culture -- a dichotomy Unamuno evokes in
> his 1914 essay on Las Hurdes. In a militant documentary about
> the Spanish Civil War Bunuel made in 1936 he uses a mincing
> waltz from Beethoven's First for the military dictatorship that
> preceded the Republic, but he uses the Egmont Overture for the
> Civil War.
>
> And as Randall Conrad points out in a Cineaste piece, Espagne
> 1937 DOES use the images to undercut the narration (by Gaston
> Modot) when it is describing enthusiastically the progressive
> measures of the first, bourgeois version of the Republic, and you
> see a loop of shots of stuffed shirts descending steps in front of
> official buildings, or starving kids being described as
> "enthusiastic." Bourgeois viewers would have been comforted by
> the legitimate-looking officials and reassured by the
> commentary, and communists (like Bunuel and Pierre Unik, who
> also cowrote the narration of Land Without Bread) would see the
> contradiction. But there's nothing like that in Land Without Bread,
> which is more like Night and Fog in its formal strategies -- or
vice
> versa.
>
> > Have you read my biographical article on Jia Zhang-ke?
>
> No - where can I see it?
>
> > (I'll have you all know that in addition to being fascinated with
> the ethical dilemmas of self-reflexive cinema, I'm also a very
> good cook.)
>
> You don't sound like someone with one string to his bow.
>
> re: Kiarostami, our view of him is systematically distorted by the
> fact that his "early, engaged ones" (made under the Shah) are
> never screened here and aren't available on tape. My favorite
> Kiarostami is Experience, whose making is a textbook case of
> how to do what you're talking about.
10684
From: Doug Cummings
Date: Fri Jun 4, 2004 8:53pm
Subject: Re: Italian DVDs
>Hello everyone,
>
>Does anyone happen to know of a reliable store on the web that sells
>Italian DVDs? Apparently Rossellini's SOCRATE is available on Region 2
>DVD with English subtitles. The transfer looks fabulous--too great to
>pass up.
I've had good luck with www.dvd.it--they have an English interface, too.
The "Socrate" DVD is indeed excellent, I've had it for a while now.
Doug
10685
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sat Jun 5, 2004 3:06am
Subject: Abu Ghraib Torture
Every Friday night, Aaron Brown's "Headlines" sequence on his
Newsnight show includes headlines from supermarket tabloids. One
such article tonight; "Iraqi Prisoners At Abu Ghraib Forced To Watch
Jerry Lewis Movies!"
10686
From:
Date: Sat Jun 5, 2004 11:59pm
Subject: Bunny Lake Is Missing
Mike Grost wrote:
>"Bunny Lake is Missing" was definitely letter-boxed - maybe for the first
>time ever on TV! "Bunny Lake" (the movie) is no longer missing! Have it
>all on
>tape, watched the first half live. Preminger's camera is remarkable...
The TCM showing was indeed letterboxed - hope you all had your VCRs going!
"Bunny Lake Is Missing" has always been one of my very favorite Preminger
films and this viewing was a particular revelation. The climatic scene almost
called to mind Fuller in its outrageousness - I'm thinking of Stephen crazily
pushing Ann on the swing. Preminger's camera goes a little 'nuts' during this
scene, indulging in odd angles and (I think) handheld shots which contrast very
markedly with the fluid style which characterizes the rest of the film. It's
appropriate, though, since this is the scene where everything comes to a head
and Stephen's insanity - revealed a few minutes earlier - dominates. Prior
to this, as I say, Preminger's style is very fluid, very graceful, done with
his usual preference for all-in-ones; it's a style that makes sense because for
most of the film the audience is encouraged, I think, to share the rational
view of the police inspector that Ann is probably mentally ill, there is no
Bunny Lake, etc. (And, indeed, Preminger reverts to his characteristic camera
style towards the very end, as the police haul Stephen away and order is
restored.) Talk about a meaningful interlocking of theme and imagery!
As an aside, I did note that the final shot of "Bunny Lake" is very, very
similar to the final shot of "The Man With the Golden Arm," which played right
before "Bunny Lake" and which I also watched: two characters walking directly
towards us, the camera dollying backwards. The shots aren't identical, but it's
a neat little thing to notice.
Peter
10687
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:17am
Subject: a reality he can never experience first hand?
Perhaps I'm being too literal, but it seems that most films are about a
reality never experienced first hand by the film-makers.
On Jun 5, 2004, at 6:54 AM, a_film_by@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> its subject - can someone make a film about a reality he can never
> experience first hand? -- is a very important one. Many films, and
> not just Visconti's (Kiarostami's, for instance), are caught up in
> the vortex of that question.
10688
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:17am
Subject: Mabuse (novels and films)
Fritz Lang's final film, THE 1,000 EYES OF DR. MABUSE, is incredibly
great. Same for his 1933 film, THE TESTAMENT OF DR. MABUSE. A
re-visit of his seminal early work, DR. MABUSE, DER SPIELER, is a
must.
Are any of the other Mabuse films - in the hands of other directors
and on the heels of 1,000 EYES - worthwhile?
And more importantly, what's the best way of getting started with
Norbert Jacques' novels about Mabuse? And the best place to find
them?
Cheers,
-Jaime
10689
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:26am
Subject: Re: a reality he can never experience first hand?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Elizabeth Nolan wrote:
> Perhaps I'm being too literal, but it seems that most films are about a
> reality never experienced first hand by the film-makers.
>
>
> On Jun 5, 2004, at 6:54 AM, a_film_by@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> > its subject - can someone make a film about a reality he can never
> > experience first hand? -- is a very important one. Many films, and
> > not just Visconti's (Kiarostami's, for instance), are caught up in
> > the vortex of that question.
Quite true, although the post you quoted from seems to acknowledge
this as a "question" rather than something that harms the films or
distorts the intentions of the filmmakers.
Also, being that many cinephiles are (excuse the oversimplification)
left-wingers as far as the high-middle-lower/liberal-conservative
question on class and the worker and the poor, and so on, a film
that's explicitly about the struggle of the lower class and the poor
and the worker is going to ask questions, intentionally or
unintentionally, that may likely be quite a bit more provocative than
films about Manhattan socialites and suburban office dwellers, not to
mention cops and lawyers and military servicemembers (fact: nearly
ALL movies about the military focus on the officers, NOT the enlisted
men/women).
From a neutral standpoint, the filmmaker creates a lot of his ideas
from the tension between his direction and the content of his scripts
and stories and so forth, whether he means to or not, and that
frequently makes the film what it is as a work of art. But very few
people are able to rid themselves of their personal political baggage
when watching these films.
-Jaime
10690
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 1:20pm
Subject: Re: Mabuse (novels and films)
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
>
> Are any of the other Mabuse films - in the hands of
> other directors
> and on the heels of 1,000 EYES - worthwhile?
>
No.
The closest work to the "Mabuse" of Lang is "Scream
and Scream Again" (1970) directed by Gordon Hessler
from a screenplay by former film critic Chris Wicking.
Lang himself greatly admired it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10691
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 1:09pm
Subject: Re: Abu Ghraib Torture
A more accurate headline might have been "Iraqi Prisoners at Abu Ghraib
Forced to Live Out Tony Scott Movie"
g
Our talk of justice is empty until the
largest battleship has foundered on the
forehead of a drowned man.
--Paul Celan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Bona"
To:
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 11:06 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Abu Ghraib Torture
> Every Friday night, Aaron Brown's "Headlines" sequence on his
> Newsnight show includes headlines from supermarket tabloids. One
> such article tonight; "Iraqi Prisoners At Abu Ghraib Forced To Watch
> Jerry Lewis Movies!"
>
10692
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 2:47pm
Subject: Re: a reality he can never experience first hand?
very few
> people are able to rid themselves of their personal political
baggage
> when watching these films.
Or when making them. Bunuel said he never made a film a these, but
added "If I make a film set in South Africa, because I'm an
anticolonialist, it's going to show."
ER, I was being too vague. The subject under discussion is how well
filmmakers who have never been out of H'wd can portray poverty - the
question raised by Sullivan's Travels. A case that comes to mind,
acually, is Ulmer. I think Detour portrays poverty - the physical
details of how Ann Savage looks, for example - accurately, because
Ulmer was poor himself during much of the Depression, after being
blacklisted by Laemmle. Ford did a good job in Grapes of Wrath, too,
but I think Ulmer did it better.
10693
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 2:55pm
Subject: Re: Mabuse (novels and films)
>
> The closest work to the "Mabuse" of Lang is "Scream
> and Scream Again" (1970) directed by Gordon Hessler
> from a screenplay by former film critic Chris Wicking.
>
>
> Lang himself greatly admired it.
I didn't know that. There's a pretty thorough book out on Lang's
Mabuses and others, the books etc. Each of the three Lang films is
very diferent from the others. I once had the pleasure of hearing
Noel Carroll explaining to people before a rare screening of The 1000
Eyes at NYU that it was pretty much worthless -- I love it, of
course. I wonder if he's reversed himself on that one as the acclaim
has grown -- not that I particularly care. Old-timers will recall
that that The 1000 Eyes was the original name of Roger and Howard's
screening place in NY, until they sold the name to Sid and Jacky for
use with the Bleecker and Carnegie.
10694
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 2:58pm
Subject: John Wayne quotation
A friend asked me, "In which movie did John Wayne say, 'Now we're even,
just like when we left Texas'?" It doesn't even sound familiar. Anyone
have an idea? - Dan
10695
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 3:35pm
Subject: Re: a reality he can never experience first hand?
Certainly we all work / view with the prisms of our own experience,
reference socio-, politico-, psycho- etc.
My comment is more general. Many movies are about major
turning points in life through acts of great valor, violence, courage.
We automatically give more credence to 'experiential' film-makers
telling their stories. But the key for a film-maker is to take his /
her own experiences and find those universals that viewers will
identify, however meager.
Poverty is a very apparent phenomenon; sexuality less so. It always
intrigues me why as a society we tie overt appearance with covert
sexuality, ice queens excepted.
But there are many rich people who feel poor; some poor people
who feel rich. My father, poor my most standards, would say he
was a millionaire, six times over, once for each child he had...
that was during the good times. I'll have to ask him what he
thought when times were bad.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" wrote:
>> very few
>> people are able to rid themselves of their personal political
>> baggage
>> when watching these films.
> ER, I was being too vague. The subject under discussion is how well
> filmmakers who have never been out of H'wd can portray poverty - the
> question raised by Sullivan's Travels. A case that comes to mind,
> acually, is Ulmer. I think Detour portrays poverty - the physical
> details of how Ann Savage looks, for example - accurately, because
> Ulmer was poor himself during much of the Depression, after being
> blacklisted by Laemmle. Ford did a good job in Grapes of Wrath, too,
> but I think Ulmer did it better.
10696
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 3:42pm
Subject: Re: Mabuse (novels and films)
>
> --- "Jaime N. Christley"
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Are any of the other Mabuse films
- in the hands of
> > other directors
> > and on the heels of 1,000 EYES -
worthwhile?
I haven't seen them, but José Lino
Grunewald (a very good brazilian
formalist critic) was very fond of
them, he even put the first of them in
his Top of 1962 (1000 Eyes was in his
61 list too). I usually take all
Grunewald recommendations as worth
seeking out (this is a guy who have
Joseph Lewis' Terror in Texas Town in
his top 10, back in 1959...).
Filipe
> >
>
> No.
>
> The closest work to the "Mabuse" of
Lang is "Scream
> and Scream Again" (1970) directed by
Gordon Hessler
> from a screenplay by former film
critic Chris Wicking.
>
>
> Lang himself greatly admired it.
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new
Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo!
Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads.
Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for
free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/b5IolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/
>
>
a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
10697
From: rpporton55
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 3:55pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
> Most telling is the scene with the dwarves and idiots, especially if
> you've seen the jaw-dropping newsreel documentary of King
> Alphonso XIII beneficently touring Las Hurdes with an entourage
> of imbedded journalists in 1922. (I believe he did it to shore up
> support after a disastrous military misadventure in the Middle
> East, but he was gone before the end of the year...) Besides
> focusing largely on the King and the journalists (plus ca
> change...), the piece contains a horrifying moment where two
> dwarf herdsmen pass the newsreel caravan and a journalist
> hops off, runs up to them and literally tries to shoo them in front
> of the camera. Later several dwarves are rounded up and forcibly
> hauled in front of the camera to pose uncomfortably.
>
> In Bunuel's film the dwarf sequence ends with an
> over-the-shoulder shot of someone talking to a dwarf while the
> French soundtrack explains that dwarves and idiots are very shy,
> and it was only after a Hurdano colleague talked to them that
> they calmed down and allowed themselves to be filmed. The
> impeccable Third World filmmaking manners aren't surprising,
> given that the crew was three communists and two anarchists.
>
> Both the voiceover and the Brahms have been called parodic, but
> I think they just clash with each other. Brahms' Fourth isn't the
> Trout Quintet; it's one of Brahms' last and darkest compositions,
> and serves to express the heroism of the Hurdanos for holding
> on, while the voice gives the point of view of a sociologist
> describing a doomed culture -- a dichotomy Unamuno evokes in
> his 1914 essay on Las Hurdes. In a militant documentary about
> the Spanish Civil War Bunuel made in 1936 he uses a mincing
> waltz from Beethoven's First for the military dictatorship that
> preceded the Republic, but he uses the Egmont Overture for the
> Civil War.
>
> And as Randall Conrad points out in a Cineaste piece, Espagne
> 1937 DOES use the images to undercut the narration (by Gaston
> Modot) when it is describing enthusiastically the progressive
> measures of the first, bourgeois version of the Republic, and you
> see a loop of shots of stuffed shirts descending steps in front of
> official buildings, or starving kids being described as
> "enthusiastic." Bourgeois viewers would have been comforted by
> the legitimate-looking officials and reassured by the
> commentary, and communists (like Bunuel and Pierre Unik, who
> also cowrote the narration of Land Without Bread) would see the
> contradiction. But there's nothing like that in Land Without Bread,
> which is more like Night and Fog in its formal strategies -- or vice
> versa.
>
From my perspective, the glimpses of a classroom in Las Hurdes provide a key to the
radicalism of its overall critique. In a sense, the film, which at every point challenges our
assumptions concerning documentary realism (more literal-minded documentarians such
as Michael Moore might learn a thing or two) could be termed an example of radical
pedagogy or "unlearning" Out of laziness, I can only quote something I once wrote: the
film" mocks the pretensions of a curriculum, approved by the 'liberal'Republic of the 1930s
in which children are encouraged to forget their hunger pangs and remember that they
'respect their neighbor's property' and concentrate on the fact tht 'the sum of the angles of
a triangle is equal to two right angles.'" To a great extent, the parodic elements of Las
Hurdes (as Freddy Buache once pointed out") lampoon the loftier aspirations of 'humanist'
education; the film as a whole suggests a more radical mode of pedagogy. Bunuel's
radicalism might be contrasted with the Enlightenment liberalism of Truffaut's "Wild
Child," in which Dr. Itard succesfully tames a savage human beast and facilitates his
assimilation into 'civilized' society. Bunuel instead finds liberalism and humanist values
just about as culpable as conservatism.
Richard P.
10698
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:40pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
the parodic elements of Las
> Hurdes (as Freddy Buache once pointed out") lampoon the loftier
aspirations of 'humanist'
> education; the film as a whole suggests a more radical mode of
pedagogy. Bunuel's
> radicalism might be contrasted with the Enlightenment liberalism
of Truffaut's "Wild
> Child," in which Dr. Itard succesfully tames a savage human beast
and facilitates his
> assimilation into 'civilized' society. Bunuel instead finds
liberalism and humanist values
> just about as culpable as conservatism.
> Richard P.
I agree about the point of view, but not about the parodic elements,
if you mean the voiceover and them music. Bunuel used classsical
music with considerable precision in Espagne 1937, so I don't see
Brahms' Fourth as parodic in and of itself. And as I said, a lot of
things in the narration that are regularly cited as parodic are
mistranslations from the French and Spanish originals. Bunuel's own
description of the voiceover was "statistical," meaning scientific,
like Legendre -- the film is subtitled A Study in Human Georgraphy.
And it is, after all, the narrator who asks, when the camera shows
the lithopgraph of the woman in fancy dress on the wall of the
impoverished schoolroom, "What is this absurd lithograph doing here?"
But the point of view of the film is exactly as you say. The town
where we see the schoolroom was, theoretically, a showplace for the
initiatives undertaken by the liberal-Socialist Republican
government. Before the new schoolhouse was built the school was a
cramped room with a terrarium full of reptiles, according to
Legendre's description, and the schoolmaster taught in his own home,
where he kept a couple of books in a chest which he proudly displayed
to Legendre and Unamuno. REALLY pathetic. So what we see is already a
big improvement on that, but obviously ill-conceived, and the
narrator says that it's ill-conceived. By the way, Pierre Unik was a
pedagogue with very interesting theories of how the Hurdano children
should be taught -- like most good educational ideas, it was never
tried and has been forgotten. And Bunuel put a fake date of 1932 on
the film in 1936 to underline that this schoolroom was the work of a
bourgeois Republic.
The makers of Land Without Bread were two anarchists and three
communists. The makers of Espagne 1937 -- the only intelligent
commentary on which appeared in Cienaste -- were three communists. In
between, the Comintern line had changed, so in Land Without Bread
Bunuel was in synch with the Comintern, while in Espagne 1937 he and
Unik and Le Chanois -- who was not happy with the way his part of La
vie est a nous had been organized -- ignored the guidelines not only
of the Comintern but of the Republican ambassador in France, the
film's producer, who was a Socialist and later an anti-communist. As
Conrad says in his article in Cineaste, the film will be read
differently by communists and liberals, but even liberals would have
been bothered, I think, by the frank portrayal of the communist
revolution going on during the Civil War, even if the word is never
spoken. A Popular Front film that would not have ofended liberals is
The Spanish Earth, which Bunuel helped with and said he liked at the
time -- his film on the Civil War is more radical.
A friend who saw the lovely little film Bunuel wrote and produced and
Gremillon directed in 1936, Centinela Alerta, says she thinks Bunuel
and Gremillon were using the old comedy about screw-ups in the Army
to portray as a popular army the rag-tag anarchist brigades who were
replaced by the communist army we see being built in Espagne 1937,
after the seige of Madrid began and the communists basically were
running the country. Bunuel and Gremillon clearly loved the
anarchists -- even though Bunuel, as an upper middle-class man, was
scared of them -- but Espagne 1937 is a communist film.
Robert Keser sent me some quotes from Hugo Butler's wife (from Tender
Comrades) where she describes Bunuel, at the time of Crusoe and The
Young One, as too much of an anarchist by temperament to ever accept
party discipline. But that was later, after the atrocities of Stalin
had begun to be exposed. (Mirabeau, the author of Diary of a
Chambermaid, was a fierce anarchist, by the way.) I think Bunuel was
an UNDISCIPLINED communist who got a lot of inspiration from
anarchist friends in the 30s. After all, the soundtrack of Land
Without Bread wasn't locked until 1936, after the Popular Front line
had been laid down, but all he changed was adding a coda about
peasants uniting for political struggle. And Espagne 1937 can't have
gladdened dogmatic hearts in the PCE or the PCF.
10699
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:53pm
Subject: Yippie Yi Yo Cahiers
Attention everyone at a_film_by : A am in the process
of selling my back issues of "Cahiers du Cinema." I
have an almost-complete run from 1964 to (roughly)
1991.
Anyone who is interested in purchasing either specific
numbers of groups of issues should contact me and make
an offer.
I also have back issues of "Screen," "Ca,"
"Cinethique" and other film publications of note for
sale.
Cheers,
David Ehrenstein
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10700
From: rpporton55
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 6:58pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" wrote:
> > I agree about the point of view, but not about the parodic elements,
> if you mean the voiceover and them music. Bunuel used classsical
> music with considerable precision in Espagne 1937, so I don't see
> Brahms' Fourth as parodic in and of itself. And as I said, a lot of
> things in the narration that are regularly cited as parodic are
> mistranslations from the French and Spanish originals. Bunuel's own
> description of the voiceover was "statistical," meaning scientific,
> like Legendre -- the film is subtitled A Study in Human Georgraphy.
> And it is, after all, the narrator who asks, when the camera shows
> the lithopgraph of the woman in fancy dress on the wall of the
> impoverished schoolroom, "What is this absurd lithograph doing here?"
>
> But the point of view of the film is exactly as you say. The town
> where we see the schoolroom was, theoretically, a showplace for the
> initiatives undertaken by the liberal-Socialist Republican
> government. Before the new schoolhouse was built the school was a
> cramped room with a terrarium full of reptiles, according to
> Legendre's description, and the schoolmaster taught in his own home,
> where he kept a couple of books in a chest which he proudly displayed
> to Legendre and Unamuno. REALLY pathetic. So what we see is already a
> big improvement on that, but obviously ill-conceived, and the
> narrator says that it's ill-conceived. By the way, Pierre Unik was a
> pedagogue with very interesting theories of how the Hurdano children
> should be taught -- like most good educational ideas, it was never
> tried and has been forgotten. And Bunuel put a fake date of 1932 on
> the film in 1936 to underline that this schoolroom was the work of a
> bourgeois Republic.
>
> The makers of Land Without Bread were two anarchists and three
> communists. The makers of Espagne 1937 -- the only intelligent
> commentary on which appeared in Cienaste -- were three communists. In
> between, the Comintern line had changed, so in Land Without Bread
> Bunuel was in synch with the Comintern, while in Espagne 1937 he and
> Unik and Le Chanois -- who was not happy with the way his part of La
> vie est a nous had been organized -- ignored the guidelines not only
> of the Comintern but of the Republican ambassador in France, the
> film's producer, who was a Socialist and later an anti-communist. As
> Conrad says in his article in Cineaste, the film will be read
> differently by communists and liberals, but even liberals would have
> been bothered, I think, by the frank portrayal of the communist
> revolution going on during the Civil War, even if the word is never
> spoken. A Popular Front film that would not have ofended liberals is
> The Spanish Earth, which Bunuel helped with and said he liked at the
> time -- his film on the Civil War is more radical.
>
> A friend who saw the lovely little film Bunuel wrote and produced and
> Gremillon directed in 1936, Centinela Alerta, says she thinks Bunuel
> and Gremillon were using the old comedy about screw-ups in the Army
> to portray as a popular army the rag-tag anarchist brigades who were
> replaced by the communist army we see being built in Espagne 1937,
> after the seige of Madrid began and the communists basically were
> running the country. Bunuel and Gremillon clearly loved the
> anarchists -- even though Bunuel, as an upper middle-class man, was
> scared of them -- but Espagne 1937 is a communist film.
>
> Robert Keser sent me some quotes from Hugo Butler's wife (from Tender
> Comrades) where she describes Bunuel, at the time of Crusoe and The
> Young One, as too much of an anarchist by temperament to ever accept
> party discipline. But that was later, after the atrocities of Stalin
> had begun to be exposed. (Mirabeau, the author of Diary of a
> Chambermaid, was a fierce anarchist, by the way.) I think Bunuel was
> an UNDISCIPLINED communist who got a lot of inspiration from
> anarchist friends in the 30s. After all, the soundtrack of Land
> Without Bread wasn't locked until 1936, after the Popular Front line
> had been laid down, but all he changed was adding a coda about
> peasants uniting for political struggle. And Espagne 1937 can't have
> gladdened dogmatic hearts in the PCE or the PCF.
Well, perhaps the word "parodic" introduces some semantic confusion. I was thinking
less of the music or text than the general approach to documentary. And by parodic I
didn't necesarily mean humorous.
I think that Bunuel's instincts were basically anarchist, but he embraced the Spanish CP
for pragmatic reasons. That wasn't uncommon at the time. The anarchists I've met in Spain
don't seem to resent this and claim him as one of their own . They appear to have
forgiven him any lapses he may have committed during the Thirties. In any case, I really
appreciate the detailed response and should learn more about Unik. All of Bunuel's work
could be viewed as a kind of radical pedagogy and links to anti-authoritarian theories of
education, which are crucial to anarchism (esp. in Spain where memories of the martyred
anarchist educator Francisco Ferrer were still fresh during the 1930s) seem vitally
important.
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact