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.
10701
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 9:33pm
Subject: Bunuel (wasFwd: Re: Preston Sturges ...)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> 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.
All this Bunuel stuff makes one eager to see your Taschen book!
The author of "Chambermaid" is Mirbeau (Octave). Mirabeau was a
revolutionary but not an anarchist!
You mentioned Bunuel's "Robinson Crusoe". Is it available in any
form anywhere? I loved it when I saw it some 40 years ago. I thought
it was almost as surrealist as "L'Age d'or".
JPC
10702
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 9:45pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
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.
My face is red: I susbtituted Unik for Acin (they being near-anagrams
of each other)! The educational theorist was Ramon Acin, the producer
of the film (via the famous lottery ticket), a white anarchist visual
artist and pedagogue who gets his due in Merce Ibarz' book on Land
Without Bread, which is in both Spanish and English. Roman Gobern and
Paul Hammond contest Ibarz' view that Land Without Bread is an
anarcho-surrealist film in an indispensable Positif article that is
extensively referenced in a piece by Hammond in the next Rouge. I
agree with Hammond, because it is clear that Bunuel was afraid of
being executed by the Spanish anarchists, because the crew of LWB was
predominately communist, and because the criticisms in Land Without
Bread are perfectly consistent with the Comintern "third period"
line. I think Hammond and John Baxter attribute too much opportunism
to him in their accounts -- I think he was, as I say, an
undisciplined communist during this period.
I also don't agree with Hammond and Gobern's characterization of Acin
as "a modest Aragonian pedagogue" whom Ibarz "elevates to the level
of a Thalberg or a Selznick." Pedagogy, as you say, is a very
important issue in the film, and constitutes the whole of the
critique of the liberal Republic.
Ibarz reports that "Together with Herminio Almendros, pedagogue and
chief promoter of Freinet's [use of printing as a teaching tool] in
Spain and father of the future filmmaker Nestor Almendros, Acin
organized the first National Teachers' Conference in Huesca in 1932.
In the spring of 1933, a few days before the shooting of Tierra Sin
Pan started, Acin was already in Lss Hurdes, and experiments in four
villages of the lower region of Las Hurdes also took place during
that year, giving rise to the school notebooks titled Vida hurdana
[reproduced on p. 113 of Ibarz' book], printed in Vilafranca del
Penedes (Barcelona). The notebooks linked the schoolchildren of Las
Hurdes with schoolchildren in villages in the area of Lerida."
Issues of authorship often cloud these discussions, as is also the
case with Espagne 1937. That was clearly a collective work, more so
than Land Without Bread, and even though Bunuel no doubt supervised
it closely, having BEEN Thalberg for two years at Filmofono before he
made it, the ideas of Jean-Paul Dreyfuss (Le Chanois) on montage
quoted in Jonathan Buchsbaum's Cinema Engage: Film in the Popular
Front suggest that Le Chanois made a big contribution to Espagne
1937, where Bunuel credits him as editor and himself and Unik as
writers: "The montage film appeared to me the perfect place to
experiment [with objets trouves]. My idea was to conduct the
experiment with the greatest possible number of 'ready-made'
elements: newsreel images, sounds from the film library, prerecorded
music."
Le Chanois adds that when Renoir asked him to edit the first two
reels of La vie est a nous, the text for the commentary of the first
sequence was imposed in advance: "Thus the experiment was not
entirely conclusive." To my eyes (and ears) Espagne 1937 was a more
open, dialectical collaboration between Le Chanois, Bunuel and Unik,
and a perfect illustration of Le Chanois' ideas. As with Centinela,
Alerta, Bunuel was a creative producer who gave people a chance to do
good work -- in that case, Gremillon should not have been embarrassed
to put his name on the film. Land Without Bread, on the other hand,
was Bunuel's film; he directed it, cowrote it, edited it and
supervised the dubbing, so he signed it. "It is the least gratuitous
film I ever made," he later said.
Unik also worked on La vie est a nous. According to Ibarz'
fascinating book, the Land Without Bread team didn't come to good
ends, except for Bunuel and Rafael Sanchez Ventura, who left Spain in
1936 and France before the German invasion. Acin and his wife were
killed by a Falangist firing squad in 1936; Unik died escaping from a
German prison camp in 1945. Pierre Lotar, the cameraman on Land
Without Bread, went searching for traces of Unik after the war but
found nothing. Lotar ended up down and out in Paris in the 60s, where
he served as a model for Giacometti -- as if the imanges of
starvation he filmed in 1933 had been internalized, making him the
perfect Giacometti subject.
I again recommend that anyone who has followed this part of the
thread try experiment of watching Land Without Bread with the famous
soundtrack turned off!
10703
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 9:58pm
Subject: Bunuel (wasFwd: Re: Preston Sturges ...)
> You mentioned Bunuel's "Robinson Crusoe". Is it available in
any
> form anywhere? I loved it when I saw it some 40 years ago. I
thought
> it was almost as surrealist as "L'Age d'or".
>
> JPC
Thanks for the correction re Diary of a Chambermaid. I just read it,
and the "shoe scene" in the book - right at the beginning - is ten
times more ferocious than the one in the film! Bunuel also TONED DOWN
Death in This Garden -- the book is like Dostoevsky on psilocybin
(sp?).
Crusoe is very, very hard to find. I can make you a complete copy
w/out subtitles but w. decent color from a version I taped off
Spanish-language tv, with the dream sequence, which that version
omits, plunked in from a more faded ITALIAN copy at Cinefile. (BTW,
that's O'Herlihy playing his own father in the dream.) I can't
guarantee it will arrive fast, but if you send me your address I'd be
happy to do it.
I agree that it's a great film. I believe UCLA has an English print,
which can be viewed on tape or on film. I plan to check that when I
have finished watching Fever Mounts in their archives -- the only
Bunuel film (besides the Riefenstahl montage) for which I don't have
a tape to refer to, thanks to help from many hands. Actually, there's
a para-Bunuel that I don't believe exists on tape: La novia de
medianoche, a 1997 film based on a treatment LB wrote with a friend
in H'wd in 1946 - a Gothic thriller with apparently supernatural
elements that are resolved at the end. It sounds like fun. I got a
real bang out of Adonis Kyrou's The Monk, written by LB and Carriere,
which they have at Cinefile. Almost a Jesus Franco film...
10704
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 10:42pm
Subject: Bunuel (wasFwd: Re: Preston Sturges ...)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> > You mentioned Bunuel's "Robinson Crusoe". Is it available in
> any
> > form anywhere? I loved it when I saw it some 40 years ago. I
> thought
> > it was almost as surrealist as "L'Age d'or".
> >
> > JPC
>
> Thanks for the correction re Diary of a Chambermaid. I just read
it,
> and the "shoe scene" in the book - right at the beginning - is ten
> times more ferocious than the one in the film! Bunuel also TONED
DOWN
> Death in This Garden -- the book is like Dostoevsky on psilocybin
> (sp?).
Read it ages ago. If I remember correctly the shoe fetishist
dies with the chambermaid's "bottine" clenched between his teeth.
JPC
>
> Crusoe is very, very hard to find. I can make you a complete copy
> w/out subtitles but w. decent color from a version I taped off
> Spanish-language tv, with the dream sequence, which that version
> omits, plunked in from a more faded ITALIAN copy at Cinefile. (BTW,
> that's O'Herlihy playing his own father in the dream.) I can't
> guarantee it will arrive fast, but if you send me your address I'd
be
> happy to do it.
>
I really appreciate the offer. "Crusoe" is near the top of my
list of "films introuvables". I never forgot the dream sequence...
> real bang out of Adonis Kyrou's The Monk, written by LB and
Carriere,
> which they have at Cinefile. Almost a Jesus Franco film...
That's another hard-to-find one... I remember Ado drooling
surrealistically over Charisse's legs at a screening of "Bandwagon"
or jumping up during a Cine Club discussion and shouting (I don't
remember the topic) "Mais vous oubliez Borzage!" (pronounced to rhyme
with "corsage")... I liked him but I must say Truffaut's response to
his diatribes (Positif Copie Zero in Cahiers #79) was right on
target.
10705
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 10:49pm
Subject: Re: a reality he can never experience first hand?
This issue is raised by Godard in "Notre Musique". Is that possible
to take part in History and be the one who tells it? Do I need to
participate to be able / have the right to tell?
Notre Musique says no. See Homere and the battlefields.
But Fuller ?
10706
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 11:08pm
Subject: Re: Mabuse (novels and films)
Thanks very much, David, Filipe, and Bill!
Bill, do you recall the name of that book? Is it the one by David
Kalat, "The Strange Case of Dr. Mabuse: A Study of the 12 Films and 5
Novels"?
-Jaime
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "filipefurtado"
wrote:
10707
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 11:21pm
Subject: Robinson Crusoe
> I really appreciate the offer. "Crusoe" is near the top of my
> list of "films introuvables". I never forgot the dream sequence...
>
Dream of this film introuvable no longer --
http://www.vcientertainment.com/press.asp?page=21-RobinsonCrusoe.txt
craig.
10708
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jun 6, 2004 11:36pm
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
> > I really appreciate the offer. "Crusoe" is near the top of my
> > list of "films introuvables". I never forgot the dream sequence...
> >
>
> Dream of this film introuvable no longer --
>
> http://www.vcientertainment.com/press.asp?page=21-RobinsonCrusoe.txt
>
> craig.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, Craig! You've made my day (D. Day indeed!)and that
of all Bunuel fans in this Group!. Can't wait until late August!
JPC
10709
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 0:28am
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
> > Dream of this film introuvable no longer --
A videotape is also on ebay at the moment (quote unquote: "Less Sureal and possiably the most realistic telling of this classic story akin to Passolini's The
Gospel According to St. Matthew.") Also, robertsvideos.com, which I recently came across, lists it -- not much point in posting this now, especially as they
say they take 6 weeks (I think) to deliver, but they seem to have numerous other rarities - can anyone vouch for them?
10710
From: Robert Keser
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 1:14am
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
Whoa! Caution: robertsvideos is synonymous with rip-off. They don't
take 6 weeks to deliver: they never deliver! The last I heard, the
Canadian authorities were investigating this operation. In case
robertsvideos has reformed, maybe the company can prove it by sending
back the hundred dollars they've owed me for over two years now.
--Robert Keser
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
wrote:
>
Also,
robertsvideos.com, which I recently came across, lists it --
they say they take 6 weeks(I think) to deliver, but they seem
to have numerous other rarities - can anyone vouch for them?
10711
From: jtakagi@e...
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:00am
Subject: RE: Robinson Crusoe
Now if only someone would release J-D Pollet's "Tu imagines
Robinson", a film that I've thought about for years.
Jonathan Takagi
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Craig Keller evillights@m...
Dream of this film introuvable no longer --
http://www.vcientertainment.com/press.asp?page=21-RobinsonCrusoe.txt
craig.
Yahoo! Groups Links
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
10712
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:08am
Subject: RE: Robinson Crusoe
How about a Pollet retro?
I adore "L'Amour C'est Gai, L'Amour C'est Triste."
--- "jtakagi@e..." wrote:
> Now if only someone would release J-D Pollet's "Tu
> imagines
> Robinson", a film that I've thought about for years.
>
> Jonathan Takagi
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Craig Keller evillights@m...
> Dream of this film introuvable no longer --
>
>
http://www.vcientertainment.com/press.asp?page=21-RobinsonCrusoe.txt
>
> craig.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10713
From: rpporton55
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:50am
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
> My face is red: I susbtituted Unik for Acin (they being near-anagrams
> of each other)! The educational theorist was Ramon Acin, the producer
> of the film (via the famous lottery ticket), a white anarchist visual
> artist and pedagogue who gets his due in Merce Ibarz' book on Land
> Without Bread, which is in both Spanish and English. Roman Gobern and
> Paul Hammond contest Ibarz' view that Land Without Bread is an
> anarcho-surrealist film in an indispensable Positif article that is
> extensively referenced in a piece by Hammond in the next Rouge. I
> agree with Hammond, because it is clear that Bunuel was afraid of
> being executed by the Spanish anarchists, because the crew of LWB was
> predominately communist, and because the criticisms in Land Without
> Bread are perfectly consistent with the Comintern "third period"
> line. I think Hammond and John Baxter attribute too much opportunism
> to him in their accounts -- I think he was, as I say, an
> undisciplined communist during this period.
>
> I also don't agree with Hammond and Gobern's characterization of Acin
> as "a modest Aragonian pedagogue" whom Ibarz "elevates to the level
> of a Thalberg or a Selznick." Pedagogy, as you say, is a very
> important issue in the film, and constitutes the whole of the
> critique of the liberal Republic.
>
> Ibarz reports that "Together with Herminio Almendros, pedagogue and
> chief promoter of Freinet's [use of printing as a teaching tool] in
> Spain and father of the future filmmaker Nestor Almendros, Acin
> organized the first National Teachers' Conference in Huesca in 1932.
> In the spring of 1933, a few days before the shooting of Tierra Sin
> Pan started, Acin was already in Lss Hurdes, and experiments in four
> villages of the lower region of Las Hurdes also took place during
> that year, giving rise to the school notebooks titled Vida hurdana
> [reproduced on p. 113 of Ibarz' book], printed in Vilafranca del
> Penedes (Barcelona). The notebooks linked the schoolchildren of Las
> Hurdes with schoolchildren in villages in the area of Lerida."
>
> Issues of authorship often cloud these discussions, as is also the
> case with Espagne 1937. That was clearly a collective work, more so
> than Land Without Bread, and even though Bunuel no doubt supervised
> it closely, having BEEN Thalberg for two years at Filmofono before he
> made it, the ideas of Jean-Paul Dreyfuss (Le Chanois) on montage
> quoted in Jonathan Buchsbaum's Cinema Engage: Film in the Popular
> Front suggest that Le Chanois made a big contribution to Espagne
> 1937, where Bunuel credits him as editor and himself and Unik as
> writers: "The montage film appeared to me the perfect place to
> experiment [with objets trouves]. My idea was to conduct the
> experiment with the greatest possible number of 'ready-made'
> elements: newsreel images, sounds from the film library, prerecorded
> music."
>
> Le Chanois adds that when Renoir asked him to edit the first two
> reels of La vie est a nous, the text for the commentary of the first
> sequence was imposed in advance: "Thus the experiment was not
> entirely conclusive." To my eyes (and ears) Espagne 1937 was a more
> open, dialectical collaboration between Le Chanois, Bunuel and Unik,
> and a perfect illustration of Le Chanois' ideas. As with Centinela,
> Alerta, Bunuel was a creative producer who gave people a chance to do
> good work -- in that case, Gremillon should not have been embarrassed
> to put his name on the film. Land Without Bread, on the other hand,
> was Bunuel's film; he directed it, cowrote it, edited it and
> supervised the dubbing, so he signed it. "It is the least gratuitous
> film I ever made," he later said.
>
> Unik also worked on La vie est a nous. According to Ibarz'
> fascinating book, the Land Without Bread team didn't come to good
> ends, except for Bunuel and Rafael Sanchez Ventura, who left Spain in
> 1936 and France before the German invasion. Acin and his wife were
> killed by a Falangist firing squad in 1936; Unik died escaping from a
> German prison camp in 1945. Pierre Lotar, the cameraman on Land
> Without Bread, went searching for traces of Unik after the war but
> found nothing. Lotar ended up down and out in Paris in the 60s, where
> he served as a model for Giacometti -- as if the imanges of
> starvation he filmed in 1933 had been internalized, making him the
> perfect Giacometti subject.
>
> I again recommend that anyone who has followed this part of the
> thread try experiment of watching Land Without Bread with the famous
> soundtrack turned off!
Yes, I'm of course familiar with Acin. As I believe I once wrote you, an o=
ld Spanish
anarchist once argued with me and insisted that Acin contributed the spoils=
of a bank
robbery, not a lottery ticket, to Bunuel's Las Hurdes fund! That's most lik=
ely not true, but it
would be nice of it was.
The contours of the Las Hurdes debate seem a bit literal-minded to me. It's=
obvious that
Bunuel was more sympathetic to the Coummunists at the time and it seems mo=
re than
credible that he was afraid of the anarchists. But that doesn't mean that t=
he film can't be
appropriated for an anarchist or anarcho-surrealist interpretation. In any =
case, the
definition of what constituted an anarchist in Spain during the Thirties wa=
s quite porous. A
partisan of the FAI might well have wanted to murder Bunuel and his Communi=
st cohorts.
(In general, though, the Communists, specifically the Comintern, did a muc=
h better and
systematic job of persecuting Trotskyists and anarchists). But the CNT, the=
anarcho-
syndicalist trade union, attracted more than a million members during its p=
rime and many
of the rank and file were not particularly dogmatic; it's doubtful, for exa=
mple, that most of
them spent their evenings studying Kropotkin.
It's odd that the only mainstream, or semi-mainstream, film that tackles th=
e Spanish
Revolution (as opposed to merely the Civil War)—Loach's "Land and Freedom"—=
is from the
pov of the POUM, not the CNT or FAI , particularly since the Marxist POUM w=
as much
smaller than either of the anarchist organizations. (This is of course a r=
esult of the fact
that Loach is closer to the Trotskyists—although the POUM was not, strickly=
speaking, a
Trotskyist organization and Trotsky crticized them harshly.
I hate to contradict M. Coursodon, but Octave Mirbeau certainly was close t=
o anarchism,
You don't have to take my word for it—the evidence is in a number of schola=
rly works—
Reg Carr, "Anarchism in France; the Case of Octave Mirbeau: (Manchester UP,=
1977) ;
Sharif Gemie, "Mirbeau and the Politics of Misogyny" (Journal of European S=
tudies).
R. Porton
10714
From: rpporton55
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 3:02am
Subject: Mirbeau and Anarchism
Just as a follow-up; Here's a link to an article that chronicles Mirbeau's "conversion to
anarchism:
http://www.infoshop.org/mirbeau.html
10715
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 4:34am
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
> The contours of the Las Hurdes debate seem a bit literal-minded to
me. It's=
> obvious that
> Bunuel was more sympathetic to the Coummunists at the time and it
seems mo=
> re than
> credible that he was afraid of the anarchists. But that doesn't
mean that t=
> he film can't be
> appropriated for an anarchist or anarcho-surrealist interpretation.
Absolutely. It presumably satisfied representatives of both groups,
because representatives of both groups made it! But it wouldn't have
pleased the liberal Republican government, which it criticizes, and
certainly didn't please the conservative government that was elected
in 1934, which banned the film. And one reason for that is that the
film says that Las Hurdes is a caricatural microcosm of Spain, as
Legendre had written. The fact that the opening maps of Europe and
Spain were snipped off by request in 1936 shows that the "microcosm"
theory isn't so far-fetched -- always trust a censor to read well.
The film was seen as an insult to the honor of Spain, which is also
represented by the ghastly ceremony going on in La Alberca (which is
not part of Las Hurdes) at the beginning, and the monastery full of
reptiles and toads shown afterward, before we ever get to Las Hurdes.
10716
From:
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 4:38am
Subject: Creeping Mabuse
Jaime
Kalat's is the only book on the subject I'm aware of and it's certainly a must read if you've caught the bug. He seems to have made something of a cottage
industry of the Dr, having done commentary on all three of the Lang films and the first of the subsequent ones (I think his DVD commentaries are great, among
the very few worthwhile contributions to that misbegotten enterprise). His company (All-Day Entertainment, I think) released the THOUSAND EYES and RETURN
discs, he wanted to do others but ran into legal tangles.
Michel Chion has great stuff about TESTAMENT in his book on the voice in cinema (and I think that's the title, handily enough).
The remake of TESTAMENT is well worth watching, I haven't seen any of the later ones, except Chabrol's unofficial contribution, CLUB EXTINCTION. But as we've
discussed, I think DEMONLOVER is the real continuation.
Listeiros in search of Bunuel's ROBINSON CRUSOE be advised that the Masters of Cinema site has announced a U.S. (I think) DVD release.
Brent
10717
From: rpporton55
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 4:46am
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
--- In a_fi
>
> Absolutely. It presumably satisfied representatives of both groups,
> because representatives of both groups made it! But it wouldn't have
> pleased the liberal Republican government, which it criticizes, and
> certainly didn't please the conservative government that was elected
> in 1934, which banned the film. And one reason for that is that the
> film says that Las Hurdes is a caricatural microcosm of Spain, as
> Legendre had written. The fact that the opening maps of Europe and
> Spain were snipped off by request in 1936 shows that the "microcosm"
> theory isn't so far-fetched -- always trust a censor to read well.
> The film was seen as an insult to the honor of Spain, which is also
> represented by the ghastly ceremony going on in La Alberca (which is
> not part of Las Hurdes) at the beginning, and the monastery full of
> reptiles and toads shown afterward, before we ever get to Las Hurdes.
I think your position makes a lot of sense. In fact, I'd go out on a limb and contend that
LAS HURDES, despite all of the contradictions we've mentioned, is a much more "anarchist"
film than the fiction films and documentaries produced by the CNT-FAI during the war.
Perhaps that's a bit perverse. But I think it's nevertheless true.. Be that is it may, the CNT
films are fascinating, if, in the final analysis, quite mediocre.
RP
10718
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 5:36am
Subject: archive red alert (BFI/National Film Archive)
Everyone should go to the following URL and, if possible, sign this
petition. It looks pretty serious:
www.filmarchiveaction.org
Faithfully,
Jonathan
10719
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 6:11am
Subject: Deleuze DVD set
It's too expensive for me to buy right now but the 3-disc "L'abédédaire de =
Gilles
Deleuze" is currently out in France. The bonus of the set, apparently, is a=
FEMIS
conference delivered by Deleuze in '87 called "Qu'est-ce que l'acte de créa=
tion".
Supposedly Deleuze discusses whether there is anything to left to create in=
movie-
making compared to philosophical work. Do our French colleagues (or residen=
t DVD
aficionados -- like Jonathan) have any more info on this?
Feeling empty since he lent his Deleuze books to his grandma,
Gabe
10720
From: Joseph Kaufman
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 6:55am
Subject: Re: Mabuse (novels and films)
>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
The Mabuse books don't appear to be in print. The only novel that
shows up on Bookfinder.com, my favorite search engine for finding old
books, is the first one, at prices ranging from US$250 to $800 for
copies of the early English-language edition.
Bookfinder basically indexes all the other book search engines, so
it's pretty thorough.
--
- Joe Kaufman
10721
From: Hadrian
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 8:41am
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
I have succesffully ordered from Robert's Videos....however I
have been waiting for my copy of Joseph Losey's "M" for a very
long time...my guess is more flakery than shenanigans. Most
bootleggers I've dealt with (and that would be most of them) are
by nature, unreliable....
> Whoa! Caution: robertsvideos is synonymous with rip-off. They
don't
> take 6 weeks to deliver: they never deliver! The last I heard, the
> Canadian authorities were investigating this operation. In case
> robertsvideos has reformed, maybe the company can prove it
by sending
> back the hundred dollars they've owed me for over two years
now.
>
> --Robert Keser
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
> wrote:
>
> >
> Also,
> robertsvideos.com, which I recently came across, lists it --
> they say they take 6 weeks(I think) to deliver, but they seem
> to have numerous other rarities - can anyone vouch for them?
10722
From: Andy Rector
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 9:20am
Subject: experience of Fuller/Godard
--- "Maxime Renaudin" wrote:
> This issue is raised by Godard in "Notre Musique". Is that possible
> to take part in History and be the one who tells it? Do I need to
> participate to be able / have the right to tell?
> Notre Musique says no. See Homere and the battlefields.
> But Fuller ?
Fuller had the insatiable desire to try and try again to tell a first
hand story. To let others know what it was like. Somewhere I read
(maybe in a post here) Fuller say that the only way to really let the
audience know what war was like was to let off grenades in the
theater. Why would he want others to know war so well? For the same
reason as Godard. But probably for a different reason than Spielberg
or Kubrick.
The question of the right to tell doesn't hold back many
filmmakers today and what is told in the end is but a string of
tropes, embellished in one direction or the other. But even that is
not eternal, it is a historical form in itself. In that, at the least,
we can try to tell, whats true and whats false.
From the press conference on the occasion of the premier of Notre
Musique, Godard said he liked to go and see when others have lost
interest, journalists that is, when the war is said to be over. This
seems to me, by its approach, simply a different sort of participation
which must give one the right to an expression of ones impressions.
Though it's not with out its questionability.
Yours,
andy
10723
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 9:57am
Subject: Mabuse reading, etc
Dear friends - I just stumbled upon an essay about the Dr Mabuse literature
and films in NEW LEFT REVIEW on-line:
http://www.newleftreview.net/NLR25904.shtml
This site also has on-line an English-language version of Edgardo
Cozarinsky's fascinating 'Letter from Buenos Aires' that first appeared in
TRAFIC.
By the way, has anyone here yet mentioned Chabrol's crazy Mabuse film of the
early 90s, DR M with Alan Bates and ... Andrew McCarthy ?! Aka CLUB
EXTINCTION on video. Has to be seen to be disbelieved!
Adrian (Dr M)
10724
From: Robert Keser
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 1:35pm
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Hadrian" wrote:
> I have successfully ordered from Robert's Videos....however I
> have been waiting for my copy of Joseph Losey's "M" for a very
> long time...
Ah, but when's the last time you heard from them?! (Apparently,
Canadian fraud investigators are at work).
my guess is more flakery than shenanigans. Most
> bootleggers I've dealt with (and that would be most of them) are
> by nature, unreliable....
On a positive note, I'd certainly recommend Darker Image, which not
only has rare American titles of interest to auteurists (Preminger's
The Fan, The Lawless, Park Row, My Son John) but helped me a lot by
adding extra film material and even sending copies of articles. This
is run by a filmography specialist (who's published at least five
books), and the deliveries are timely!
--Robert Keser
> > Whoa! Caution: robertsvideos is synonymous with rip-off. They
> don't
> > take 6 weeks to deliver: they never deliver! The last I heard,
the
> > Canadian authorities were investigating this operation. In case
> > robertsvideos has reformed, maybe the company can prove it
> by sending
> > back the hundred dollars they've owed me for over two years
> now.
> >
> > --Robert Keser
> >
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
>
> > wrote:
> > Also,
> > robertsvideos.com, which I recently came across, lists it --
> > they say they take 6 weeks(I think) to deliver, but they seem
> > to have numerous other rarities - can anyone vouch for them?
10725
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:28pm
Subject: Fwd: Re: Preston Sturges - Sullivan's Travels - opinions sought
I'd go out on a limb and contend that
> LAS HURDES, despite all of the contradictions we've mentioned, is a
much more "anarchist"
> film than the fiction films and documentaries produced by the CNT-
FAI during the war.
> Perhaps that's a bit perverse. But I think it's nevertheless
true.. Be that is it may, the CNT
> films are fascinating, if, in the final analysis, quite mediocre.
>
> RP
Even Espagne 1937 is interesting by virtue of not quite following the
Popular Front line. Here's something I read last night that I agree
with -- from Charles Tesson's great book on LB: "Los Olvidados is a
film that couldn't be imagined without Land Without Bread. The same
is true of Nazarin. The subterranean presence of Land Without Bread
during the Mexican and Spanish period (cf. the ending of Viridiana),
and its total absence during the final French period define the main
movements of the oeuvre."
10726
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:36pm
Subject: Re: experience of Fuller/Godard
>
> Fuller had the insatiable desire to try and try again to tell a
first
> hand story. To let others know what it was like. Somewhere I read
> (maybe in a post here) Fuller say that the only way to really let
the
> audience know what war was like was to let off grenades in the
> theater. Why would he want others to know war so well?
With Sam it was also a matter of trying to heal his own post-
traumatic stress syndrome. He and Marvin, who suffered from the same
thing, and drank himself to death, finally got to show what they had
experienced when they made The Big Red One, but Lorimar kept them
from seeing it all the way to the end.
10727
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:45pm
Subject: Re: Mabuse reading, etc
>
> By the way, has anyone here yet mentioned Chabrol's crazy Mabuse
film of the
> early 90s, DR M with Alan Bates and ... Andrew McCarthy ?! Aka CLUB
> EXTINCTION on video. Has to be seen to be disbelieved!
>
> Adrian (Dr M)
It has been mentioned. I kind of like Club Extinction -- it's one of
the few Chabrols that doesn't make me want to go put a bullet in my
head!
10728
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 2:54pm
Subject: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
>
>
> > I got a real bang out of Adonis Kyrou's The Monk, written by LB
and
> Carriere,
> > which they have at Cinefile. Almost a Jesus Franco film...
>
> That's another hard-to-find one... I remember Ado drooling
> surrealistically over Charisse's legs at a screening of "Bandwagon"
> or jumping up during a Cine Club discussion and shouting (I don't
> remember the topic) "Mais vous oubliez Borzage!" (pronounced to
rhyme
> with "corsage")... I liked him but I must say Truffaut's response
to
> his diatribes (Positif Copie Zero in Cahiers #79) was right on
> target.
>JPC
I bet that's part of why you're so grouchy when we start rhapsodizing
about Anna or Sharmilla. One of the under-discussed strands in
auteurism is the obsession with actresses -- Sarris's "cherchez la
femme." And it's quite true that for some cinephiles and even critics
it becomes the center of their esthetic. But you must have seen all
that ages ago, JP, when it was being invented -- that could incline
you to find it tiring when it pops up here. It's an interesting
phenomenon.
10729
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 3:57pm
Subject: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
> One of the under-discussed strands in
> auteurism is the obsession with actresses -- Sarris's "cherchez la
> femme." And it's quite true that for some cinephiles and even critics
> it becomes the center of their esthetic.
We don't have a monopoly on that! Just start a chat with the guy
sitting next to you at any screening of an old Hollywood film.
Maybe it's similar to the way pagans held on to their old customs after
converting to Christianity. - Dan
10730
From: rpporton55
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 4:08pm
Subject: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
--- In
>
> We don't have a monopoly on that! Just start a chat with the guy
> sitting next to you at any screening of an old Hollywood film.
>
> Maybe it's similar to the way pagans held on to their old customs after
> converting to Christianity. - Dan
Well, it is odd how , in a recent New York Observer column, Sarris invoked=
auteurism
while singing the praises of LIndsay Lohan in "Mean Girls."...Has he beome =
the Humbert
Humbert of film reviewing?—RP
10731
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 5:00pm
Subject: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
I bet that's part of why you're so grouchy when we start
rhapsodizing
> about Anna or Sharmilla. One of the under-discussed strands in
> auteurism is the obsession with actresses -- Sarris's "cherchez la
> femme." And it's quite true that for some cinephiles and even
critics
> it becomes the center of their esthetic. But you must have seen all
> that ages ago, JP, when it was being invented -- that could incline
> you to find it tiring when it pops up here. It's an interesting
> phenomenon.
Me? Grouchy? I just said that I found the "toilet-seat-worship"
bit somewhat excessive (even if some tongue-in-cheekness was
involved, and I'm not even sure it was the case).
Your mention of Sarris reminds me of the time a few years ago
when I had dinner with him and Molly at their place (Dave Kehr and
Richard Corliss were there too)and the very topic of Goddesses came
up. Everyone was supposed to expatiate about his screen goddess
(except Molly, of course -- but why? Well it's a guy thing I
guess...) Sarris went on about Garbo (whom I find totally unerotic
and with few exceptions -- Cukor -- unengaging as an actress)and I
don't remember about the others, but I was quite unable to come up
with any name. How humiliating! Of course I could and still can give
names (Janet Leigh would be one) but do they rank as goddesses, did
they "become the center of my esthetic" (assuming I have one)?
Certainly not. But, yes, it's an interesting phenomenon. Part of the
inherently fetishistic nature of auteurism, as I think I remarked in
an earlier post.
The goddess syndrome has always existed. Jean George Auriol was
totally infatuated with Mary Duncan and waxed poetic about her in
several articles in "La revue du Cinema" (lots of full page photos of
the goddess) between 1928 and 1931. The articles about screen
actresses and their influence often came under the logo "Le Cinema et
les moeurs". And after the war Kyrou virtually invented or reinvented
Louise Brooks...
JPC
10732
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 5:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
Raymond Durgnat was a big Brigitte Bardot fan, and
mentioned her frequently in his writings.
I penned a paen to Barbara Steele for "December"
magazine back in the late 60's.
And I'm sure you all know how I feel about Julie
Christie.
If anyone's up for a discussion of actresses as
auteurs it's quite a fertile field.
"A Bette Davis picture" means a lot more than the fact
that she had the leading role. At the height of her
powers every aspect of her movies related to her,
regardless of the director.
Joan Crawford was similar in a more passive-agressive
way.
And there's certainly an argument to be made for
Sternberg and Dietrich as co-auteurs.
--- rpporton55 wrote:
> --- In
> >
> > We don't have a monopoly on that! Just start a
> chat with the guy
> > sitting next to you at any screening of an old
> Hollywood film.
> >
> > Maybe it's similar to the way pagans held on to
> their old customs after
> > converting to Christianity. - Dan
>
> Well, it is odd how , in a recent New York Observer
> column, Sarris invoked=
> auteurism
> while singing the praises of LIndsay Lohan in "Mean
> Girls."...Has he beome =
> the Humbert
> Humbert of film reviewing?—RP
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10733
From: Dave Garrett
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 5:07pm
Subject: Re: Robinson Crusoe
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Hadrian" wrote:
> > I have successfully ordered from Robert's Videos....however I
> > have been waiting for my copy of Joseph Losey's "M" for a very
> > long time...
[...]
> On a positive note, I'd certainly recommend Darker Image, which not
> only has rare American titles of interest to auteurists (Preminger's
> The Fan, The Lawless, Park Row, My Son John) but helped me a lot by
> adding extra film material and even sending copies of articles. This
> is run by a filmography specialist (who's published at least five
> books), and the deliveries are timely!
I highly recommend the Danger & Despair Knitting Circle for
anything noir-related:
http://www.noirfilm.com/
They have Losey's M, according to their stock list, and the
last time I ordered anything from them (ACE IN THE HOLE/THE BIG
CARNIVAL and FIVE AGAINST THE HOUSE), they promptly responded
to email and I received the order quickly.
Dave
10734
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 6:32pm
Subject: Re: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> The goddess syndrome has always existed. Jean
> George Auriol was
> totally infatuated with Mary Duncan and waxed poetic
> about her in
> several articles in "La revue du Cinema" (lots of
> full page photos of
> the goddess) between 1928 and 1931. The articles
> about screen
> actresses and their influence often came under the
> logo "Le Cinema et
> les moeurs". And after the war Kyrou virtually
> invented or reinvented
> Louise Brooks...
>
Joseph Cornell was over the moon about Hedy Lamarr. He
claimed there was something about her presence that
preserved the magic of the silent cinema in the sound
era.
Much later he became fascinated with Jacqueline
Bissett for an early vehicle of hers called "The
Grasshopper." In tribute he constructed a paper
grasshopper in a jar and sent it to her.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10735
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 7:43pm
Subject: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> >
> > The goddess syndrome has always existed. Jean
> > George Auriol was
> > totally infatuated with Mary Duncan and waxed poetic
> > about her in
> > several articles in "La revue du Cinema" (lots of
> > full page photos of
> > the goddess) between 1928 and 1931. The articles
> > about screen
> > actresses and their influence often came under the
> > logo "Le Cinema et
> > les moeurs". And after the war Kyrou virtually
> > invented or reinvented
> > Louise Brooks...
> >
> Joseph Cornell was over the moon about Hedy Lamarr.
It's Hedley!
10736
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 9:20pm
Subject: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Joseph Cornell was over the moon about Hedy Lamarr. He
> claimed there was something about her presence that
> preserved the magic of the silent cinema in the sound
> era.
>
"And so we are grateful to Hedy Lamarr, the enchanted wanderer,
who again speaks the poetic and evocative language of the silent
film, if only in whispers at times, beside the empty roar of the
sound track..." (J.C., "View" 1941). He also had a fascination for
Lauren Bacall, who, processed by Hollywood, didn't look unlike Lamarr
(see for inst. the "Penny Arcade Portrait of Lauren Bacall", a 1946
folder containing several Bacall documents, and a similarly
titled "construction" of 1945-46). In 1946 he wrote (in broken
French) a letter to a French film historian, Claude Serbanne,
praising Jennifer Jones in terms reminiscent of his Lamarr article.
JPC
> Much later he became fascinated with Jacqueline
> Bissett for an early vehicle of hers called "The
> Grasshopper." In tribute he constructed a paper
> grasshopper in a jar and sent it to her.
So that was very soon before he died...
Cornell had been putting grasshoppers in glass jars since at
least the early thirties.
JPC
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10737
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 11:42pm
Subject: Actresses
I like some actresses as much as the next cinephile, but I must say the
'goddess' talk - at least as part of the public act of writing film
criticism - kinda soured for me in the mid 80s, when the genre hit its nadir
in David Thomson's writing.
Apart from any political critique, the 'fetishistic' mode of writing about
actress-goddesses (I mean generally, not just in Thomson) often illuminated
absolutely zip about the actual acting styles and achievements of these
women!
Adrian
10738
From:
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 8:36pm
Subject: Re: Re: Actress-worship (was: Bunuel)
David Ehrenstein writes:
"Joseph Cornell was over the moon about Hedy Lamarr. He claimed there was
something about her presence that preserved the magic of the silent cinema in the
sound era."
The last 15 minutes of "The Conspirators" (Jean Negulesco) seems to have
magical mise-en-secene. I remember Hedy in a fur coat, waiting on a fog-drenched
dock...
Have never seen the whole picture!
Mike Grost
10739
From:
Date: Mon Jun 7, 2004 8:37pm
Subject: Re: Actresses
When this goddess stuff is worth writing about, in my opinion, is when it's
plainly intrinsic to the film and built-in to the mise-en-scene. Hitchcock and
his blondes: in "Vertigo," Scottie's first glimpse of Madeleine/Judy at
Ernie's (and the way AH cross-cuts between the profile shot of M/J and Scottie
looking at her from over his shoulder) or the first, great close-up of Lisa in
"Rear Window." AH's attitude towards these actresses here is manifest in the way
he presents them cinematically. I believe, oh, Bogdanovich can also be
talked about this way with some productivity and relevance. And there are others.
All this seems separate, to me, from movie star crushes, which I readily
admit to having. I can enjoy Ms. Julie Delpy in a very bad film, but that's not
why I go to the cinema.
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10740
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:16am
Subject: Re: Actresses
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
> I like some actresses as much as the next cinephile, but I must say
the
> 'goddess' talk - at least as part of the public act of writing film
> criticism - kinda soured for me in the mid 80s, when the genre hit
its nadir
> in David Thomson's writing.
>
> Apart from any political critique, the 'fetishistic' mode of
writing about
> actress-goddesses (I mean generally, not just in Thomson) often
illuminated
> absolutely zip about the actual acting styles and achievements of
these
> women!
>
> Adrian
Of course. But Adrian you're missing the point. The actress-as-
goddess thing has very little to do with acting achievements. Oh, if
the "goddess" happens to have some acting talent, all the better, but
that's not what the cultist is at bottom interested in.
10741
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:31am
Subject: Re: Re: Actresses
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> Of course. But Adrian you're missing the point.
> The actress-as-
> goddess thing has very little to do with acting
> achievements. Oh, if
> the "goddess" happens to have some acting talent,
> all the better, but
> that's not what the cultist is at bottom interested
> in.
>
>
And men figure in here too. I'm sure you haven't
forgotten Michel Mourlet's cri de coeur "Charlton
Heston is an axiom!" J-P.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10742
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:57am
Subject: Re: Actresses
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> All this seems separate, to me, from movie star crushes, which I
readily
> admit to having. I can enjoy Ms. Julie Delpy in a very bad film,
but that's not
> why I go to the cinema.
Not at all, period? You can credit the wonderfulness of her small
"cigarette girl" part in KING LEAR to a certain Delpy-ness that
contributes to Godard's overall plan.
Goodness knows, here I am being linked with dirty old man Andrew
Sarris, but Lindsay Lohan has been one of the more pleasurable
"cinematic" elements of 2004 moviegoing?
Auteurism doesn't have to be airtight. This is where I join the
"weekend auteurists" with Mr. Ehrenstein. And I agree that we
shouldn't limit ourselves to the ladies, either: Alain Delon is the
obvious choice (there's a thread going on at the Criterion fan club
that Delon is the most beautiful thing god ever created for the
movies), but in more recent years we've had Heath Ledger, Karl Geary,
the boys of ELEPHANT, and so on.
-Jaime
10743
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 2:40am
Subject: Actresses/Actors Godesses/Gods Idols
Certainly, the more open sexuality of times forward from the
40's-50's makes it hard to create the 'aura of sexuality' when
it is everywhere around us.
I don't know when film stars moved from IDOLS to celebrity
icons, but at the PS Film Noir this weekend, I was glad to see
the female guests looking quite stylish in their older age rather
than what we see of stars today (no need to go into previously
discussed dress issues).
At some point, stars moved from trying to always look the
part to never looking the part of a movie star, possibly in
response to the audience's desire for more realism.
10744
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:20am
Subject: Re: Re: Actresses
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
(there's a thread going on at the
> Criterion fan club
> that Delon is the most beautiful thing god ever
> created for the
> movies),
Mais Oui!
but in more recent years we've had Heath
> Ledger, Karl Geary,
> the boys of ELEPHANT, and so on.
>
Ledger and Geary do nothing for me, but John Robinson
is another story. Whoa!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10745
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:24am
Subject: Re: Actresses
> Auteurism doesn't have to be airtight. This is where I join the
> "weekend auteurists" with Mr. Ehrenstein. And I agree that we
> shouldn't limit ourselves to the ladies, either: Alain Delon is the
> obvious choice (there's a thread going on at the Criterion fan club
> that Delon is the most beautiful thing god ever created for the
> movies)
How about Belmondo and Ben Carruthers?
-Aaron
10746
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:38am
Subject: Re: Actresses
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> > Of course. But Adrian you're missing the point.
> > The actress-as-
> > goddess thing has very little to do with acting
> > achievements. Oh, if
> > the "goddess" happens to have some acting talent,
> > all the better, but
> > that's not what the cultist is at bottom interested
> > in.
> >
> >
> And men figure in here too. I'm sure you haven't
> forgotten Michel Mourlet's cri de coeur "Charlton
> Heston is an axiom!" J-P.
>
> It's "cri du coeur", and I think you're an axiom, David!
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10747
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:58am
Subject: Re: Re: Actresses
--- Aaron Graham wrote:
)
>
> How about Belmondo and Ben Carruthers?
>
Sir, that you remember Ben Carruthers at all marks you
as a true cinema devotee.
He SHOULD have had Belmondo'scareer, after his
performances in "Shadows" and "Guns of the Trees." But
racist America would not have it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10748
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:59am
Subject: Re: Re: Actresses
Right back atcha, J-P!
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- jpcoursodon wrote:
> >
> > > Of course. But Adrian you're missing the
> point.
> > > The actress-as-
> > > goddess thing has very little to do with acting
> > > achievements. Oh, if
> > > the "goddess" happens to have some acting
> talent,
> > > all the better, but
> > > that's not what the cultist is at bottom
> interested
> > > in.
> > >
> > >
> > And men figure in here too. I'm sure you haven't
> > forgotten Michel Mourlet's cri de coeur "Charlton
> > Heston is an axiom!" J-P.
> >
> > It's "cri du coeur", and I think you're an axiom,
> David!
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10749
From: Patrick Ciccone
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 4:06am
Subject: Heston + "Vintage Hollywood"
> > >
> > And men figure in here too. I'm sure you haven't
> > forgotten Michel Mourlet's cri de coeur "Charlton
> > Heston is an axiom!" J-P.
Speaking of which, has anyone seen the photo of Mr. Heston in
HOLLYWOOD LIFE: The Glamorous Homes of Vintage Hollywood, photographed
(does Amazon have that credit right?--sorry David) by Gavin Lambert?
The photo of Heston nude in his sauna with only a white towel covering
his member, or his axiom as it were, is priceless.
In a glance at the book in the AMMI shop between Hitchcocks, I found
the collection more than a little nauseating, as it's a hybrid of
Architectural Digest and a nightmare 1960s recipe book (cf.
http://www.lileks.com/institute/gallery/). The photo of David O.
Selznick and Jennifer Jones' bedroom, with massive stuffed animals
amid the ghastly decor, is particularly frightening. I wouldn't call
this glamor--where's that pure California Modernism when you need it?
Speaking, does anyone find it crazy that Sternberg's Richard Neutra
house was subsequently occupied by Ayn Rand?
Sorry to emerge from the shadows somewhat off-topic.
Patrick
10750
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 4:36am
Subject: Re: Heston + "Vintage Hollywood"
--- Patrick Ciccone wrote:
> Speaking of which, has anyone seen the photo of Mr.
> Heston in
> HOLLYWOOD LIFE: The Glamorous Homes of Vintage
> Hollywood, photographed
> (does Amazon have that credit right?--sorry David)
> by Gavin Lambert?
> The photo of Heston nude in his sauna with only a
> white towel covering
> his member, or his axiom as it were, is priceless.
>
That can't be right. Gavin's not a photographer as far
as I know. Quite possibly he wrote the text.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10751
From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 4:38am
Subject: Re: Actressess
>tongue-in-cheekness
Oh, it was a tongue in a cheek, all right.
Don't get me started on Nargis, or Waheeda Rehman. Or
in the Philippines, Nora Aunor:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NoraAunor/?yguid=163972330
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10752
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 5:50am
Subject: Re: Actressess
OK, now that we've all shared, I'll repeat: while this is still an
under-analyzed phenomenon in cases where it swells up into an
esthetic (Sarris and others, even more extreme), we can all agree
that the cinephile's actress worship is just an outgrowth of the
filmgoer's. But what about actors, since it has come up again? The
fetishizing of actresses by everyone has been analyzed to death, and
there are loads of films about the director's projected romance with
the gal he's filming, a la Vertigo. So how has the relationship of
directors - gay and not, male and female - to actors been "inscribed"
in films? Where are the theories about THAT?
Let's narrow it down to avoid the obvious. It's easy enough to launch
into a discussion of Cukor or Visconti, but what about Ford or
DeMille? Or Sirk? Or Boetticher? They used actors too, and they made
them stars. Are you telling me that Heston WASN'T eroticized by
DeMille as much as Claudette Colbert? So how does that play out?
Welles made this the center of The Other Side of the Wind -- Huston
is sleeping with both his leads, who are his discoveries, and at the
same time wants to destroy the actor so much that he forces him to
walk off the set before the shooting is finished. The Stunt Man is
about that kind of love-hate deathwish relationship too. I started
thinking about this after seeing a very disturbing indy film called
Cleopatra's Second Husband, now on tape. Any others?
10753
From: Fred Camper
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 5:56am
Subject: Re: Re: Actresses
jpcoursodon wrote:
>--
>
>>....It's "cri du coeur",
>>
While I won't argue with someone named Jean-Pierre about French, in
English "cri de coeur" is acceptable, even preferred. See, for example,
http://www.bartleby.com/61/69/C0746900.html My OED (1987 supplement to
the first edition) lists "cri de coeur" before "cri du coeur," and the
first citation, from 1905, is from G. K. Chesterton, and he has "cri de
coeur."
>>....and I think you're an axiom, David!
>>
>>
>>
This may be true, but I'm a little scared to see the theorems that can
be proven based on the Ehrenstein Axiom....
- Fred C.
10754
From: Damien Bona
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 7:31am
Subject: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
I apologize for going off-topic, but I've been so infuriated and
nauseated by the panegyrics ever since Ronald Reagan woke up the
other day and found himself in hell that I just need to vent with
this article:
KILLER, COWARD, CON-MAN GOOD RIDDANCE, GIPPER ...
MORE PROOF ONLY THE GOOD DIE YOUNG
Sunday, June 6, 2004 by Greg Palast
You're not going to like this. You shouldn't speak ill of the dead.
But in this case, someone's got to.
Ronald Reagan was a con man. Reagan was a coward. Reagan was a
killer.
In 1987, I found myself stuck in a crappy little town in Nicaragua
named Chaguitillo. The people were kind enough, though hungry, except
for one surly young man. His wife had just died of tuberculosis.
People don't die of TB if they get some antibiotics. But Ronald
Reagan, big hearted guy that he was, had put a lock-down embargo on
medicine to Nicaragua because he didn't like the government that the
people there had elected.
Ronnie grinned and cracked jokes while the young woman's lungs filled
up and she stopped breathing. Reagan flashed that B-movie grin while
they buried the mother of three.
And when Hezbollah terrorists struck and murdered hundreds of
American marines in their sleep in Lebanon, the TV warrior ran away
like a whipped dog . then turned around and invaded Grenada. That
little Club Med war was a murderous PR stunt so Ronnie could hold
parades for gunning down Cubans building an airport.
I remember Nancy, a skull and crossbones prancing around in designer
dresses, some of the "gifts" that flowed to the Reagans -- from hats
to million-dollar homes -- from cronies well compensated with
government loot. It used to be called bribery.
And all the while, Grandpa grinned, the grandfather who bleated on
about "family values" but didn't bother to see his own grandchildren.
The New York Times today, in its canned obit, wrote that Reagan
projected, "faith in small town America" and "old-time
values." "Values" my ass. It was union busting and a declaration of
war on the poor and anyone who couldn't buy designer dresses. It was
the New Meanness, bringing starvation back to America so that every
millionaire could get
another million.
"Small town" values? From the movie star of the Pacific Palisades,
the Malibu mogul? I want to throw up.
And all the while, in the White House basement, as his brain boiled
away, his last conscious act was to condone a coup d'etat against our
elected Congress. Reagan's Defense Secretary Casper the Ghost
Weinberger with the crazed Colonel, Ollie North, plotted to give guns
to the Monster of the Mideast, Ayatolla Khomeini.
Reagan's boys called Jimmy Carter a weanie and a wuss although Carter
wouldn't give an inch to the Ayatolla. Reagan, with that film-fantasy
tough-guy con in front of cameras, went begging like a coward
cockroach to Khomeini pleading on bended knee for the release of our
hostages.
Ollie North flew into Iran with a birthday cake for the maniac
mullah -- no kidding --in the shape of a key. The key to Ronnie's
heart.
Then the Reagan roaches mixed their cowardice with crime: taking cash
from the hostage-takers to buy guns for the "contras" - the drug-
runners of Nicaragua posing as freedom fighters.
I remember as a student in Berkeley the words screeching out of the
bullhorn, "The Governor of the State of California, Ronald Reagan,
hereby orders this demonstration to disperse" and then came the
teargas and the truncheons. And all the while, that fang-hiding grin
from the Gipper.
In Chaguitillo, all night long, the farmers stayed awake to guard
their kids from attack from Reagan's Contra terrorists. The farmers
weren't even Sandinistas, those 'Commies' that our cracked-brained
President told us were 'only a 48-hour drive from Texas.' What the
hell would they want with Texas, anyway?
Nevertheless, the farmers, and their families, were Ronnie's targets.
In the deserted darkness of Chaguitillo, a TV blared. Weirdly, it was
that third-rate gangster movie, "Brother Rat." Starring Ronald Reagan.
Well, my friends, you can rest easier tonight: the Rat is dead.
Killer, coward, conman. Ronald Reagan, good-bye and good riddance.
**********************************************
Greg Palast is author of the New York Times bestseller, The Best
Democracy Money Can Buy. www.GregPalast.com
10755
From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 10:00am
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
He didn't do the Philippines any favors either; when it was clear
that Marcos had orchestrated massive fraud on the snap elections in
February, 1986, Reagan still insisted that there was cheating "but
on both sides." He didn't want Marcos to go; only the Filipino
people did.
10756
From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 10:07am
Subject: Re: Actressess
> filmgoer's. But what about actors, since it has come up again? The
> fetishizing of actresses by everyone has been analyzed to death,
and
> there are loads of films about the director's projected romance
with
> the gal he's filming, a la Vertigo. So how has the relationship of
> directors - gay and not, male and female - to actors
been "inscribed"
> in films? Where are the theories about THAT?
Funny, but when Hitchcock uses Grace Kelly or Tippi Hedren in a
film, it's whispered to be an "obsession," but when he casts Cary
Grant and James Stewart it's "actor-director collaboration."
Ford used John Wayne as an icon, in any number of his films; if he
had him strip half naked, we'd have a clearer answer. I don't
remember who pointed this out, but Kubrick's fond of showing
muscular, half-naked men; what does that mean re: Kirk Douglas
washing himself in Paths of Glory and wearing thongs in Spartacus
(was this the real cause of their rift?). For that matter, what
about Mifune, in Kurosawa's films? And if anyone's heard of Lino
Brocka, Philip Salvador in his Jaguar could be called the great love
of his life--there would be no Philip if it wasn't for Brocka.
10757
From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:04pm
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
I couldn't agree more: the wildly uncritical reporting has been
unbelievably offensive, a dramatic taste of what we can expect now
that the mass media are in the grip of three or four monopolies. Nor
is this so off-topic if we remember those auteurs and auteurists who
died unnecessarily degrading deaths because the "Great Communicator"
refused to utter even one syllable that would marshall national
resources to address the epidemic (while the cretinous and
destructive "war on drugs" denied them – and still denies them!
– basic relief from their pain).
Another good critique is in Slate by Christopher Hitchens (who does
not always think so clearly, but is exceptionally clear-eyed here):
http://slate.msn.com/id/2101842/
--Robert Keser
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
> I apologize for going off-topic, but I've been so infuriated and
> nauseated by the panegyrics ever since Ronald Reagan woke up the
> other day and found himself in hell that I just need to vent with
> this article:
>
> KILLER, COWARD, CON-MAN GOOD RIDDANCE, GIPPER ...
> MORE PROOF ONLY THE GOOD DIE YOUNG
> Sunday, June 6, 2004 by Greg Palast
10758
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:11pm
Subject: Re: Re: Actressess
--- Noel Vera wrote:
>
> Funny, but when Hitchcock uses Grace Kelly or Tippi
> Hedren in a
> film, it's whispered to be an "obsession," but when
> he casts Cary
> Grant and James Stewart it's "actor-director
> collaboration."
>
An excellent point, Noel. And one doesn't need to
delve into gossip or psycho-sexual "speculation" to
talk about it.
When a director who has "something to say" finds a
performer with the ability to say it for/with him/her
they've struck gold. Consider Todd Haynes and Julianne
Moore in this regard. There's no off-screen love
affair, but their collaoration on-screen is as close
as that of Sternberg and Dietrich.
> Ford used John Wayne as an icon, in any number of
> his films; if he
> had him strip half naked, we'd have a clearer
> answer.
Notatall. Ford's relationship to Wayne is quite like
Haynes and Moore -- symbiotic but not sexual in the
fully erotic sense.
I don't
> remember who pointed this out, but Kubrick's fond of
> showing
> muscular, half-naked men; what does that mean re:
> Kirk Douglas
> washing himself in Paths of Glory and wearing thongs
> in Spartacus
> (was this the real cause of their rift?).
No. Douglas produced "Spartacus." He fired Anthony
Mann and replaced him with Kubrick.
For that
> matter, what
> about Mifune, in Kurosawa's films?
Ford and Wayne again.
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10759
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 1:14pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
--- Robert Keser wrote:
> I couldn't agree more: the wildly uncritical
> reporting has been
> unbelievably offensive, a dramatic taste of what we
> can expect now
> that the mass media are in the grip of three or four
> monopolies.
You'll find my two cents on the matter here:
http://fablog.ehrensteinland.com/
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10760
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 2:22pm
Subject: Re: Actresses
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
>
>
> jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> >--
> >
> >>....It's "cri du coeur",
> >>
> While I won't argue with someone named Jean-Pierre about French, in
> English "cri de coeur" is acceptable, even preferred. See, for
example,
> http://www.bartleby.com/61/69/C0746900.html My OED (1987 supplement
to
> the first edition) lists "cri de coeur" before "cri du coeur," and
the
> first citation, from 1905, is from G. K. Chesterton, and he
has "cri de
> coeur."
Well, it may be acceptable (and come to think of it I have indeed
always read "de" rather than "du" in English) but it still makes no
sense in French. Phrases borrowed from a foreign language are bound
to be misunderstood, misspelled and variously mistreated. This is one
case among many.
Conversely I wrote a book called "50 ans de cinema americain", a
title which more often than not has been quoted in English as "50
ans du cinema americain". I would need the help of a skilled
grammarian to explain why it has to be "de" and not "du" in that
case, but "du" definitely makes it gibberish.
JPC
>
> >>....and I think you're an axiom, David!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> This may be true, but I'm a little scared to see the theorems that
can
> be proven based on the Ehrenstein Axiom....
>
> - Fred C.
Axioms being, by nature, axiomatic, it HAS to be true. We'll
have to take the consequences (just like with Heston...)
JPC
10761
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 2:58pm
Subject: Katharine Hepburn Goes on the Block
This catalogue must be seen to be believed:
http://search.sothebys.com/search/collArea/BrowseCat.jsp?source_indicator=E&event_id=26731&sale_number=N08004&event_name=The+Estate+of+Katharine+Hepburn
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10762
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:36pm
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- Robert Keser wrote:
> > I couldn't agree more: the wildly uncritical
> > reporting has been
> > unbelievably offensive, a dramatic taste of what we
> > can expect now
> > that the mass media are in the grip of three or four
> > monopolies.
>
> You'll find my two cents on the matter here:
>
> http://fablog.ehrensteinland.com/
Lead me add one more cent. Anyone who grew up in California during
the '60s will remenber that RR's depredations started when he was
governor (we're still living with the consequences of his bad
decisions, e.g., booting the mentally ill out of hospitals.) I
remember most vividly his decision to to send in the National Guard
to put down People's Park in Berkeley. He was warned that it could
cause a bloodbath and his reply: "If there's gonna be a bloodbath,
let's get it over with." There was no bloodbath, but James Rector,
the projectionist at the Telegraph Repretory Cinema, was shot and
killed by a guardsman while standing on the roof of the theatre.
Michael McClure wrote a good poem about it.
Richard
10763
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:40pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
> I couldn't agree more: the wildly uncritical reporting has been
> unbelievably offensive, a dramatic taste of what we can expect now
> that the mass media are in the grip of three or four monopolies.
Monopolized or not, the mainstream American press generally hasn't used
the death of a statesman as the occasion for hard-hitting investigative
journalism. I don't remember anything but elegy and uncritical
retrospection at the death of any president. Even the openly disgraced
Nixon was handled with kid gloves. Do you see a change in an existing
journalistic practice? - Dan
10764
From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 4:16pm
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
Well, we don't *need* any more hardhitting investigative journalism
regarding RR: all that work was done at the time. What I find
appalling is how the Iran-Contra affair and his championing of
Saddam Hussein and the Nicaragua and Grenada affairs (which pale
next to Iraq, of course) are being totally swept under the rug.
Nixon's demise, on the other hand, was treated from a relatively
balanced perspective (probably because his behavior had resulted in
unignorable investigations of crimes at the highest level). That's
how I remember it, anyway.
--Robert Keser
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> Monopolized or not, the mainstream American press generally hasn't
used
> the death of a statesman as the occasion for hard-hitting
investigative
> journalism. I don't remember anything but elegy and uncritical
> retrospection at the death of any president. Even the openly
disgraced
> Nixon was handled with kid gloves. Do you see a change in an
existing
> journalistic practice? - Dan
10765
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 5:27pm
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser"
wrote:
> Well, we don't *need* any more hardhitting investigative
journalism
> regarding RR: all that work was done at the time. What I find
> appalling is how the Iran-Contra affair and his championing of
> Saddam Hussein and the Nicaragua and Grenada affairs
(which pale
> next to Iraq, of course) are being totally swept under the rug.
> Nixon's demise, on the other hand, was treated from a
relatively
> balanced perspective (probably because his behavior had
resulted in
> unignorable investigations of crimes at the highest level).
That's
> how I remember it, anyway.
>
> --Robert Keser
You forgot the creation of Osama bin Ladin - part of The
Goober's master plan for bringing down the Evil Empire. He was
called the Teflon Kid, but time has revealed that he was the
Blowback Kid. (And probably the patron saint of "blow.") David,
what were those whores doing around the Fox Plaza? Pardon
my naivete...
Re: the press, I do think they were forced to say more about
Nixon's "errors" - and even LBJ's - when they died. And there
HAVE been changes in press coverage of everything during our
lifetime.
Certainly anyone who has spent some time in newspaper
archives knows that the press was more supine in the fifties
than it is now, but anyone who lived through the sixties and
seventies knows that the press developed a little bit of a spine
for a while. Then the mush-mouthed brainlessness we grew up
with came back, with a vengeance. So I'd much rather read
today's LA Times than that of 1953; but I'd also rather read the LA
Times I was thrilled by every morning over breakfast when I
made my first exploratory visit here in 1974. I remember thinking:
"Now THAT's a newspaper!"
I also think that the still-timid Get Bush campaign which we have
been seeing in the press these last two months is being
engineered via leaks and use of on-the-ground journalistic
"assets." As a Washington lawyer friend of mine commented a
few months ago: "When you fuck with the CIA, you're fucking with
the media!"
Regrettably, I can simply no longer accept the national narrative I
see reflected in e-mails from friends who still read the
mainstream press and watch tv news. My beady eye is firmly
fixed on the little man behind the curtain, and I get all my
information from the Net and a couple of radio stations. To do
otherwise would be a waste of time.
10766
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 5:54pm
Subject: Re: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
--- hotlove666 wrote:
David,
> what were those whores doing around the Fox Plaza?
> Pardon
> my naivete...
>
They were waiting to be called upstairs to fuck a
Republican.
>
> Regrettably, I can simply no longer accept the
> national narrative I
> see reflected in e-mails from friends who still read
> the
> mainstream press and watch tv news. My beady eye is
> firmly
> fixed on the little man behind the curtain, and I
> get all my
> information from the Net and a couple of radio
> stations. To do
> otherwise would be a waste of time.
>
>
Like countless others.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10767
From:
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 3:53pm
Subject: Cleopatra's Second Husband
Bill -
I saw Cleopatra's Second Husband on your recommendation but was really
disappointed. I can certainly see how it got you thinking about the fetishization of
the male body. But as with The Vanishing (the original - never saw the remake
with Jeff Bridges, never plan to) but thankfully less so, I was wondering
what the payoff was.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10768
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 8:45pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra's Second Husband
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> Bill -
>
> I saw Cleopatra's Second Husband on your recommendation
but was really
> disappointed. I can certainly see how it got you thinking about
the fetishization of
> the male body. But as with The Vanishing (the original - never
saw the remake
> with Jeff Bridges, never plan to) but thankfully less so, I was
wondering
> what the payoff was.
>
> Kevin John
Thanks for asking.
It's not about fetishization - it's about subjugation (of the woman)
and murder (of the man). The protagonist's marriage is going
badly. A seductive stranger moves in with his girlfriend, and by
the now-familiar method of shared-sex-partnering, seduces the
master of the house, driving off the wife (as I recall) and the
girlfriend both. The protagonist then fights back by producing
internal hemmoraghing (thru the anus) in his seducer, and while
he's knocked out imprisons him in a coffin-like box where he can
watch him die of hunger with a video camera.
The director-actor metaphor is suggested a) by the very actor-y
look and manner of the murdered guest and b) the video set-up,
but I wouldn't call what goes on after the wife leaves fetishization.
It's also interesting that by making his film, the protagonist
reduces his wife to the role of barefoot and pregnant hausfaru.
(Again I'm remembering a few years back, but I believe that's
what happens.) I have funny taste in indy film. Quite apart from
questions of budget and style (the director also made Better
Living Through Circuitry, not awful), I like films with radical
content, and I think this one has it. The payoff is the wife's
subjugation; the means is the "film" the husband makes --
perhaps even the one we're watching. And what the film reveals
about cinema is the murderous impulses which (some) male
directors (may) harbor toward their eroticized male stars.
Again, I would reference The Other Side of the Wind, and more
mainstream films like The Stunt Man, which bring up some of
the unconscious content put right on screen in Cleopatra's
Second Husband. (Another obvious refrence, made even more
perverse here: The Servant.)
10769
From: George Robinson
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 10:22pm
Subject: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
The entire schedule for TCM for September is here:
http://www.tcm.turner.com/Schedule/Print/0,,09-2004|0|,00.html
and it's mighty impressive.
g
Our talk of justice is empty until the
largest battleship has foundered on the
forehead of a drowned man.
--Paul Celan
10770
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 10:38pm
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
Slightly OT.
Lying beside Stanwyck along a dead tree, at dawn, Indians around; he
smells the blissful serenity of her sleeping beauty.
Moving away from the camera, arm in arm with his friends, in the
peaceful final shot.
He had his moments.
10771
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 10:42pm
Subject: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
Lots of great obscure Ulmer on the 17th.
The description of "Gertrud" is hilarious!
--- George Robinson wrote:
> The entire schedule for TCM for September is here:
>
http://www.tcm.turner.com/Schedule/Print/0,,09-2004|0|,00.html
>
> and it's mighty impressive.
>
> g
>
> Our talk of justice is empty until the
> largest battleship has foundered on the
> forehead of a drowned man.
> --Paul Celan
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10772
From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 11:04pm
Subject: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
Can't wait to look at "The Parson's Window"! (But no Lubitsch, not
even "The Merry Window").
--Robert Keser
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Lots of great obscure Ulmer on the 17th.
>
> The description of "Gertrud" is hilarious!
>
> --- George Robinson wrote:
> > The entire schedule for TCM for September is here:
> >
> http://www.tcm.turner.com/Schedule/Print/0,,09-2004|0|,00.html
> >
> > and it's mighty impressive.
10773
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 11:23pm
Subject: Re: Actressess
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
"Ford's relationship to Wayne is quite like Haynes and Moore --
symbiotic but not sexual in the fully erotic sense."
Very likely true of Haynes and Moore, Ford and Wayne, etc. But some
feminists have argued that pop goddess worship is nothing more
than "pedestalitis." Actress worship never translated to a higher
status for women in social reality because (so the argument goes) the
male viewer disempowers actual women while empowering imaginary
women. In effect, female imagery is used to conquer a fear of female
power. Male film makers and viewers both co-opt women's subjectivity
for themselves and deny the subjectivity of real women. This point
has been argued very eloquently by Luce Irigaray in her discussion of
male co-optation of women's speech and subjectivity in "The Three
Genres" in THE IRIGARAY READER.
Any admirer of film makers like Mizoguchi (for me the greatest of all
film makers) or Sternberg (he's one of my favorites) should take
these issues into consideration when contemplating thier works.
Richard
10774
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 11:43pm
Subject: Re: Re: Actressess
--- Richard Modiano wrote:
In effect, female imagery is used to conquer
> a fear of female
> power. Male film makers and viewers both co-opt
> women's subjectivity
> for themselves and deny the subjectivity of real
> women. This point
> has been argued very eloquently by Luce Irigaray in
> her discussion of
> male co-optation of women's speech and subjectivity
> in "The Three
> Genres" in THE IRIGARAY READER.
>
Does she mention Margaret Thatcher, Jeanne
Kirkpatrick, Midge Decter or Ann Coulter?
They're "real women" too, you know -- despite rumos to
the contrary in Coulter's case.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10775
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 0:23am
Subject: Re: Actressess
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Does she mention Margaret Thatcher, Jeanne
> Kirkpatrick, Midge Decter or Ann Coulter?
>
> They're "real women" too, you know -- despite rumos to
> the contrary in Coulter's case.
__________________________________
Oh but all women are real women, David, with or without the " ".
I have never met a woman who wasn't a real woman. (it's another way
of saying that women are magic, Truffaut style). And I'm sure that
lots of men dream of being spanked and whipped into submission by
Coulter (who looks like but is not a she-male.)
JPC
10776
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 1:53am
Subject: Welles and Conrad (Peter)
I have just read in The London Review of Books a long review (by
David Bromwich) of Peter Conrad's "Orson Welles: The Stories of his
Life" published last September by Faber, and was wondering who among
our Welles specialists has read it and what they think of it. I
haven't not.
JPC
10777
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 1:58am
Subject: Re: Actressess
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
"Does she mention Margaret Thatcher, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Midge Decter
or Ann Coulter?
They're "real women" too, you know -- despite rumos to the contrary
in Coulter's case."
She dosen't mention them. However, I've heard frminists say that
women like Thatcher, Dector and Kirkpatrick (and no doubt Coulter
too) have internalized patriarchal values and so offered thier
services to power and domination for which they were rewarded; the
kapo phenomenon you could say.
Anyway, Irigaray seemed convincing while I was reading her book, and
though I can't make the case for her thesis with great conviction I
think it's worth considering when we talk about actresses as
goddesses.
Richard
10778
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 2:11am
Subject: Re: Re: Actressess
--- Richard Modiano wrote:
>
> Anyway, Irigaray seemed convincing while I was
> reading her book, and
> though I can't make the case for her thesis with
> great conviction I
> think it's worth considering when we talk about
> actresses as
> goddesses.
>
It's worth considering up to a point.
Feminists TALK a good game. . .
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10779
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 2:30am
Subject: Re: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
> Lying beside Stanwyck along a dead tree, at dawn, Indians around; he
> smells the blissful serenity of her sleeping beauty.
>
> Moving away from the camera, arm in arm with his friends, in the
> peaceful final shot.
>
> He had his moments.
Not a lot of good films in his filmography, but there are the Dwans (I
prefer TENNESSEE'S PARTNER to CATTLE QUEEN - TENNESSEE is the only film
that ever made me think that Reagan had that movie-star
je-ne-sais-quoi), and of course Siegel's THE KILLERS.
One memory of TENNESSEE is that the punch he throws at John Payne near
the end looks a lot more convincing than most movie tough-guys could
manage. - Dan
10780
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 3:17am
Subject: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Lots of great obscure Ulmer on the 17th.
What "obscure" Ulmers might those be? The Border Sheriff? Natalka
Poltyavka? The Coke commercials? Dr. Broadway? Hmmmm?
10781
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 3:22am
Subject: Re: Welles and Conrad (Peter)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> I have just read in The London Review of Books a long review (by
> David Bromwich) of Peter Conrad's "Orson Welles: The Stories of his
> Life" published last September by Faber, and was wondering who
among
> our Welles specialists has read it and what they think of it. I
> haven't not.
>
> JPC
I haven't - just the index, as usual. He says nice things about me,
that's all I care about. I'm still working up to The Hitchcock
Murders, when I can read again.
Actually, I would take exception of his description of the raisin
pumpernickle incident. He reads it as deferential behavior, whereas I
clearly explain that it was a potlach, which is the opposite.
10782
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 3:24am
Subject: Re: The Star of Allan Dwan's Cattle Queen Of Montana
> Not a lot of good films in his filmography, but there are the Dwans
(I
> prefer TENNESSEE'S PARTNER to CATTLE QUEEN - TENNESSEE is the only
film
> that ever made me think that Reagan had that movie-star
> je-ne-sais-quoi), and of course Siegel's THE KILLERS.
I much prefer Cattle Queen.
10783
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 3:50am
Subject: Re: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
Well all Ulmer, save for "Detour," is by definition
obscure.
--- hotlove666 wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
>
> wrote:
> > Lots of great obscure Ulmer on the 17th.
>
> What "obscure" Ulmers might those be? The Border
> Sheriff? Natalka
> Poltyavka? The Coke commercials? Dr. Broadway?
> Hmmmm?
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10784
From:
Date: Tue Jun 8, 2004 11:58pm
Subject: Re: Re: Cleopatra's Second Husband
In a message dated 6/8/04 3:48:08 PM, hotlove666@y... writes:
> The protagonist then fights back by producing internal hemmoraghing (thru
> the anus) in his seducer
>
But let's not forget that the seducer has already raped the anus of the
protagonist by this point. And while that may fit into the theme of "murderous
impulses which (some) male directors (may) harbor toward their eroticized male
stars," I'm not sure the film is illuminating this problem or a repulsive example
of it. I lean towards the latter because, as you say "the payoff is the
wife's subjugation." That's a horrible payoff, one we find at the end of far too
many films as it is. It plays into the idea of male anal penetration as a
feminization that needs to be eradicated. And the best way to do that, after you've
tortured your torturer/male object of desire to death, is to reaffirm your
patriarchal dominance over woman. How is that different from the themes of c
ountless slimy Hollywood pieces of product? How is that edifying?
This brings up two points:
1. Often, I have trouble determining when a film illuminates a social ill or
is a narsty example thereof. Take, for instance, Crazy in Alabama. I find it a
vicious critique of white privilege but sometimes wonder if that's my reading
imposed on the film or if I could actually glean that from the mechanisms of
the film. (And even if it is the former, does that automatically delegitimize
my reading?) Briefly, I detected a cognitive clash at heart of the film which
lead me to my reading. So the over-the-top melodrama of Lucille's story
clashed with the earnest reflection back on the civil rights movement to bring out
Lucille's story as one of white privilege (a beautiful white woman's privilege,
to be exact). (Implicit in all this is a formalist bias which I don't often
buy into since it upholds the self-conscious choices of the director as an
ultimate standard. Still, I think one of the problems people had with Crazy in
Alabama is that they were unwilling to confer such self-consciousness on Antonio
Banderas as a director.) By contrast, nothing in Cleopatra's Second Husband is
trying to tell me "Hey, look at how the male anus has so much horrifying
anxiety surrounding it." Instead, it seems to take that as a given and doesn't
suggest any alternatives to such a formulation.
2. Maybe one of the problems I have with movies like Cleopatra's Second
Husband and The Vanishing is an expectation of enlightenment and edification.
Rosenbaum used the word "unenlightening" in his capsule review of The Vanishing and
I agree. He also had this to say about The Grey Zone: "This is grueling to
watch and to think about, which doesn't necessarily make it edifying." I agree
with this assessment as well. But should we expect enlightenment from a film
about the Holocaust? Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the first place?
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10785
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:03am
Subject: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Well all Ulmer, save for "Detour," is by definition
> obscure.
>
> --- hotlove666 wrote:
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Lots of great obscure Ulmer on the 17th.
> >
> > What "obscure" Ulmers might those be? The Border
> > Sheriff? Natalka
> > Poltyavka? The Coke commercials? Dr. Broadway?
> > Hmmmm?
> >
> >
> But, David, "obscure" is a relative concept. For true
auteurists (like Bill K.) very very few Ulmer films are obscure.
They've seen them all. (even I have seen lots of them). This forum is
not concerned with the rest of the world, which of course has never
heard of Ulmer.
JPC
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10786
From:
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 0:06am
Subject: Re: Welles and Conrad (Peter)
It's an interesting book, although Conrad's quasi-poetic style (his book is
in no way a straight-ahead biography) can be a little frustrating. It's a
style which also lends itself, I suspect, to factual errors and
misrepresentations. I know from Bill that Conrad's description of the events leading up to
Bill's interview with Welles for the Cahiers is not precisely accurate.
Nevertheless, I think his analysis of some of the films can be rather good
and every so often you will come across a new (to me, anyway) piece of
information. For instance, in the chapter where Conrad delves into Welles' fascination
with Robert Graves' work, he also reveals Welles to be a great admirer of the
author T.H. White. That, however, leads me to my biggest gripe with the
book: there is no bibliography or list of sources. So I have no clue how he came
up with this information about Welles being an admirer of White.
Peter
10787
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:12am
Subject: Re: Welles and Conrad (Peter)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> It's an interesting book, although Conrad's quasi-poetic style (his
book is
> in no way a straight-ahead biography) can be a little frustrating.
It's a
> style which also lends itself, I suspect, to factual errors and
> misrepresentations. I know from Bill that Conrad's description of
the events leading up to
> Bill's interview with Welles for the Cahiers is not precisely
accurate.
>
> Nevertheless, I think his analysis of some of the films can be
rather good
> and every so often you will come across a new (to me, anyway) piece
of
> information. For instance, in the chapter where Conrad delves into
Welles' fascination
> with Robert Graves' work, he also reveals Welles to be a great
admirer of the
> author T.H. White. That, however, leads me to my biggest gripe
with the
> book: there is no bibliography or list of sources. So I have no
clue how he came
> up with this information about Welles being an admirer of White.
>
> Peter
Ah, that's poetry for you...
10788
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:16am
Subject: Re: Re: Dreyer and Ulmer on TCM in September
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > But, David, "obscure" is a relative concept.
> For true
> auteurists (like Bill K.) very very few Ulmer films
> are obscure.
> They've seen them all. (even I have seen lots of
> them). This forum is
> not concerned with the rest of the world, which of
> course has never
> heard of Ulmer.
>
Well let's just say I like seeing the word "obscure."
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
10789
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 5:53am
Subject: Re: Welles and Conrad (Peter)...+ Dreyer and Drums
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> I have just read in The London Review of Books a long review (by
> David Bromwich) of Peter Conrad's "Orson Welles: The Stories of
his
> Life" published last September by Faber, and was wondering who
among
> our Welles specialists has read it and what they think of it. I
> haven't not.
>
> JPC
I enjoyed the way he grouped his chapters around motifs in Welles'
work like Quixote--a good idea that no one else to my knowledge has
explored. But I was irritated by the lack of references that Peter
mentions, because it often implies that he isn't playing with a full
deck. (Jim Naremore, who reviewed the book--I believe for Film
Quarterly--was even more irritated by this than me, although he did
his best not to gripe about it in his review.)
Since Dreyer has been on a lot of members' minds lately, I should
mention my recent discovery of a full-length Dreyer biography in
English, published by the Scarecrow Press in 2000, that to the best
of my knowledge has received no reviews whatsoever: MY ONLY GREAT
PASSION, by Jean Drum and Dale D. Drum. I learned about it from an
email sent to me by Jean Drum, now a widow in Long Beach, in
response to a remark of mine written somewhere that the only Dreyer
biography was Drouzy's in Danish and French. It turns out that the
Drums both went to Copenhagen while Dreyer was alive, taught
themselves Danish in order to read lots of clippings (though they
seem to know practically nothing about most Dreyer criticism in
other languages, apart from the Drouzy bio and, in English, Eileen
Bowser and Raymond Durnat's EROS IN THE CINEMA!), and apparently got
Dreyer's "full cooperation" in exchange for not delving too much
into personal matters. They're definitely square about some topics
(most noticeably GERTRUD, which they don't seem to get at all), but
I'm sure there's a fair amount of valuable material to be found here
and nowhere else. It's only available in hardcover and isn't cheap,
but I'd be curious to hear if any other members have encountered it--
or any other reports about it.
Jonathan
10790
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 7:33am
Subject: Re: Cleopatra's Second Husband
> >
> But let's not forget that the seducer has already raped the anus of
the
> protagonist by this point. And while that may fit into the theme
of "murderous
> impulses which (some) male directors (may) harbor toward their
eroticized male
> stars," I'm not sure the film is illuminating this problem or a
repulsive example
> of it. I lean towards the latter because, as you say "the payoff is
the
> wife's subjugation." That's a horrible payoff, one we find at the
end of far too
> many films as it is. It plays into the idea of male anal
penetration as a
> feminization that needs to be eradicated. And the best way to do
that, after you've
> tortured your torturer/male object of desire to death, is to
reaffirm your
> patriarchal dominance over woman. How is that different from the
themes of countless slimy Hollywood pieces of product? How is that
edifying?
Well, it's at least different, I think.
Not to beat a dead horse - actually, the corpse still seems pretty
fresh - I am still amazed at the single-minded devotion of film
theory to actresses, when half of almost any film is actors. The
numbing power of the theoretical and ideological commonplaces that
have been being pounded into us for 30 years on this subject is so
great that when it comes up, our automatic response is to assume that
actors' symbolic role is the same as that of actresses: directors
lusting after actors, actors being fetishized. It's a completely
unexplored topic - I would even go so far as to say a repressed one -
and Cleopatra's Second Husband, however unpleasant, at least has the
virtue of portraying on screen, if only metaphorically, the
relationship between a director and an actor.
That's rarer than hen's teeth, in film as well as in writing on film,
unless anecdotes about John Ford's systematic abuse of his male
collaborators count. Budd Boetticher said something I found
fascinating about Ford's last days, when he and Mary regularly drove
up from Ramona to visit his sick room and slip him cigars and booze
when no one was looking: "Maureen and all the other actresses would
occasionally pay their respects, but none of the actors ever went -
none of the guys."
I do assume, for reasons extraneous to this discussion, that the
exposure of the question was at least partly unconscious on the part
of the director of Cleopatra's Second Husband, but I've never taken
consciousness as the measure of a film. (Or of anything: Given that
we're all unconscious all the time, making consciousness a touchstone
of value would entail a blanket condemnation of all human
activities.) And I don't see edification as the aim of a film -
anyway, of a good one. You're right, I think, when you say: "But
should we expect enlightenment from a film about the Holocaust?
Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the first place?" Right and
very astute.
By the way, The Vanishing is a nasty piece of work, but as a horror
movie fan, I just take it as a genre piece that recalls Poe and
evokes a universal terror which I happen to have had as a child. (The
American version has a happy ending, by the way.) My nerves are
dulled by years of this, so I wouldn't ask anyone to share the very
minor experience of The Vanishing, and I wouldn't suggest that anyone
watch Cleopatra's Second Husband without fair warning: it is also a
nasty piece of work, akin to Poe, but it can't be reduced to the
formulas of the horror genre or justified by them. At a minimum I
would say that the director is working something out on screen -
undoubtedly something very personal - that raises interesting
questions without giving answers, to be platitudinous about it. If
you want edification along with your nasties from the unconscious,
I'd just remind you of the old saw about being careful what you pray
for. You might get The Passion of the Christ.
My question, setting this film aside, is: What about the workers?
Sorry, I mean, What about the actors?
10791
From: Noel Vera
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 8:01am
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Actressess
>Douglas produced "Spartacus." He fired Anthony
Mann and replaced him with Kubrick.
And when Douglas heard how lucky he had someone as
talented as Kubrick to work for him, he stopped
listening to Kubrick's suggestions about streamlining
the script, especially the latter part, if I remember
right.
Kubrick does have a fair share of bare male bodies in
his filmography. The bald man who provides a
distraction in The Killing; Douglas in his quarters in
Paths of Glory; Douglas through most of Spartacus
(Tony Curtis eyes I think were photographed to good
effect too); if I remember correctly there was
something in Barry Lyndon, Clockwork Orange, and Full
Metal Jacket as well.
I swear I heard this mentioned once about Kubrick, but
never again. I suppose the suggestion never stuck.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10792
From: Doug Cummings
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 10:51am
Subject: Re: Re: Dreyer and Drums
On Jun 8, 2004, at 10:53 PM, Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote:
> Since Dreyer has been on a lot of members' minds lately, I should
> mention my recent discovery of a full-length Dreyer biography in
> English, published by the Scarecrow Press in 2000, that to the best
> of my knowledge has received no reviews whatsoever: MY ONLY GREAT
> PASSION, by Jean Drum and Dale D. Drum...It's only available in
> hardcover and isn't cheap, but I'd be curious to hear if any other
> members have encountered it--or any other reports about it.
Jonathan, knowing how literate and fond of Dreyer's work you are, I'm
really surprised you didn't know about this! Yes, I bought the book
and read it a couple years ago and have referred to it a number of
times in conversations with others. There is a lot of wonderful
historical detail--I love all the production details about "Vampyr,"
for instance, and knowing that the book was an ongoing project for the
Drums for so long (they actually learned Danish specifically to write
it) makes it especially valuable. I'll definitely toss in my own
strong endorsement as well, although yes, it's a bit pricey. It would
make a great library rental.
Doug
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10793
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 0:32pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra's Second Husband
Kevin John:
> But should we expect enlightenment from a film
> about the Holocaust? Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the
> first place?
Could you elaborate on this?
--Zach
10794
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 1:59pm
Subject: Enlightenment
> You're right, I think, when you say: "But
> should we expect enlightenment from a film about the Holocaust?
> Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the first place?" Right and
> very astute.
I had been letting this pass, but: How so? Genocide is an old pastime
of humanity's, no? - Dan
10795
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 2:39pm
Subject: Re: Enlightenment
Actually, one can also say that the holocaust was a very strange culmination
of german idealism, and that german idealism was a movement against
enlightenment, french or kantian (the querelle of concrete vs. abstract
universals).
ruy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Sallitt"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 10:59 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Enlightenment
> > You're right, I think, when you say: "But
> > should we expect enlightenment from a film about the Holocaust?
> > Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the first place?" Right and
> > very astute.
>
> I had been letting this pass, but: How so? Genocide is an old pastime
> of humanity's, no? - Dan
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
10796
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 3:55pm
Subject: Re: Enlightenment
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > You're right, I think, when you say: "But
> > should we expect enlightenment from a film about the Holocaust?
> > Wasn't enlightenment what got us there in the first place?" Right
and
> > very astute.
>
> I had been letting this pass, but: How so? Genocide is an old
pastime
> of humanity's, no? - Dan
Not genocide organized and operated like a factory and based on
scientific theories (however specious).
10797
From: rpporton55
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:02pm
Subject: Re: Enlightenment
> Not genocide organized and operated like a factory and based on
> scientific theories (however specious).
The sociologist Zygmunt Bauman's book "Modernity and the Holocaust" offers an
interesting perspective on this subject.
RP
10798
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:31pm
Subject: Re: Enlightenment (or Actresses and Actors)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Actually, one can also say that the holocaust was a very strange
culmination
> of german idealism, and that german idealism was a movement against
> enlightenment, french or kantian (the querelle of concrete vs.
abstract
> universals).
> ruy
All intellectual movements are against whatever came last, but German
idealism and German Romanticism, like their English counterparts, are
better described as "post-Enlightenment," the continuation of a
process that began with the Enlightenment. In a sense, we're still in
that process, according to my resented mentor Harold Bloom.
Does anyone want to address my claim that film theory - poor, bare,
forked thing that it is - by overlooking actors is like a geographer
who thinks his work is finished when he has described the northern
hemisphere of the globe? And that the same concepts that have been
drilled into us by 30 years of pseudo-Lacanian feminism don't
automatically apply to actors, so that speculating about Ford having
the hots for Harry Carey won't fill the gap?
I'm not even sure those generalizations cover the terrain they set
out to map, although Robert's post about "pedestalization" was very
interesting. And for what it's worth, now that I'm venting, the
generalizations about Hitchcock's "frigid blonds" are definitely
gimpy: I don't consider Bergman a blond, and she and Kelly and Leigh
and Hedren all played sexually very active women for Hitchcock as
often as they played ice queens - more often, actually, in the case
of Kelly. The only outright case of "frigidity" in those films, as
far as I can can recall, is Marnie. If we are too understand "frigid"
as meaning "chilly in demeanor," that covers some of Hedren's scenes
and some of Kelly's and some of Bergman's (in Spellbound), but is
totally inappropriate for most of Hitchcock-Bergman, even in
Spellbound (one of the warmest actresses who ever lived -- and brown-
haired to boot), and ignores the vast differences between Joan
Fontaine, Grace Kelly, Janet Leigh (who starts off Psycho post-
coitus) and even 'Tippi,' as actresses and as people.
And yet these phrases just get repeated.
A year ago, just after Biette's death, I reproduced here my last long
conversation with him, concerning which directors treated which
actors erotically. He laid out a fairly nuanced brief overview for
me - Hawks: secondary actors only; DeMille, everything is eroticized,
even a scarab; French cinema, no actor before Delon, who had
first "passed through the hands" of Visconti - which can be accessed
by going back to late June of last year, if anyone's interested. But
the how and the wherefore haven't been studied at all, because of a
dug-in contingent in academia who have focused all their intermittent
efforts on the question of Woman, and the habit the rest of us have
fallen into of repeating their findings and not looking at what's on
the screen. Me too! I long considered Oudart's theories of "the
obsessional director and the hysterical actress" as definitive re:
cinematic modernism, but Cleopatra's Second Husband, love it or hate
it, made me wonder if something else hadn't also been going on since
the beginning.
10799
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 4:55pm
Subject: Re: Re: Enlightenment (or Actresses and Actors)
--- hotlove666 wrote:
> Does anyone want to address my claim that film
> theory - poor, bare,
> forked thing that it is - by overlooking actors is
> like a geographer
> who thinks his work is finished when he has
> described the northern
> hemisphere of the globe?
I'll second that. But Raymond Durgnat has already.
Recall his note that "It's through Marlene that we
feel," plus he paens to Bardot and others. He never
neglected actors. And neiother did Parker Tyler -- or
Gore Vidal, either as himself or Myra.
And that the same concepts
> that have been
> drilled into us by 30 years of pseudo-Lacanian
> feminism don't
> automatically apply to actors, so that speculating
> about Ford having
> the hots for Harry Carey won't fill the gap?
>
It certainly won't. On the whole I'm beginning to find
feminist criticism as limited as Heath & Metz.
And related to that, what's going on between Ford and
Harry Carey isn't at all comparableto what's going on
between Rene Clement and Alain Delon.
And for what it's worth, now that I'm
> venting, the
> generalizations about Hitchcock's "frigid blonds"
> are definitely
> gimpy: I don't consider Bergman a blond, and she and
> Kelly and Leigh
> and Hedren all played sexually very active women for
> Hitchcock as
> often as they played ice queens - more often,
> actually, in the case
> of Kelly. >
Well a lot of this is just laziness. People are
content to knee-jerk out a "frigid blondes" rather
than do the real work of examining the many different
ways Hitchcock treated women.
BTW, Janet Leigh in "Psycho" is a blonde and not in
the least frigid.
French cinema, no actor before Delon,
> who had
> first "passed through the hands" of Visconti - which
> can be accessed
> by going back to late June of last year, if anyone's
> interested.
I'm just going to stop for a few minutes, have another
cup of coffe and think about Delon passing through
Visconti's hands. WOOF!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
10800
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Wed Jun 9, 2004 5:18pm
Subject: Re: Re: Enlightenment
> All intellectual movements are against whatever came last, but German
> idealism and German Romanticism, like their English counterparts, are
> better described as "post-Enlightenment," the continuation of a
> process that began with the Enlightenment. In a sense, we're still in
> that process, according to my resented mentor Harold Bloom.
I agree with your mentor, but think we may be on the verge of something new
coming on. Don't really know. But German Idealism was strongly against the
universalism of french enlightenment philosophers (do we need to recall they
were uniting their country finally for the first time). Some good accounts
on german philosophy, the construction of the idea of the german country,
the greek myth and nazism can be found on Jacques Taminiaux' "Le Theatre des
Philosophes" and Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe's "La Fiction du Politique".
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact