Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 9:50am
Subject: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
Chauvin, who was always clueless about America, his subject of
expertise, is no longer with CdC. I'll comment on the mag's take when
I see F911 and when copy of the June issue finally drags its butt
into my West Coast mail box. As I told Joe McBride, even when I
finish my writing chores I'm afraid to see the film. I don't have tv,
I could have a heart attack seeing all that stuff at once.
11802
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 3:57pm
Subject: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
If there's any trait that can be said to be shared by New Yorker critics, from
past (Pauline Kael, Terrence Rafferty) to present (Anthony Lane, David
Denby), it is their ability to consistently and articulately give their bullsh*t
middlebrow insights the falsely knowing ring of truth, thanks to a half-dozen
urbanities that's the stock in trade of a metropolitan writer trying to live up to
his role as the designated film expert at the magazine equivalent of an
uptown cocktail party. Just as in party conversations, their job is to tell people
what they think they need to know about an artist, but not tell them too much
lest their attention start to drift or the breezy vibe get disrupted by anything
serious. Just wrap it up in easily ingestible phrasings so people can nod in
complacent self-assurance and go on to the next topic.
I've admired some of Rafferty's writing in the past, but his New York Times
assessment of Robert Bresson is one of the worst examples of cocktail party
film criticism I've ever laid eyes on (next to Denby, Lane and Kael).
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/movies/04RAFF.html
There's no unbridled earnestness or enthusiasm on display, just a lot of smug
pedantic posturing, the kind that ingratiates lay readers because its
authoritative tone assures them that there's little more to think about beyond
the words in front of them. A tepid kind of even-handedness that praises
Bresson's early films while denouncing the latter half, thus achieving a falsely
seductive impression of fair-and-balanced. Sounds like he borrowed half his
"insights" from the similarly self-gratifying observations found in Paul
Schrader's superficial study of Bresson. Why the f- did the Times not ask their
in-house writer Dave Kehr to do a piece -- he would have had sparked three
times as much insight in half the page space (proof of this can be found by
referencing his capsules of LANCELOT DU LAC, THE DEVIL PROBABLY and
L'ARGENT in the Chicago Reader brief reviews database, which combined
say more about Bresson's late period than Rafferty's probably even interested
in considering) and thus opened all the doors for exploration and discovery
that Rafferty insists on slamming shut.
Gabe Klinger has another phrase to describe this kind of false authoritative
tone in film writing: "poker player criticism". Terrence Rafferty, I call your bluff.
11803
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:21pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
--- Kevin Lee
>
> I've admired some of Rafferty's writing in the past,
> but his New York Times
> assessment of Robert Bresson is one of the worst
> examples of cocktail party
> film criticism I've ever laid eyes on (next to
> Denby, Lane and Kael).
>
I can think of a lot worse --especially David Thomson.
Rafferty, like most lazy scribes, is looking for a
simple forula to "nail" Bresson. The notion that he
"lost his faith" and therefore the late films aren't
any good, is pretty neat.
Except fo the fact that "Le Diable Probablement" is a
masterpiece and arguably the most influential film of
his entire career.
See also critics who knee-jerk over Welles making "the
greatest American film" (no fair guessing the title)
and then "going into decline."
Welles' greatest film is, of course, "F For Fake."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11804
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:21pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
>
> I've admired some of Rafferty's writing in the past, but his New York
> Times
> assessment of Robert Bresson is one of the worst examples of cocktail
> party
> film criticism I've ever laid eyes on (next to Denby, Lane and Kael).
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/movies/04RAFF.html
I read that article this morning as well. Garbage. How can these
editors possibly think a story that runs against the
status-quo-assessment would risk subscription cancellations? Actually,
I just think they don't give such matters much thought at all, and are
too passionless about even their own interests, pastimes, and lives to
re-examine, re-situate their editorial lines. In other words, cocktail
party criticism, as you put it, born out of interior monologues of
banter. Or is it dangerous for someone reading about Bresson for the
first time to be given anything but the truism?
Rick Lyman's obituary of Brando trotted out the stock "such wasted
potential, like Orson Welles" paragraph, too -- for the
hundred-thousandth time.
craig.
11805
From: Nick
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:29pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
>> I've admired some of Rafferty's writing in the past, but his New
>> York Times
>> assessment of Robert Bresson is one of the worst examples of
>> cocktail party
>> film criticism I've ever laid eyes on (next to Denby, Lane and Kael).
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/movies/04RAFF.html
>
>
> Rafferty, like most lazy scribes, is looking for a
> simple forula to "nail" Bresson. The notion that he
> "lost his faith" and therefore the late films aren't
> any good, is pretty neat.
>
> Except fo the fact that "Le Diable Probablement" is a
> masterpiece and arguably the most influential film of
> his entire career.
Bresson didn't lose his faith at all - he just, in his own words,
"became even more lucid".
I agree about THE DEVIL, PROBABLY. I'd argue that Bresson got stronger
towards the end. His last two films are extraordinary.
(I've read a lot worse than Rafferty's piece too...)
Rafferty:
> they're the only films of his that could, even at a stretch, be
> considered examples of recognizable commercial genres — the
> prison-break movie and the Arthurian romance, respectively.
Ah! Now I understand! :)
What about comparing LES ANGES DU PECHE to SISTER ACT? That'd put bums
on seats.
---
Bill: I was joking about Vern=Ebert. I don't know who the hell Vern is
and don't really care.
-Nick Wrigley>-
11806
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:37pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
> Rafferty, like most lazy scribes, is looking for a
> simple forula to "nail" Bresson. The notion that he
> "lost his faith" and therefore the late films aren't
> any good, is pretty neat.
I smell a Fablog entry coming on.
> See also critics who knee-jerk over Welles making "the
> greatest American film" (no fair guessing the title)
> and then "going into decline."
>
> Welles' greatest film is, of course, "F For Fake."
I could agree with that. If we were to compile a list of some of the
most widely espoused cocktail-critical truisms, what might it contain?
Feel free to add, any and all --
-Welles's decline
-Bresson became less essential after 'Pickpocket' (though this one
isn't as common as the preceding one)
-Godard went mad after 1967 and only occasionally gives us glimpses of
lucidity, but the kind of a piece with museum work
-Tati topped out with the excesses of 'Playtime'
-the American 1970s was the last Golden Age of the movies
-Carl Dreyer is "austere" (see also "Robert Bresson is 'austere' ")
und so weiter
craig.
11807
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:45pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
> I could agree with that. If we were to compile a list of some of the
> most widely espoused cocktail-critical truisms, what might it contain?
> Feel free to add, any and all --
>
> -Welles's decline
> -Bresson became less essential after 'Pickpocket' (though this one
> isn't as common as the preceding one)
Seems to me that Bresson is usually either adored without reservation or
ignored. I haven't seen too many pieces like this in recent years that
take a middle ground.
I don't really care for the piece (too much is hung on a single concept
- loss of faith vitiates the films' value - that can't really bear the
weight), but I think it's a good thing that the unchallengable ones get
challenged once in a while. It keeps us on our toes. The most
dangerous aspect of auteurism is that our admiration can calcify into
uncritical hero-worship. - Dan
11808
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 4:57pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
> Why the f- did the Times not ask their
> in-house writer Dave Kehr to do a piece -- he would have had sparked three
> times as much insight in half the page space
Not to answer the question, but Dave Kehr has already, in his DVD column, reviewed the two releases that appear to be the occasion for Rafferty's piece; he described these evidently flawed transfers unfavorably. So my first thought when I saw this piece was that it was the paper's attempt to mend the damage, or whatever (that was before I read it, of course).
11809
From: Dave Kehr
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 6:14pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
I guess I shouldn't comment on Rafferty's piece, though I was as
surprised as anyone to discover that Bresson had lost his faith --
I'm sorry, but doesn't a title like "The Devil, Probably" tell you
something else all by itself? But I've been spending the weekend
doing my own cocktail party criticism, assigned by Entertainment
Weekly to write capsule reviews of all of Brando's films for their
memorial issue next week. It's sad to see, looking over his
filmography, how few really important films he appeared in; not
being a big fan of "Streetcar" or "On the Waterfront," I'd say his
most significant films were "One=Eyed Jacks," "The Chase," "Countess
from Hong Kong," "Burn" and "The Godfather," with "Last Tango"
fading fast. Still, there are theose moments of brilliant
eccentricity in garbage like "The Nightcomers" and "The Island of
Dr. Moreau." Does anyone have any favorite Brando "found moments"
they would like to share?
11810
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 6:56pm
Subject: Re: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
> It's sad to see, looking over his
> filmography, how few really important films he appeared in; not
> being a big fan of "Streetcar" or "On the Waterfront," I'd say his
> most significant films were "One=Eyed Jacks," "The Chase," "Countess
> from Hong Kong," "Burn" and "The Godfather," with "Last Tango"
> fading fast. Still, there are theose moments of brilliant
> eccentricity in garbage like "The Nightcomers" and "The Island of
> Dr. Moreau." Does anyone have any favorite Brando "found moments"
> they would like to share?
His career is much longer on great moments than on good films, isn't it.
THE CHASE really stands out for me in his filmography.
Here's something I posted elsewhere:
----
One of my favorite random Brando moments is in THE FORMULA, when he
finally turns up at the end as the oil villain, which he plays in a
goofy, diffident way. At one point he interrupts George C. Scott's
self-righteous posturing (not Scott's fault particularly - unlike
Brando, he was willing to subordinate himself to the awful Steve Shagan
script) to offer Scott a Milk Dud. When Scott declines, Brando
continues to push the Milk Duds: "Damn good."
Like other good Brando moments, it's completely destructive of the movie
around him.
----
Then there's his dramatic introduction in THE MISSOURI BREAKS: "under
severe attack by a tooth."
His Sky Masterson in GUYS AND DOLLS is really quite charming. On the
other hand, I've always felt that his overwhelming performance in
STREETCAR isn't quite right for the material: he makes Stanley so
threatening that his dependence on Stella becomes mysterious. Likewise,
Vivian Leigh seems to me too out-there and not pragmatic enough for
Blanche. I was surprised that Alec Baldwin and Jessica Lange's
performances in the early 90's Broadway revival seemed more in keeping
with the feelings of the play than Brando's and Leigh's. - Dan
11811
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 7:02pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> I can think of a lot worse --especially David Thomson.
Thank you! I can't pick up a paper or read a rep house program --few
that there are-- here in SF without some quote by Thomson followed by
that he will lead a discussion after the film. "David Thomson says:",
"David Thomson calls the film". He's got quite a receptive audience
here, or maybe he's not much in demand elsewhere. I am glad Kent Jones
chipped away at the "institution" in his article for Film Comment,
thought I could have done without the swipe at Mario Bava admirers at
the end.
I always had a bit of grudging respect for Rafferty becuase he wrote a
very good review of John Boorman's "Beyond Rangoon". He was one of the
few American critics in the press who seemed to understand it.
Alan Parker, who is to me one of the worst directors working today,
called Bresson's "L' Argent": "the work of a tired old man" at the
Cannes premiere. How I wish Parker would retire.
Michael Worrall
11812
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 7:10pm
Subject: Kehr on Brando (was Robert Bresson....)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Kehr"
It's sad to see, looking over his
> filmography, how few really important films he appeared in; not
> being a big fan of "Streetcar" or "On the Waterfront," I'd say his
> most significant films were "One=Eyed Jacks," "The
Chase," "Countess
> from Hong Kong," "Burn" and "The Godfather," with "Last Tango"
> fading fast. Still, there are theose moments of brilliant
> eccentricity in garbage like "The Nightcomers" and "The Island of
> Dr. Moreau." Does anyone have any favorite Brando "found moments"
> they would like to share?
Dave, if you reject the three films with Kazan (I assume you don't
care much for "Zapata" either) there is very little left indeed. I
have always had a weakness (if that's the word) for "The Wild One", a
film that most auteurists either despise or ignore these days, but
which I can always watch with pleasure and in which Brando was great
even though lots of people find his acting in it "dated". (this was
one of the few movies Tavernier and I seriously disagreed about when
we wrote "50 ans". He thinks Brando is ridiculous in it. I don't see
that at all. Also, I love the music). I agree that "One-Eyed Jacks"
is one of his most interesting films, flaws and all -- his seduction
scenes especially are extraordinary. I loved "Burn!" when I saw it 30
odd years ago and would love to see it again (is it available in
video?). "The Chase" is an awful mess but the scene of Brando being
beaten up is memorable. "Last Tango" to me is more than fading fast,
it has faded out completely (watched it again a few weeks ago). I'd
have to watch "Golden Eye" again. Can't think of any "found moments"
deserving to be retrieved from the Lost and Found Department. By and
large his was a fairly disastrous and immensely disappointing film
career.
JPC
11813
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 7:43pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando (was Robert Bresson....)
My favorite of the various Brando tributes I've read so far:
Published on Friday, July 2, 2004 by CommonDreams.org
A Eulogy For Our Marlon Brando
by Dave Zirin
<http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0702-14.htm>
Marlon Brando's death at the age of 80 will begin a
battle over how the "greatest actor of all time" will be
remembered. Some will focus on his latter day isolation,
his bizarre behavior, and the many personal tragedies
that befell his family.
Others will focus exclusively on his iconic status, and
when it comes to Brando performances, icons abound.
There was the 1950s motorcycle rebel from "The Wild One"
(1954), or the brutal Stanley Kowalski in "A Streetcar
Named Desire" (1951) or Terry "I Coulda Been a
Contender" Malloy in "On the Waterfront" (1954). or his
performance as Vito Corleone in "The Godfather."
Then there is Brando's influence on acting itself. In a
Hollywood built around "movie stars" Brando was at the
vanguard of a new generation of performers in the
aftermath of World War II schooled in Stanislavsky's
"Method" acting style. Taught by Stella Adler and Lee
Strasberg at the Actor's Studio in New York, The Method
was a rejection of the Spencer Tracy approach to drama
of "Just memorize your lines and don't bump into the
furniture." Emotional honesty and "becoming" your
character were the hallmarks of this style It was an
attempt to use art to break out of what was seen as a
stultifying and frustration gray haze of early 1950s
America. Robert DeNiro, Al Pacino, Laurence Fishburne,
Sean Penn, and countless others count Brando as their
primary influence.
But the Brando I want to remember, especially now, is
the actor who pulled back in the 1960s to focus on
supporting the Civil Rights Movement and the broader
struggles against war and oppression. In 1959, he was a
founding member of the Hollywood chapter of SANE, an
anti-nuclear arms group formed alongside African-
American performers Harry Belafonte and Ossie Davis.
In 1963, Brando marched arm in arm with James Baldwin at
the March on Washington. He, along with Paul Newman,
went down South with the freedom riders to desegregate
inter-State bus lines. In defiance of state law, Native
Americans protested the denial of treaty rights by
fishing the Puyallup River on March 2, 1964. Inspired by
the civil rights movement sit-ins, Brando, Episcopal
clergyman John Yaryan from San Francisco, and Puyallup
tribal leader Bob Satiacum caught salmon in the Puyallup
without state permits. The action was called a fish-in
and resulted in Brando's arrest. When Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. was assassinated in 1968, Brando announced
that he was bowing out of the lead role of a major film
and would now devote himself to the civil rights
movement. Brando said "If the vacuum formed by Dr.
King's death isn't filled with concern and understanding
and a measure of love, then I think we all are really
going to be lost.." He gave money and spoke out in
defense of the Black Panthers and counted Bobby Seale as
a close friend and attended the memorial for slain
prison leader George Jackson. Southern theater chains
boycotted his films, and Hollywood created what became
known as the 'Brando Black List' that shut him out of
many big time roles.
After making a comeback in Godfather, Brando won his
second Oscar. Instead of accepting what he called "a
door prize," he sent up Native American activist Sacheen
Littlefeather to refuse befuddled presenter Roger Moore
and issue a scathing speech about the Federal
Government's treatment of Native Americans.
Even in the past several years, he has lent his name and
bank account to those fighting the US war and occupation
in Iraq.
So how do we remember Brando? He was a celebrity, an
artist, an activist, and at the end an isolated and
destroyed old man.
It is tragic that we live in a world where most people's
talents never get to see the light of day. It is equally
tragic that those like Brando who actually get the
opportunity to spread their creative wings, can be
consumed and yanked apart in process. Yet whether Brando
was on the top of Hollywood or alone and embittered, he
never forgot what side he was on.
Dave Zirin is the Editor of the Prince George's Post in
Prince George's County Maryland. He can be reached at
editor@p.... His sports writing can be read at
http://www.edgeofsports.com.
11814
From: Nick
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 7:56pm
Subject: Re: Alan Parker - (was Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim)
> Alan Parker, who is to me one of the worst directors working today,
> called Bresson's "L' Argent": "the work of a tired old man" at the
> Cannes premiere. How I wish Parker would retire.
Indeed.
I would just like to add that Alan Parker runs the Film Council here in
the UK (a govt. appointed body set up four years ago to, among other
nebulous and misguided responsibilities, oversee all bfi funding,
including bfi production).
It is ultimately Parker's responsibility for the sacking of 25 staff
members from the National Film and Television Archive and the setting
up of a curatorial board to decide what gets archived in the new
archive (which they want to sell off at some point). Previously,
practically everything was archived.
Since 2000, Parker has embarked on a clubfooted attempt to rejuvenate
British cinema, pouring National Lottery money into dogshit celluloid
like SEX LIVES OF THE POTATO MEN, THERE'S ONLY ONE JIMMY GRIMBLE,
JANICE BEARD 45 WPM, 51st STATE, and a host of sub-Guy Ritchie London
gangster flix (and if you don't know "sub-Guy Ritchie" equals one giant
turd).
Alan Parker is perhaps the worst thing to happen to UK cinema since the
CONFESSIONS OF A WINDOW CLEANER series of faux-porn films became "the
British Film Industry" in the 1970s.
Parker's opinion of L'ARGENT just cements my dismay.
His Screenonline entry states that he "never takes refuge in whinging
from the sidelines". So I'll be putting my whinging into action.
-Nick Wrigley>-
11815
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 8:20pm
Subject: Alan Parker - (was Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick
Indeed.
>
> I would just like to add that Alan Parker runs the Film Council here in
> the UK (a govt. appointed body set up four years ago to, among other
> nebulous and misguided responsibilities, oversee all bfi funding,
> including bfi production).
Oh my higher power! I didn't know that.
> Alan Parker is perhaps the worst thing to happen to UK cinema since the
> CONFESSIONS OF A WINDOW CLEANER series of faux-porn films became "the
> British Film Industry" in the 1970s.
from the sidelines". So I'll be putting my whinging into action.
Nick, this comment above is one of the funniest insights made on this
board. I actually saw two of those films in my teens. I am very
interested and passionate about British cinema, though many Britains I
know look at me aghast when I talk about Ken Russell. I really feel
that there is a lot to be discussed or written about in British cinema
that gets ignored.
In Russell's book on British cinema: "Fire Over England", he writes
that while he likes Parker's "The Commitments", he finds Parker's
slicking up of the images, considering the setting of the film, to be
rather dishonest. On Parker's tendency to make everything look like a
slick tv ad, Russell writes; "he can make dog shit look like hot dogs."
John Boorman is one of the greatest filmmakers in contemporary cinema
to me, but I get annoyed when Boorman defends Parker.
On the lighter side, I have to admit I have two British directors that
are "quilty pleasures", J.Lee Thompson and Michael Winner. (Brando
said that Winner was his favorite director to work with!!) I enjoy
them because the bad choices they make in their films never cease to
amaze me.
Michael Worrall
11816
From:
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 5:54pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando (was Robert Bresson....)
"Julius Caesar" is one of the best Shakespeare adaptations - and Brando is
superb (so are James Mason, Gielgud and the others, of course).
"The Wild One" is one of the most iconic performances in film history.
"The Night of the Following Day" shows the underrated talents of Hubert
Cornfield.
Mike Grost
11817
From:
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 6:07pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando (was Robert Bresson....)
PS: "A Countess from Hong Kong" is a classic.
Just refound my treasured old vinyl LP of Chaplin's score for this film.
Mike Grost
11818
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 11:00pm
Subject: Re: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
I thought his subject of expertise to be reality shows. And "facingness",
those are the things he's writing majorly about in his weblog. And
photographing also. It was not a take on F9/11, but on "la Palme". Anyway,
it avances some points...
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 6:50 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No
Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
> Chauvin, who was always clueless about America, his subject of
> expertise, is no longer with CdC. I'll comment on the mag's take when
> I see F911 and when copy of the June issue finally drags its butt
> into my West Coast mail box. As I told Joe McBride, even when I
> finish my writing chores I'm afraid to see the film. I don't have tv,
> I could have a heart attack seeing all that stuff at once.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
11819
From:
Date: Sun Jul 4, 2004 9:04pm
Subject: Wilder's Buddy Buddy
The tone of Wilder's "Buddy Buddy" seems like the polar opposite of the rest
of his late films: while "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes," "Avanti!,"
"Fedora," and perhaps "The Front Page" (I'd have to re-see that last one) are
characterized by a decidedly melancholy streak, "Buddy Buddy" is as cynical as
anything Wilder has ever done. Richard Combs has suggested that Wilder was
"playing it safe this time around" in light of the fact that none of the
aforementioned mellow Wilder pictures were blockbusters. That's an interesting view
and it makes the very conception of the movie seem cynically calculated - in
addition to the cynicism intrinsic to the movie itself.
What's strange is that I liked "Buddy Buddy" on this most recent viewing,
whereas I normally have difficulties with the sneering side of Wilder. I've
thought about this and it could either be that I'm growing as a filmgoer, and am
thus having less trouble overall with the moviemaker's negative life view; or,
to expand on Combs' theory, that there's so total a lack of pretensions in
"Buddy Buddy," of trying to make the characters sympathetic or ingratiating, that
the film takes on a self-conscious tinge which is nothing short of
fascinating to watch. It's as though Wilder felt like he had to top himself at his own
game.
It's maybe one of the angriest films I've ever seen.
I disagree with Cameron Crowe's comment in "Conversations with Wilder" where
he says it's "not the most visual of Wilder's films." Well, fine, but Wilder
can do more with a single set (much of the action is confined to Matthau and
Lemmon's hotel rooms) than most filmmakers; in terms of the choreography and
visualizing of the comedy in a relatively confined physical space, I was
reminded me Lester's "The Ritz" and Bogdanovich's "Noises Off..." - both of which are
absolutely cinematic. The oft-decried (and rather obviously fake looking)
rear projection shots in "Buddy Buddy" just add to the film's corrosive,
sometimes brilliant depiction of a universe lacking in genuine emotion.
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11820
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:47am
Subject: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
The only ERASERHEAD dvd I find on the net is a REGION 2
(England, presumably in English) copy. Any guesses if it
will play on Mac Powerbook DVD player? I don't know if
I have (ever) seen ERASERHEAD (know the story as well as
am mindful of some scenes perhaps from Lynch's bio video)
I've seen most of the Lynch's others; I am curious as I read
comments that it is LYNCH's best.
11821
From: Nick
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:50am
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
> The only ERASERHEAD dvd I find on the net is a REGION 2
> (England, presumably in English) copy. Any guesses if it
> will play on Mac Powerbook DVD player? I don't know if
> I have (ever) seen ERASERHEAD (know the story as well as
> am mindful of some scenes perhaps from Lynch's bio video)
> I've seen most of the Lynch's others; I am curious as I read
> comments that it is LYNCH's best.
Leave the UK version well alone and go to www.davidlynch.com for the
expensive but superb remaster, direct from Mr. Lynch himself.
[I thought everyone knew this by now?? :) ]
-Nick Wrigley>-
11822
From: Nick
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:50am
Subject: Re: Ken Russell / Britons (was Alan Parker hates L'Argent)
> though many Britains I know look at me aghast when I talk about Ken
> Russell. I really feel that there is a lot to be discussed or written
> about in British cinema that gets ignored.
It's sad that many Britons don't know who Nicolas Roeg, Lindsay
Anderson, Ken Loach, Carol Reed or Michael Powell are - let alone Ken
Russell (who I'm not much a fan of, but I admire him). His DELIUS film
(in the bfi Archive TV DVD series) is rather good.
It was Ken Russell's 77th birthday yesterday.
> On the lighter side, I have to admit I have two British directors
> that are "quilty pleasures", J.Lee Thompson and Michael Winner.
Are they films you watch under a quilt then? :)
> (Brando said that Winner was his favorite director to work with!!) I
> enjoy them because the bad choices they make in their films never
> cease to amaze me.
Brando's predilection for Winner seems to me a nonchalant dismissal of
everyone else he's ever worked with. The intention being to wind them
up.
Winner is responsible for some outrageously bad films.
Here in the UK he's an odious television personality at best and is
trotted out whenever someone film-related dies. He's best known/most
hated for car insurance TV adverts where his catchphrase is, "It's only
a commercial!!!"
Regarding Brando, Winner said yesterday: ""I've no doubt he was the
most admired screen actor ever. And rightly so. He transcended fame
just as an actor."
He transcended fame just as an actor?
-Nick Wrigley>-
11823
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:58am
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
Maybe you can find it on his web site: www.davidlynch.com
There's a great film in the Cinema de notre temps series (well, several great films) on
Lynch, by Guy Girard, that revisits a couple of the key locations from ERASERHEAD.
The contrast is shocking.
Gabe
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
> The only ERASERHEAD dvd I find on the net is a REGION 2
> (England, presumably in English) copy. Any guesses if it
> will play on Mac Powerbook DVD player? I don't know if
> I have (ever) seen ERASERHEAD (know the story as well as
> am mindful of some scenes perhaps from Lynch's bio video)
> I've seen most of the Lynch's others; I am curious as I read
> comments that it is LYNCH's best.
11824
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:34am
Subject: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> I thought his subject of expertise to be reality shows.
And "facingness",
>
What is "facingness"? What's the French for it? I'm just curious.
11825
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:46am
Subject: Re: Wilder's Buddy Buddy
Peter, your fresh-eyed takes on things are so...refreshing. You
probably were in diapers when Buddy Buddy opened with a stake already
driven thru its heart, and the heart of Wilder's career, by Todd
McCarthy's Variety review. It was obvious having followed the career
while he was still being allowed to work that Wilder had problems
after his contract with the Mirisch Bros. ran out -- he had less
freedom and less money when he did Fedora and Buddy Buddy than he did
for The Front Page or Avanti, those masterpieces. But I love what's
great about Buddy Buddy: Lemmon. It's his most abstract performance,
IMO, because of the way that he uses all his considerable expresssive
arsenal in combination w. Wilder's mise en scene (mainly those fluids
he's constantly getting bathed in, but also framing, angles) to
portray a man who is physically and emotionally a squawling infant,
may two months old. That combination of all elements of performance
and direction is no longer around much -- Landau in Ed Wood comes to
mind, not much else...
11826
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:55am
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
> ----
>
> One of my favorite random Brando moments is in THE FORMULA, when he
> finally turns up at the end as the oil villain, which he plays in a
> goofy, diffident way. At one point he interrupts George C. Scott's
> self-righteous posturing (not Scott's fault particularly - unlike
> Brando, he was willing to subordinate himself to the awful Steve
Shagan
> script) to offer Scott a Milk Dud. When Scott declines, Brando
> continues to push the Milk Duds: "Damn good."
> His Sky Masterson in GUYS AND DOLLS is really quite charming. On
the
> other hand, I've always felt that his overwhelming performance in
> STREETCAR isn't quite right for the material:
Not surprising - Brando is essentially a comic actor, as Chaplin
completely understood. Termitic. That Milk Duds bit is a pricelss
example. I'm eager to resee Missouri Breaks, Bedtime Story, The
Appaloosa, The Chase. There's gold scattered all along the way.
11827
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:44am
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
wrote:
? I don't know if
> I have (ever) seen ERASERHEAD (know the story as well as
> am mindful of some scenes perhaps from Lynch's bio video)
> I've seen most of the Lynch's others; I am curious as I read
> comments that it is LYNCH's best.
How can one not know whether one has seen ERASERHEAD or not??? It
is one of the most memorable, unforgettable films ever made!
11828
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:56am
Subject: Re: Ken Russell / Britons (was Alan Parker hates L'Argent)
--- Nick
> It's sad that many Britons don't know who Nicolas
> Roeg, Lindsay
> Anderson, Ken Loach, Carol Reed or Michael Powell
> are -
More than sad. It's positively criminal. Do they know
ANYTHING about their culture anymore?
let alone Ken
> Russell (who I'm not much a fan of, but I admire
> him). His DELIUS film
> (in the bfi Archive TV DVD series) is rather good.
>
> It was Ken Russell's 77th birthday yesterday.
>
I'm a big fan. "The Devils" is his masterpiece, and
"Savage Messiah," "Ken Russell's Film of Tchaikovsky
and the Music Lovers," "The Boy Friend," and Larry
Kramer's "Women in Love" aren't far behind.
Among the TV films "Dante's Inferno" and "Isadora --
The Biggest Dancer in the World" are superb.
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11829
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 4:53am
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
Bedtime Story is a delight; Brando should have done
more comedies. He should have done more slapstick, I
remember when he let loose he was physically eloquent.
Actually, seeing Streetcar recently, I realized it's
esentially a domestic comedy with teeth, and a tragic
ending (I'm an admirer, more of Williams' play and the
performances than of the film).
Saw Wilder's Front Page recently, and I can't help
comparing it unfavorably to His Girl Friday. It seems
slowed down, somehow, and I miss the sexual tension
between Grant and Russell.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11830
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:01am
Subject: Re: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
I really don't know. I don't know if he picked it up from Deleuze. In this
case, it should be "visageité" (in portuguese, "rostidade"), which is a huge
concept from 1000Plateaux. If he invented it himself and has nothing to do
with de D/G concept, it's anything else. By the way, I hated Anything Else.
----- Original Message -----
From: "jpcoursodon"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 11:34 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No
Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
> wrote:
> > I thought his subject of expertise to be reality shows.
> And "facingness",
> >
>
> What is "facingness"? What's the French for it? I'm just curious.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
11831
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:26am
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
"I am curious as I read comments that it is LYNCH's best."
Dismiss these comments. For a director of like Lynch, it is common
that fanboys pick the most unaccessable of his films and put forward
as his best in order to sound smart. They also frequently pick "Lost
Highway".
Besides probably not understanding his work, they ignore Lynch
developing as a director, in terms of skill, and Lynch developing as
auteur, in terms of style, motifs and signatures.
Henrik
11832
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:48am
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
I've always thought the greatest thing about Brando's performance in
Streetcar -- and I do think it's a great performance -- is the self-
aware humor he finds in Stanley. If he played the character simply
as a dumb, bullying brute, Stanley would be of little interest and
the interaction between him and Blanche would have quickly grown
tedious. But he plays Stanley like a snarky, hyped-up William Bendix
and the result is both very funny and chilling.
-- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>Brando is essentially a comic actor, as Chaplin
> completely understood. Termitic.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Noel Vera
> Bedtime Story is a delight; Brando should have done
> more comedies. He should have done more slapstick, I
> remember when he let loose he was physically eloquent.
>
>
> Actually, seeing Streetcar recently, I realized it's
> esentially a domestic comedy with teeth, and a tragic
> ending (I'm an admirer, more of Williams' play and the
> performances than of the film).
I don't know if I'd go that far, Noel, but it does seem to me that
most people do overlook the comedic elements in the material.
11833
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 8:14am
Subject: Re: Ken Russell / Britons
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick
> It's sad that many Britons don't know who Nicolas Roeg, Lindsay
> Anderson, Ken Loach, Carol Reed or Michael Powell
A lot of films and filmmakers from England from the late 60's to the
90's are, to me, extraordinary. Mike Hodges, Nick Roeg, Peter
Greenaway (a master of moving camera and another of the greatest
contemporary filmmakers), Terrance Davies, (dito on greatest
contemporary filmmakers), Mike Newell's "Dance with a Stranger" and I
am sure that I will wake up at 3am here with some more.
One of the most enjoyable running audio commentaries on a Criterion
laserdisc is for "The Man Who Fell to Earth.'' (This film helped me
survive two years in central Florida.) Roeg and Bowie become more and
more plastered as the reels progress until then end up giggling and
making incoherent comments.
As for Powell, I could watch "Black Narcissus" endlessly.
> It was Ken Russell's 77th birthday yesterday.
And he's just finished shooting his new "home movie/shot in his garage/
funded out of his own pocket because no one will bank him short film:"
The Revenge of the Elephant Man. Russell hit a bad patch in the
1990's, but his directoral skills were still on display with "Prisoner
of Honor" and "The Strange Affliction of Anton Bruckner" from that
period.
> Are they films you watch under a quilt then? :)
The fact that I type a q instead of a g has been on my mind all day,
along with British cinema in general, which I thought was rather
appropriate on July 4th. ;)
> Winner is responsible for some outrageously bad films.
Oh yes, and I've seen a few of them! I have a friend that breaks out
laughing when saying JUST the title of one of Winner's films: "Won Ton
Ton, the Dog that Saved Hollywood."
> Here in the UK he's an odious television personality at best and is
> trotted out whenever someone film-related dies.
What did he have to say about Charles Bronson? Oliver Reed? Winner
made a decent film with Reed in the 60's called "The Girl Getters."
Michael Worrall
11834
From:
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 9:01am
Subject: A Brief History of Film
Here is a working hypothesis on British and American Film.
From 1909 through 1972, Hollywood films were stupendous. So were French,
Italian, Japanese and pre-Nazi German films.
After around 1972, traditional Hollywood collapsed. The new people making
commercial American films largely were far less skilled and ambitious than
earlier generations. The one type of film which Hollywood still has done well during
1973-2004 is comedy, including teen comedy, and the comic cop shows of 1980's
TV.
After 1972, the center of gravity in commercial English speaking films
shifted to the British Commonwealth: Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand.
Here is where a flood of creative cinema has been made, both for theaters, and
TV, including music videos.
None of this has any relevance to the history of experimental film, or the
state of non-English speaking commercial narrative film, which have separate
histories.
Comments?
Exceptions can clearly be found to all of this. But I suggest these are the
actual broad trends.
Mike Grost
11835
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:25pm
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Henrik Sylow"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
wrote:
>
> "I am curious as I read comments that it is LYNCH's best."
>
> Dismiss these comments. For a director of like Lynch, it is common
> that fanboys pick the most unaccessable of his films and put forward
> as his best in order to sound smart. They also frequently pick "Lost
> Highway".
>
> Besides probably not understanding his work, they ignore Lynch
> developing as a director, in terms of skill, and Lynch developing as
> auteur, in terms of style, motifs and signatures.
>
> Henrik
Why "dismiss" without having seen the film? Granted that singling out
one film as THE masterpiece of a director is more often than not
arbitrary and debatable, but ERASERHEAD is one of the most
extraordinary films ever made and already contains all the
characteristics later "developed" by Lynch. So placing it very high
among Lynch's output sounds quite legitimate to me. Of course I have
no idea who said it was his masterpiece and whether it was said "to
sound smart" but the fact is that it is a highly personal, completely
original and mindblowing film.
JPC
11836
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 1:50pm
Subject: Hitch: Lost (?) in translation
Can anyone (Bill, perhaps) tell me whether the American version of
Truffaut's book of interviews with Hitchcock was a re-translation
from the French edition or used the original tapes or transcript of
Hitchcock's statements in English?
JPC
11837
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:04pm
Subject: Re: A Brief History of Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Here is a working hypothesis on British and American Film.
> From 1909 through 1972, Hollywood films were stupendous. So were
French,
> Italian, Japanese and pre-Nazi German films.
> After around 1972, traditional Hollywood collapsed. The new people
making
> commercial American films largely were far less skilled and
ambitious than
> earlier generations. The one type of film which Hollywood still has
done well during
> 1973-2004 is comedy, including teen comedy, and the comic cop shows
of 1980's
> TV.
> After 1972, the center of gravity in commercial English speaking films
> shifted to the British Commonwealth: Great Britain, Canada,
Australia, New Zealand.
> Here is where a flood of creative cinema has been made, both for
theaters, and
> TV, including music videos.
> None of this has any relevance to the history of experimental film,
or the
> state of non-English speaking commercial narrative film, which have
separate
> histories.
> Comments?
> Exceptions can clearly be found to all of this. But I suggest these
are the
> actual broad trends.
>
> Mike Grost
Around 1992 a change begin which today means, that cinema no longer is
the primary means of film, its home entertainment and merchendise.
Before this change, a film would with a steady audience for 5-10
weeks, today audiences peak during the first day, then drop 40-60% per
consequtive week. Where films would open in 300 screens nation wide, a
film opens in 3000+, some even in 10,000+ world wide. This has three
major advantages. (1) It has to be incredible bad in order not cover
its production costs in the opening weekend (for block busters opening
day) and (2) reviews serve no real purpose, since those who the film
is aimed at already have seen it by the time it gets bad reviews and
(3) the more screens you open in the higher the box office revenue and
nothing sells more than a huge number: "$250 million in the opening
weekend" is worth 100 times more than "Best film ever made - Roger
Ebert".
In 2003, Hollywood made $63 billion, this year its expected that
Hollywood makes $75 billions. In 2003, 46% of the revenue came from
DVD/VHS (in 2005 its predicted that this figure will be 60%), 28% from
TV and only 26% from theatres. With a rise in DVD/VHS to 60% and a
steady, if not increasing TV percentage, theatre revenue will be less
than 20% in 2 years.
This means a drop in theatre revenue from today $16.38 billions to
estimated $15 billion (effective almost 10% drop). Cinema's can battle
this two ways: cut expenses by 10% or try to make more money by
consessions (popcorn, soda) which already today is more expensive than
the ticket itself.
Henrik
11838
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:44pm
Subject: Newell (Was: Ken Russell / Britons)
> A lot of films and filmmakers from England from the late 60's to the
> 90's are, to me, extraordinary. Mike Hodges, Nick Roeg, Peter
> Greenaway (a master of moving camera and another of the greatest
> contemporary filmmakers), Terrance Davies, (dito on greatest
> contemporary filmmakers), Mike Newell's "Dance with a Stranger"
Anyone else for Mike Newell's AN AWFULLY BIG ADVENTURE? I often like
Newell's work, but this one seems to me a cut above. - Dan
11839
From: Dave Kehr
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 2:53pm
Subject: Brando
Thanks, all, for the great posts on Brando. I promise to pillage
them shamelessly.
I looked at "Night of the Following Day" again last night, a
classic "film maudit" if ever, full of daring formal ideas (what
little dialogue there is is mostly one sided)and a couple of very
good performances (Richard Boone suggests all and shows nothing as a
potential child-molester) but doomed by that hideous, it's-only-a-
dream ending. Does anyone know if that was a studio impostion?
Dave Kehr
11840
From: Craig Keller
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:07pm
Subject: Re: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
> "I am curious as I read comments that it is LYNCH's best."
>
> Dismiss these comments. For a director of like Lynch, it is common
> that fanboys pick the most unaccessable of his films and put forward
> as his best in order to sound smart. They also frequently pick "Lost
> Highway".
>
> Besides probably not understanding his work, they ignore Lynch
> developing as a director, in terms of skill, and Lynch developing as
> auteur, in terms of style, motifs and signatures.
Except that it is one of Lynch's best films, masterfully directed --
and a powerful representation (like Seijun Suzuki's 'Branded to Kill')
of male sexual anxiety. Is Jacques Rivette a "fanboy"? Is one only
not a "Lynch fanboy/girl" if his or her favorite Lynch films are 'The
Elephant Man' or 'The Straight Story'?
craig.
11841
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:07pm
Subject: Re: Newell (Was: Ken Russell / Britons)
--- Dan Sallitt
>
> Anyone else for Mike Newell's AN AWFULLY BIG
> ADVENTURE? I often like
> Newell's work, but this one seems to me a cut above.
> - Dan
Close but no cigar. Interesting for what is
unquestionably Hugh Grant's creepiest performance.
Actually he's a much more interesting actor than he's
ever been given credit for,
"Dance with a Stranger," however, is a dark gem.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11842
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:09pm
Subject: Re: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
--- Craig Keller
Is Jacques Rivette a
> "fanboy"? Is one only
> not a "Lynch fanboy/girl" if his or her favorite
> Lynch films are 'The
> Elephant Man' or 'The Straight Story'?
>
Rivette's a fanboy when it comes to Paul Verhoeven --
an enthusiasm that for the life of me I cannot
comprehend.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11843
From: Craig Keller
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:12pm
Subject: Re: Hitch: Lost (?) in translation
> Can anyone (Bill, perhaps) tell me whether the American version of
> Truffaut's book of interviews with Hitchcock was a re-translation
> from the French edition or used the original tapes or transcript of
> Hitchcock's statements in English?
I think (de) Baecque and Toubiana write in their biography that the
French version of the book uses Truffaut's questions verbatim, and
translates Hitchcock's replies, and the American version translates
Truffaut's questions while using Hitchcock's English replies verbatim.
craig.
11844
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:31pm
Subject: Re: A Brief History of Film
Mike, as someone who, like you, finds the contention that the 70s
were the high point of American cinema to be absurd (a ridiculous
postulation perpetuated by Paulettes), I agree with you about the
state of movies from this country during the Ford and Carter years
(and matters would get even worse in the 80s).
But although there was a renaissance of Australian cinema late in the
70s (previously, Australian cinema seemed to consist only of movies
starring Chips Rafferty), I think the condition of British film
reflected that of American, and that the high point of the British
cinema was the 1950s and '60s.
-- Damien
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Here is a working hypothesis on British and American Film.
> From 1909 through 1972, Hollywood films were stupendous. So were
French,
> Italian, Japanese and pre-Nazi German films.
> After around 1972, traditional Hollywood collapsed. The new people
making
> commercial American films largely were far less skilled and
ambitious than
> earlier generations. The one type of film which Hollywood still has
done well during
> 1973-2004 is comedy, including teen comedy, and the comic cop shows
of 1980's
> TV.
> After 1972, the center of gravity in commercial English speaking
films
> shifted to the British Commonwealth: Great Britain, Canada,
Australia, New Zealand.
11845
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 3:35pm
Subject: Re: Wilder's Buddy Buddy
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> Peter, your fresh-eyed takes on things are so...refreshing. You
It was obvious having followed the career
> while he was still being allowed to work that Wilder had problems
> after his contract with the Mirisch Bros. ran out -- he had less
> freedom and less money when he did Fedora and Buddy Buddy than he
did
> for The Front Page or Avanti, those masterpieces.
Nevertheless, my gang and I were thrilled at the time by the slate of
films aet forth at MGM by the briefly-tenured (and infamous for the
check-writing scandal) studio head, David Begelman. In addition to
Wilder, he greenlighted (greenlit?) projects by such other Old
Masters as Cukor, Robert Aldrich, Don Siegel and Blake Edwards.
-- Damien
11846
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 4:10pm
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
The key to appreciating Verhoeven is to understand that he's a social
satirist. The only problem is that as a satirist he's relatively
toothless.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> >
> Rivette's a fanboy when it comes to Paul Verhoeven --
> an enthusiasm that for the life of me I cannot
> comprehend.
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11847
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 4:34pm
Subject: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
:
> I really don't know. I don't know if he picked it up from Deleuze. In thi=
s
> case, it should be "visageité" (in portuguese, "rostidade")
If I'm reading correctly, wouldn't it be "faceness" in English? Facing(-nes=
s) suggests
maybe you are opposite of something.
Not that I am being very helpful here to anyone...
11848
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 4:42pm
Subject: Re: ERASERHEAD comments that it is LYNCH's best
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> --- Craig Keller
> Is Jacques Rivette a
> > "fanboy"? Is one only
> > not a "Lynch fanboy/girl" if his or her favorite
> > Lynch films are 'The
> > Elephant Man' or 'The Straight Story'?
> >
> Rivette's a fanboy when it comes to Paul Verhoeven --
> an enthusiasm that for the life of me I cannot
> comprehend.
Rivette is a fanboy extraordinaire when it comes to Verhoeven. His
love for Starship Troopers and Showgirls is even more uncritical than
7th graders watching "Tomb Raider".
11849
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 4:47pm
Subject: Re: Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
It's something he takes from another book.
The link: http://image.kaywa.com/p66.html
Manet's "Olympia" and the "facingness" of television. And it's, in fact,
related to "face".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabe Klinger"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 1:34 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: I was beginning to wonder if this forum was a No
Fahrenheit 9-11 Zone
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
:
> I really don't know. I don't know if he picked it up from Deleuze. In thi=
s
> case, it should be "visageité" (in portuguese, "rostidade")
If I'm reading correctly, wouldn't it be "faceness" in English? Facing(-nes=
s) suggests
maybe you are opposite of something.
Not that I am being very helpful here to anyone...
Yahoo! Groups Links
11850
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 5:21pm
Subject: Re: Brando
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Kehr"
"I looked at "Night of the Following Day" again last night, a
classic "film maudit" if ever, full of daring formal ideas (what
little dialogue there is is mostly one sided)and a couple of very
good performances (Richard Boone suggests all and shows nothing as a
potential child-molester) but doomed by that hideous, it's-only-a-
dream ending. Does anyone know if that was a studio impostion?"
I haven't seen it since its original release, but my recollection was
that the ending was a kind of hysteron proteron(sp?)where the
preceding events are going to inevitably happen no matter what.
As for Brando acting moments, I think Sarris pointed out that his
restraint on finding the bodies of Kelly and Katsumi in SAYONARA
lends the scene tremendous power (in fact it was the only good
sequence in the movie.) Probably a minority opinion (though shared
by Richard Shickel) but his performance in MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY was
fascinating even down to his trembling death scene on a block of ice.
Richard
11851
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 5:40pm
Subject: Partial transcript of "Fahrenheit 9-11"
http://www.redlinerants.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1088491633&archive=&start_from=&ucat=1&
It's the first quarter of the film. Very useful.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11852
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 5:52pm
Subject: Re: Brando
I expected to find the definitive assessment of Brando as director in this forum, but it seems that even here he's only being remembered as an actor, which may be a verdict in itself. (I didn't see much in One Eyed Jacks back when, but I didn't see much in anything back when -- what does it look like today?)
11853
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:17pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brando
--- jess_l_amortell
> I expected to find the definitive assessment of
> Brando as director in this forum, but it seems that
> even here he's only being remembered as an actor,
> which may be a verdict in itself. (I didn't see
> much in One Eyed Jacks back when, but I didn't see
> much in anything back when -- what does it look like
> today?)
>
It's very enjoyable. In some ways it's a precursor of
Leone, less for the violence than the leisurely pace
and almost fetishistic emphasis on props, costumes and
gesture. The sado-masochistic relationship between
Brando and Malden is surely worthy of further study.
Again it's remindful of Leone -- "Once Upon a Time in
America" in particular.
In the opening scene Brando and his gang are robbing a
bank and Brando sits cross-legged on a counter eating
a banana. Very remindful of Laughton lounging on the
operating table in "Island of Lost Souls."
I don't think the film is really "about" anything
other than whatever may have amused Brando from moment
to moment.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11854
From: Nick
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:22pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brando (ONE EYED JACKS)
> It's very enjoyable. In some ways it's a precursor of
> Leone, less for the violence than the leisurely pace
> and almost fetishistic emphasis on props, costumes and
> gesture. The sado-masochistic relationship between
> Brando and Malden is surely worthy of further study.
> Again it's remindful of Leone -- "Once Upon a Time in
> America" in particular.
Can anyone point me towards a history of the film? (ONE EYED JACKS) ---
A colleague was offered this for DVD release and it turned out to be a
cropped, butchered version. I heard talk of "Brando's original 5hr
cut", and wondered if this was just legend?
Thanks,
-Nick Wrigley>-
11855
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 6:37pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brando (ONE EYED JACKS)
--- Nick
>
> Can anyone point me towards a history of the film?
> (ONE EYED JACKS) ---
> A colleague was offered this for DVD release and it
> turned out to be a
> cropped, butchered version. I heard talk of
> "Brando's original 5hr
> cut", and wondered if this was just legend?
>
As far as I can tell that's just legend. Brando
reportedly turned in a 5-hour cut. This was doubtless
a rough-cut that further pruning could have turned
into a 2 or 2 1/2 hour film (not uncommon at that
time) But it was taken away from him (much as "Ludwig"
was taken away from Visconti) and cut by Paramount to
the state we now know.
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11856
From: Michael Brooke
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 7:57pm
Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker Party Film Criticism
>
> From: Nick
> Subject: Re: Robert Bresson Latest Victim of New Yorker Cocktail/Poker
> Party Film Criticism
>
>
>
> I agree about THE DEVIL, PROBABLY. I'd argue that Bresson got stronger
> towards the end. His last two films are extraordinary.
Indeed - L'ARGENT is right up there with his 1950s masterpieces, and
when I'm in certain frames of mind I'm not entirely sure it isn't
superior.
>>
>
> Ah! Now I understand! :)
> What about comparing LES ANGES DU PECHE to SISTER ACT? That'd put bums
> on seats.
>
Quite a few people genuinely did compare LANCELOT DU LAC to MONTY
PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL when I promoted a new print of the former to
celebrate its 20th anniversary. I used to think that the Bresson film
was a major influence (there are quite a few visual similarities) until
I checked its British release date (late 1975) against the shooting
dates of the Python film (1974), so it's just an unfortunate
coincidence.
Michael
11857
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 8:15pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando
>I don't know if I'd go that far, Noel, but it does
>seem to me that
>most people do overlook the comedic elements in the
>material.
It's like--I don't remember where I picked this
up--someone once observed, that Romeo and Juliet feels
like a comedy, only the heroes die in the end.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11858
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 9:35pm
Subject: Re: Brando (ONE EYED JACKS)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> --- Nick
>
> >
> > Can anyone point me towards a history of the film?
> > (ONE EYED JACKS) ---
> > A colleague was offered this for DVD release and it
> > turned out to be a
> > cropped, butchered version. I heard talk of
> > "Brando's original 5hr
> > cut", and wondered if this was just legend?
> >
> As far as I can tell that's just legend. Brando
> reportedly turned in a 5-hour cut. This was doubtless
> a rough-cut that further pruning could have turned
> into a 2 or 2 1/2 hour film (not uncommon at that
> time) But it was taken away from him (much as "Ludwig"
> was taken away from Visconti) and cut by Paramount to
> the state we now know.
> >
>
>
> David, I don't follow you. The film as released by Paramount has
a running time of two hours and eleven minutes, much longer than an
average movie of the time (or of today). So when Paramount "took it
away" that's just what they did -- turn it into a 2 hours+ film. The
five hour version was indeed a rough cut, nothing releasable.
According to Peter Manso, Brando brought that down to four and a half
hours, then (after producer Frank Rosenberg told Brando: "That's not
a picture; that's just an assemblage of footage")to three hours. A
few people saw that version and one of them, Sam Shaw, an old friend
of Brando, is quoted in Manso as calling it "a masterpiece, one of
the most romantic westerns ever made." Of course the history of film
is full of legends about the original cut (usually very long) of a
film being an absolute masterpiece which the studio then destroyed
(GREED being one of the earlier examples). I doubt that anyone who
disliked the released version would have found the three hour version
a masterpiece. There is a wonderful leisurliness about the movie
(it's probably the most languidly paced western ever made)that most
people just felt as slow and tedious (nothing much happens for long
stretches of time) and no doubt the longer version must have
emphasized this laid back atmosphere. I would have loved to see it
(the footage was destroyed of course!)because I loved the "short"
version. I still like it as much as I did when I first saw it more
than 40 years ago! The film is a feast for the eye.
JPC
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11859
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 0:53am
Subject: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
If I saw ERASERHEAD on release in 1977, I probably thought it
interesting (during rather interesting times, the seventies at
Harvard) enough, but wouldn't pretend to remember it,
especially as I knew little about cinema at the time. Still, I've
seen the DVD front plate image and it looks familiar (Henry's hair
reminds me of Frankenstein's Bride).
I've just watched THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE which I
know I saw and liked in the past... but there is so much one
forgets ... or even mixes up with other films ...
Anyone care to fess up to mixing up a scene, thinking it came from
one film and finding it came from another (as someone
query the other day about the villagers watching the Olympic
city announcement on a single small TV)?
Or more to the point for an auteur group: Anyone ever attribute
a movie to one auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
> How can one not know whether one has seen ERASERHEAD or not??? It
> is one of the most memorable, unforgettable films ever made!
11860
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 1:27am
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
--- Elizabeth Anne Nolan
>
>
> Or more to the point for an auteur group: Anyone
> ever attribute
> a movie to one auteur, only to later learn it was by
> another?
>
>
"The Enforcer" credited to Bretaine Windust was
primarily directored by Raoul Walsh
"Never Say Goodbye" credited to Jerry Hopper is
primarily the work of Douglas Sirk.
And then there's "Come and Get It" credited to auteur
supreme Howard Hawks and celebrated non-auteur William Wyler
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11861
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 1:36am
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
wrote:
> If I saw ERASERHEAD on release in 1977, I probably thought it
> interesting (during rather interesting times, the seventies at
> Harvard) enough, but wouldn't pretend to remember it,
> especially as I knew little about cinema at the time. Still, I've
> seen the DVD front plate image and it looks familiar (Henry's hair
> reminds me of Frankenstein's Bride).
>
This is a bit like someone saying, "I may have seen "Citizen Kane"
sometime back in the early forties but I can't say I remember seeing
it." On the other hand, there may very well be countless people who
have had this experience of seeing films we cherish and know by heart
and who have completely forgotten about them. I keep wondering about
the audiences who saw "Ambersons" at a preview and laughed and walked
out, or the ones who saw it in a double bill with "Mexican Spitfire
Sees a Ghost". By and large, most people go to a movie and see it and
then forget about it. or at least this is the way it was and maybe
this is still the way it is. But on an auteurist list, no!.
>
>
> Or more to the point for an auteur group: Anyone ever attribute
> a movie to one auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
>
I don't see how this is possible. Of course you could do "blindfold
tests" like the jazz critics used to do and show a film without the
credits and see whether an auteurist would make a fool of herself by
saying this is a Wyler film when it was a Ford or vice versa -- but I
doubt it.
JPC
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> > How can one not know whether one has seen ERASERHEAD or not??? It
> > is one of the most memorable, unforgettable films ever made!
11862
From:
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 9:36pm
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by anot...
I was about to reply to Peter's post about Billy Wilder's "Buddy Buddy" this
morning, which I remembered seeing in the mid 1970's. Some things did not
quite gel, and did some fact checking. The movie I was remembering was Wilder's
version of "The Front Page". I've never actually seen "Buddy Buddy"! This was
all 30 years ago, so there is maybe SOME excuse.
One thing that can really louse up your ideas: movie stills. They are posed
for camera men, and are often radically different from the actual scene in the
film. Looking at them can completely scramble your recollections of the film
itself. This is why many film historians prefer to use only "frame
enlargements", shots captured from the actual film itself, to illustrate their writings.
All movies seem to be "stored" in my memory under their director.
Consequently, I rarely get a film's director wrong in recollection. This is especially
true if the director has a strong personal styte.
Some directors are amazingly vivid. I posted earlier about seeing "The
Dreamers", with its clip from "Mouchette". I recognized this immediately. "There's
Mouchette!!!!"
I find it much easier to recognize an actor, once they are a continuing
character in a TV series. I must have seen Regis Toomey a zillion times in movies.
But he never registered. As soon as I became a fan of "Burke's Law" (the old
comedy mystery show sometimes seen in reruns) Toomey started making a strong
impression. Now I look forward to seeing him in movies, etc. Was even mad that
Hawks cut a lot of his scenes out of the second version of "The Big Sleep"!
(He was Bogart's cop buddy - typical of Toomey's roles throughout his vast
career as a character actor.)
"It's Burke's Law!"
MIke Grost
11863
From:
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 9:37pm
Subject: Fahrenheit 9/11
Saw "Fahrenheit 9/11" yesterday, on the Fourth of July. The packed audience
in my multiplex was riveted. When the man complains about Flint's economic
problems, the audience burst into cheers! Flint is just a short drive North of
here in Detroit.
It is good to see a Michigan film at the center of world film attention. Just
as we love Bresson here in Michigan, they love us in Cannes!
Mike Grost
11864
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 1:39am
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> --- Elizabeth Anne Nolan
>
> >
> >
> > Or more to the point for an auteur group: Anyone
> > ever attribute
> > a movie to one auteur, only to later learn it was by
> > another?
> >
> >
> "The Enforcer" credited to Bretaine Windust was
> primarily directored by Raoul Walsh
>
> "Never Say Goodbye" credited to Jerry Hopper is
> primarily the work of Douglas Sirk.
>
> And then there's "Come and Get It" credited to auteur
> supreme Howard Hawks and celebrated non-auteur William Wyler
>
> Yes, but her question was: have you ever mistaken someone for the
real auteur? Have you ever, David?
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11865
From:
Date: Mon Jul 5, 2004 10:05pm
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by ...
Three points:
1) If it were not for the old audiences, there would not be any auteur
classics! Their love of movies paid the bills for all the great Hollywood, French,
Italian and Japanese directors.
2) My parents could recount countless scenes from old movies, that they had
not seen in decades.
3) The modern-day cinephile community keeps shrugging its shoulders at movies
that will in the future be recognized as good films, IMHO.
Mike Grost
11866
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 2:40am
Subject: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by ...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Three points:
> 1) If it were not for the old audiences, there would not be any auteur
> classics! Their love of movies paid the bills for all the great
Hollywood, French,
> Italian and Japanese directors.
> 2) My parents could recount countless scenes from old movies, that
they had
> not seen in decades.
> 3) The modern-day cinephile community keeps shrugging its shoulders
at movies
> that will in the future be recognized as good films, IMHO.
Which are? I know plenty of modern-day cinephiles who have their
antennae fully extended, but nobody can predict the future. Insofar
as posterity is concerned, one can only latch onto the films one loves
and (a) gloat when it becomes a classic or (b) weep when it doesn't.
That's why such activities don't interest me.
-Jaime
11867
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 3:48am
Subject: Re: Re: attribute movie to auteur, only to later learn it was by another?
--- jpcoursodon
> >
> > Yes, but her question was: have you ever mistaken
> someone for the
> real auteur? Have you ever, David?
> >
I'm certain that I misattributed something directed by
Joe McGrath to one of the oher directors of "Casino
Royale"
I'm toldhe didthe East German sequence witht he
"caligari" take-off, but he may have done other stuff
too. The whole film feels like him -- outside of the
hunt sequence which is obviously John Huston.
And I think (uncredited of course)Welles directed
himself in the magic trick sequence.
Does anybody know for sure?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
11868
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 6:28am
Subject: Re: Brando (ONE EYED JACKS)
Re: the rest of him -- I checked with a friend who was in charge of
the Paramount film holdings in 1997 - nothing. But then, when Joel
Silver was going to restore The Big Red One, a similar guy at Warners
told him there was nothing left but positive trims. It took me and
Leith Adams less than one day to locate the negative and establish
that it was probably all there. Then when Schickel got on it, years
later, the same department told him the same bullshit going in. These
people are slugs, so there's always hope, but there's simply no one
you can rely on at Paramount since Fred Chandler moved to Fox. For
what it's worth, Coppola said he looked when he was at Paramount. I
am more inclined to believe him.
11869
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 6:34am
Subject: Re: Hitch: Lost (?) in translation
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> > Can anyone (Bill, perhaps) tell me whether the American version of
> > Truffaut's book of interviews with Hitchcock was a re-translation
> > from the French edition or used the original tapes or transcript
of
> > Hitchcock's statements in English?
>
> I think (de) Baecque and Toubiana write in their biography that the
> French version of the book uses Truffaut's questions verbatim, and
> translates Hitchcock's replies, and the American version translates
> Truffaut's questions while using Hitchcock's English replies
verbatim.
>
> craig.
That's right, but they didn't always do a good job of editing the
material. The tapes are at the Herrick, and they are very
illuminating about things in the book that simply don't make sense,
like AH's discussion of the scene in the FBI office in Notorious when
Ingrid Bergman announces that Raines has proposed to her, which I
retranslated from the tape for my Hitchcock at Work chapter on that
film. Toubiana and de Baecque excerpted 5-minute bits and ran them on
French radio throughout the Centenary -- everyone I know taped them
off the air. Herrick only has half a transcript, for some reason, but
anyone with a driver's license can go in and listen to the originals.
There's a lot left out of the book, too -- they're fascinating.
11870
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 6:40am
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
>
> Saw Wilder's Front Page recently, and I can't help
> comparing it unfavorably to His Girl Friday. It seems
> slowed down, somehow, and I miss the sexual tension
> between Grant and Russell.
A set observer reported Wilder was using a stopwatch -- to slow the
action down. He and Diamond turned America's best-loved farce into a
tragedy about a failed gay love affair.
11871
From: joe_mcelhaney
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 1:26pm
Subject: Re: Hitch: Lost (?) in translation
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
> wrote:
> >
> > > Can anyone (Bill, perhaps) tell me whether the American version
of Truffaut's book of interviews with Hitchcock was a re-translation
> > > from the French edition or used the original tapes or
transcriptof Hitchcock's statements in English?
Janet Bergstrom did a presentation at the Hitchcock centennial
conference on some of the major differences between the tapes and the
various translations and editing jobs done on this material -- some
of them significant. As far as I know, though, she's never published
her comparisons. Unless I missed them somewhere. Has anyone seen
her work on this in print form?
11872
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 1:47pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> >
> > Saw Wilder's Front Page recently, and I can't help
> > comparing it unfavorably to His Girl Friday. It seems
> > slowed down, somehow, and I miss the sexual tension
> > between Grant and Russell.
>
> A set observer reported Wilder was using a stopwatch -- to slow
the
> action down. He and Diamond turned America's best-loved farce into
a
> tragedy about a failed gay love affair.
I like it too - better than Wilder's official classics (SOME LIKE IT
HOT, THE APARTMENT, SUNSET BLVD.). And you're right, the key to the
whole movie is contained in the "cigarette me" scene, and the look
Matthau gives Sarandon.
And I still think it works on the level of farce - leagues below the
Hawks film, but how could it not be?
-Jaime
11873
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 2:25pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> >
> > Saw Wilder's Front Page recently, and I can't help
> > comparing it unfavorably to His Girl Friday. It seems
> > slowed down, somehow, and I miss the sexual tension
> > between Grant and Russell.
>
> A set observer reported Wilder was using a stopwatch -- to slow the
> action down. He and Diamond turned America's best-loved farce into
a
> tragedy about a failed gay love affair.
My favorite line from the film (not my favorite late Wilder,
though...): "He only gets it up when he puts the paper to bed."
(quoted from memory).
JPC
11874
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 2:32pm
Subject: Hitch/Truffaut
Thanks to Craig, Bill and Joe for their responses. I have always been
somewhat suspicious about the French version but never compared the
two. Since the whole thing was done through an interpreter there must
have been some loss. And the stuff left out may sometimes be as
interesting or more than the stuff included. Would there be legal
obstacles to a comprehensive publication. It's great that the whole
thing has been preserved...
11875
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 2:39pm
Subject: About Faciality
Not sure if anyone has answered this one yet, but the Deleuze-Guattari term
visagéité that people have been guessing at is officially rendered in
English as 'faciality'. That's in Chapter 7 of A THOUSAND PLATEAUS. There
are many film references in this section of their book (as I just remembered
looking it up). Like many Deleuzo-Guattarian (makes a change from
Hitchcocko-Hawksian!) concepts, this one has a concrete aspect and an
abstract aspect - they discuss faces in all their range of meanings in life
and art and history, but also regard the face as a pure 'surface', "part of
a surface-holes, holey surface, system". It's a difficult concept to get a
grip of, but I think it actually captures something profoundly true about
cinema and its doubleness: that we relate to the humanity of a face on
screen, but also to its potential abstractness as an image.
Intriguingly, their chapter introducing this concept also contains a section
on the ambiguity of form-content interpretations, and (coincidentally, I
think) their example is the identical one Jonathan R used recently in
CHICAGO READER to discuss Jarmusch's COFFEE AND CIGARETTES: Kafka's story
"Blumfeld".
Adrian
11876
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 7:00pm
Subject: Re: Hitch: Lost (?) in translation
>
> Janet Bergstrom did a presentation at the Hitchcock centennial
> conference on some of the major differences between the tapes and
the
> various translations and editing jobs done on this material -- some
> of them significant. As far as I know, though, she's never
published
> her comparisons. Unless I missed them somewhere. Has anyone seen
> her work on this in print form?
That was something she threw together for the conference - I don't
know that she plans to take it further. If someone proposed it, I
imagine she'd consider.
11877
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 7:02pm
Subject: Re: Kehr on Brando, Wilder
> And I still think it works on the level of farce - leagues below
the
> Hawks film, but how could it not be?
>
> -Jaime
Olivier Assayas told me it was the funniest movie he'd ever seen, but
he was seeing/hearing the gags for the first time -- His Girl Friday
was virtually unknown in France at that time (early 80s). So I guess
for a naive spectator it does work.
11878
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 7:07pm
Subject: Re: Hitch/Truffaut
Would there be legal
> obstacles to a comprehensive publication. It's great that the whole
> thing has been preserved...
Madeline Morgenstern would have to ok it. Believe me, the question
has been raised by a few people, but never broached to her as far as
I know. T-H still sells - there are practical as well as image
reasons for her to veto it. The ONLY change Claudine asked me to make
in HAW was the line about AH's Notorious comment being "garbled" in
the T-H. It's fudged now.
11879
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 7:53pm
Subject: Re: a little on Late Wilder
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> > And I still think it works on the level of farce - leagues below
> the
> > Hawks film, but how could it not be?
> >
> > -Jaime
> Olivier Assayas told me it was the funniest movie he'd ever seen,
but
> he was seeing/hearing the gags for the first time -- His Girl
Friday
> was virtually unknown in France at that time (early 80s). So I
guess
> for a naive spectator it does work.
Through Wilder it's "Wilder-ized," the foundation is the same as
FRONT PAGE '31/GIRL FRIDAY but his use of Lemmon & Matthau, the
bathroom humor and the gay humor and the over-the-top (and
perilously over-extended) sequence with the shrink barrelling out of
the back of the ambulance and screaming "Froooooot-caaaake!" over
and over again...these things are clearly Wilder & Diamond.
(Boy, filmmakers sure have it out for psychiatrists and
psychoanalysts, don't they!)
There are things about it that make it compelling in different ways
than the Hawks version, with its breathless, rapid-fire comic
timing, cheeky Hawks-ness in portraying "guys and gals at work,"
etc., such as Wilder's gaudy nostalgia, which - as in FEDORA -
somehow finally allows Wilder to grow into his own cynicism. (After
a fluffy SHERLOCK HOLMES and a sunny AVANTI! it seems to me that
Wilder grew more bitter about contemporary movies than ever before;
the force of this particular brand of contempt seems amplified
between SUNSET BLVD. and the tellingly similar FEDORA.)
Nice cast, too. Allen Garfield and Charles Durning, both priceless
character actors, are ideal for their roles. So is Austin
Pendleton. (Each version sure knew its era's pipsqueaks: Henry
Gibson played the part in the Burt Reynolds/Kathleen turner remake
in '88. George E. Stone in the original. And who but John Qualen
in the Hawks? Today it'd be Orlando Bloom, surely.) My absolute
favorite is Vincent Gardenia - the most apoplectic actor in the
whole movie (including the shrink), and he was never better.
Is it in 'Scope? The IMDb says it was shot (by Jordan Cronenweth!!)
in Panavision, but TCM aired it in 1.33:1 and it didn't seem to have
been cropped - also the DVD is full-frame.
-Jaime
11880
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 8:35pm
Subject: Re: a little on Late Wilder
he was never better.
>
> Is it in 'Scope? The IMDb says it was shot (by Jordan
Cronenweth!!)
> in Panavision, but TCM aired it in 1.33:1 and it didn't seem to
have
> been cropped - also the DVD is full-frame.
>
> -Jaime
It's Panavison, and the picture's Symboliste qualities are severely
impaired when it's shown cropped. For example, when Matthau
approaches Sarandon's dressing room door, I don't think you can see
the reversed images on the movie screen behind him, which are
newsreel shots of the May Day parade in Moscow. The Great Reporter is
behind the scenes of History, but he can't read the handrwiting on
the wall because, from where he's standing, it's written backwards.
Things like that are cropped out throughout the tape version I have,
and any time the film is shown on tv.
On the other hand the next symbol is in-frame: when Matthau plucks
the star off the poster for All Quiet on the Western Front to use as
a fake badge when he rousts Sarandon, thereby expressing Wilder's
opinion that the picture only deserved three stars.
Lewis Milestone, of course, also directed the little-seen first
version of The Front Page, with Adolf Menjou, which is blatantly
Marxist. Wilder's Front Page is Freudian. That's why the psychiatrist
has to be forcibly ejected from the film (a la the end of Disorderly
Orderly), which becomes a series of images with no one to comment on
them (as opposed to a film like State of Siege, say, where there's an
internal commentator to make sure the dummies in the audience get the
politics), a long dirty joke for which no one knows the punchline.
My favorite joke is the last one, at the end of the Graffiti-style
update on what became of the characters afterward: we learn that the
shrink, who has been castrated by Austin Pendleton, wrote a book
called The Joy of Impotence, WHICH BECAME A BEST-SELLER.
11881
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 8:58pm
Subject: Re: Wilder/Milestone/FRONT PAGES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> It's Panavison, and the picture's Symboliste qualities are
severely
> impaired when it's shown cropped.
For example, when Matthau
> approaches Sarandon's dressing room door, I don't think you can
see
> the reversed images on the movie screen behind him, which are
> newsreel shots of the May Day parade in Moscow. The Great Reporter
is
> behind the scenes of History, but he can't read the handrwiting on
> the wall because, from where he's standing, it's written
backwards.
> Things like that are cropped out throughout the tape version I
have,
> and any time the film is shown on tv.
Aw, shit! What the hell happened with TCM - if they couldn't find
a 'Scope print to put on the air, something's wrong.
> On the other hand the next symbol is in-frame: when Matthau plucks
> the star off the poster for All Quiet on the Western Front to use
as
> a fake badge when he rousts Sarandon, thereby expressing Wilder's
> opinion that the picture only deserved three stars.
>
> Lewis Milestone, of course, also directed the little-seen first
> version of The Front Page, with Adolf Menjou, which is blatantly
> Marxist. Wilder's Front Page is Freudian.
Sam Fuller recalls a colorful story about how some drunken soldier
almost took a shot at Menjou at a USO show, but failed to explain
why, except that he went on to name names at the HUAC hearings. (In
other words, the soldier could predict the future?)
It's been so long since I saw the first one, I can scarcely remember
anything about it. But I recently saw FIVE STAR FINAL, also a Best
Picture nominee about the 1930s press (from the following year), not
too shabby, good Edward G. Robinson performance.
-Jaime
11882
From:
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 5:12pm
Subject: French DVD subtitles
Now that I'm no longer living in Montréal, the only practice I get with my
French is on DVD subtitles. But I've noticed something extremely odd on several
DVDs that purport to have French subtitles. Nothing will be subtitled except
signs. So, for example, none of the dialogue has subtitles but a "No Swimming"
sign will. The only DVD I can remember this happening on was Club Dread
(awful, awful movie) but there were definitely several others. Am I doing something
wrong with my DVD player or...well, it doesn't seem like an oversight per se
since SOME of the film is subtitled but is it a glitch on the part of the
manufacturers?
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11883
From: Josh Mabe
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 10:34pm
Subject: Luis's Mom and her amnesia
Does anyone know the source for Bunuel's comments about his mother
and her loss of memory? I know I've seen his comments in other
places, but I ran across them recently in something by Oliver Sacks,
and I'm wondering where they are originally from.
Thanks,
Josh Mabe
PS. Speaking of memory and films (per Elizabeth's question), I am
always 'misplacing' scenes and characters in films (placing them in
the wrong film - switching them around). And often I can't remember
stories at all (especially endings - which is odd), but I am always
able to remember the exact camera and character movements.
11884
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Tue Jul 6, 2004 10:48pm
Subject: David Lynch's parents in auto wreck
Early this morning on his website, DavidLynch.com, it was reported
that his parents were involved in an car accident. His mother was
killed and his father is being treated for a concussion.
-Jaime
11885
From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 0:14am
Subject: Andre de Toth's Day of the Outlaw
This is a report on "Day of the Outlaw," which I saw for the umpteenth
time on Sunday, but for the first time in 35mm, at the Film Center (aka
the "Gene Siskel Film Center) in Chicago.
After having claimed that the film even survived television pretty well,
I have to say that 35mm made a big difference, even over 16mm. One of my
all time favorite films just got even greater.
The print was a bit warped, and apparently they had serious problems at
the earlier show on Friday, but using different projectors on Sunday
aside from some side focus problems it looked great. There was lots of
detail and great contrast, much better than in 16mm, and the contrast
was much better, with richer blacks, than in the 16mms I have seen.
At least as important was the effect of showing it with the correct
masking, 1.85:1. Of course on TV and in 16mm it would be seen in 1.33:1.
(Footnote: the late Roger McNiven, or Roger & Howie fame -- as discussed
earlier on this list, they show 16mm prints of hard to see films by
Hollywood autuers in their apartment in New York in the first half of
the 1970s -- had a 16mm projector aperture plate designed that allowed
1.85:1, and could switch between that at 1.33:1. But I don't think I
ever saw him project "Day of the Outlaw" that way, and this scheme
doesn't always work for 16mm prints, as I had to explain to him once,
because sometimes the original films were shot masked, so that the 35mm
image would be 1.85:1, or 1.66:1, which means that the 16mm and TV
versions would be missing the sides rather than showing too much at the
top and bottom, and thus masking them at the top and bottom would merely
compound the felony.)
Anyway, the great landscape pans, of which there are between 3 and 5
depending on how you count them, were even tighter, tauter, more
intense, more exclusionary, and "colder." If ever a film were "cold" in
both the literal and abstract senses of the word, it's this one, whereas
another snow movie, "The Savage Innocents," is arguably rather "hot."
The interiors got a lot greater, and resemble the landscape pans even
more. These ordinary wooden building interiors are now framed to a
similar effect, tending to exclude sympathetic human emotions in favor
of something else.
I even liked the overblown music, and with some exceptions I usually
dislike the music even in great Hollywood films. Sirk uses music pretty
well, such as those on-the-surface stupid choruses in "Magnificent
Obsession." But as John Ford once said, it seems a little inappropriate
to have a man crawling alone across the desert with the Philadelphia
Orchestra behind him. And there are music moments I really hate --
Tiomkin's chords accompanying the stabbing in "Red River," for example.
Anyway, in "Day of the Outlaw," the music emphasized the melodramatic,
even operatic qualities of this tragedy, from early on, with the blare
that follows the lines "pretty wife Helen."
The combination of the proper masking and greater detail wound up making
the film much more moving to me on a human level than it had been
before. I'm rarely deeply moved unless style and story are intersecting,
but they do so incredibly well here. The key moment is the line I
already quoted. (Spoliers ahead.) Blaise Starrett (Robert Ryan) is about
to lead the outlaws on a trip that most think will be their escape but
is actually hopeless. The leader, Jack Bruhn (Burl Ives), finds out that
it's hopeless but agrees to go anyway to spare his honor and the town.
Just before they start, he says something like, "I know what I'm doin',
and I know what Gene's doin,' but what about you? What's your reason for
wanting to die." When Starrett doesn't give him a reason, Bruhn says, "I
guess every fool has his reason."
This is not exactly a line of Shakespearean originality, but I
remembered it well enough to quote it, and already thought it was key,
but only this time, after having heard it in the film so many times
before, did it move me to tears. This is the real mystery of cinema (and
art in general): that things as subtle as framing and detail and
contrast can change the power of what might seem like ordinary story
elements.
There are moments in narrative films when all the power of the style
comes to rest, almost as if being focused by a lens, on an object or
image or narrative element. I would actually claim this for the
hilarious moment when the director Jack Andrus (Kirk Douglas) kicks the
unruly Italian actress in the butt in "Two Weeks in Another Town." It's
equally true for the moment where (small spoiler) Bama (Dean Martin)
removes his hat at the end of "Some Came Running," an actor's gesture
which rhymes with the final view down the river that follows. And there
are lines like "how far we've come from the river" at the end of
"Written on the End," when Marylee's subsequent tears should be our own.
And there's the image of the potter again at his wheel near the end of
"Ugetsu."
Another thing that happened for me with this line in "Day of the Outlaw"
is that I felt I understood its meaning in the context of the film for
the first time. Life is hopeless anyway; we cannot hope to comprehend,
let alone master, the world, which will kill us all in the end -- these
are de Toth's key themes, and they underlie the taut surfaces he
creates, even when mitigated by an apparently happy or partly happy
ending. And so the reasons for the things we do are all fool's reasons,
even when Blaise's actual "reason" is a deeply honorable and deeply
redemptive one. "Every fool has his reasons" is a metaphor for the
arbitrariness but necessity of some sort of action in the face of an
absurd existence -- though I don't want to claim de Toth as a
particularly complex existentialist either.
The last 23 minutes, by my watch (though it depends on where you start
counting) remains one of the greatest episodes of delirium in film
history. One reason it's so great is that the shifts in direction from
shot to shot, and occasionally within shots, create the sense of men
going around in circles, in a labyrinth, in a way that's not at all
obvious at first. That is, a more self-conscious director, such as some
of the current period, might have set up complicated long takes to show
the men snaking around, and used editing to make the point more
calculated and obvious. De Toth's assemblage makes the point in a far
more subterranean manner, and instead of being obviously stylish in the
current mode it's scarier, more troubling, more absurd: no one knows
where they are, or where they're going, and looking out into the
distance (as Blaise does at one point) reveals nothing, as the
half-Cherokee character who observes Blaise's gaze also realizes. Nature
here is truly outside of the sphere of the human, presented in all its
unfeeling, er, coldness, as something close to what the earlier settlers
and travelers must have felt: it's utterly apart from us, utterly
hostile to us, and fundamentally unknowable.
Fred Camper
11886
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 0:28am
Subject: Re: Wilder/Milestone/FRONT PAGES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>
> Aw, shit! What the hell happened with TCM - if they couldn't find
> a 'Scope print to put on the air, something's wrong.
>
> -Jaime
TCM sometimes errs -- nobody's perfect. But Vistavision is NOT
Scope, and loses much less on a TV screen. (my recollection of the
film in a theater is closer to 1.85, actually).
JPC
11887
From: joe_mcelhaney
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 0:38am
Subject: Re: Luis's Mom and her amnesia
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Josh Mabe"
> Does anyone know the source for Bunuel's comments about his mother
> and her loss of memory? I know I've seen his comments in other
> places, but I ran across them recently in something by Oliver
Sacks,
> and I'm wondering where they are originally from.
>
Look in his memoirs, MY LAST SIGH. The anecdote is the very
beginning of the first chapter, "Memory."
11888
From: Nick
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 0:39am
Subject: Re: Luis's Mom and her amnesia
> Does anyone know the source for Bunuel's comments about his mother
> and her loss of memory? I know I've seen his comments in other
> places, but I ran across them recently in something by Oliver Sacks,
> and I'm wondering where they are originally from.
The very first page of his autobiography MY LAST BREATH (UK title). I
think it's also known as MY LAST SIGH.
It might even be on amazon.com - that "READ INSIDE!" feature...
-Nick Wrigley>-
11889
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 3:45am
Subject: Belle de Jout (was: Luis's Mom and her amnesia)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick
> > Does anyone know the source for Bunuel's comments about his mother
> > and her loss of memory? I know I've seen his comments in other
> > places, but I ran across them recently in something by Oliver
Sacks,
> > and I'm wondering where they are originally from.
>
>
> The very first page of his autobiography MY LAST BREATH (UK title).
I
> think it's also known as MY LAST SIGH.
>
> It might even be on amazon.com - that "READ INSIDE!" feature...
>
> -Nick Wrigley>-
LB didn't get Alzheimer's, but his memory was imperfect. He insists
in Objects of Desire, the book-length interview, that the sequence
with the necrophiliac Duke in Belle de Jour is reality, not daydream.
Carriere reports in his book on film language that they wrote it as
real, based on a true anecdote (one they presumably picked up doing
their research in Paris brothels), then made it a fantasy -- you can
see how in the published screenplay. But Michael Wood spends a
chapter in his excellent BFI monograph trying to reconcile the
director's statement with what's on-screen, which is obviously a
fantasy. Hey, he forgot!
By the way, that is one nasty little film. It's LB's Curse of
Frankenstein -- lacking the polish and budget of the later French
stuff, but brutal as hell if you don't shield yourself from it with a
lot of formalistic argle-bargle.
11890
From: Craig Keller
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 5:16am
Subject: New Issue of CinemaScope
I picked up the Summer numéro of CinemaScope today -- fantastic issue.
A few quick notes:
-It was great to take in Kent Jones's long defense of Assayas and
praise of 'Clean,' although I would have liked to read further
articulation of his thoughts regarding how Assayas's cinema stands
counter-posed versus the Bazinian realism of the New Wave (a pegging
which of course doesn't really work as a generalization)... although
maybe the real conclusion to be drawn is that the delineations are
largely arbitrary and maybe even non-existent. (Not suggesting that
Assayas = New Wave Addendum, but that "definitions by opposition"
rarely give us the whole picture of any artist.) Ironic though that
the same piece probably wouldn't have run (at least in the same form)
in KJ's home-base, Film Comment.
-Also nice to read Mark Peranson openly challenge at last (in English,
in North American print) all the buzzing hype for 'Old Boy,' 'Ghost in
the Shell 2,' and the general hyperflux aesthetic and ballyhoo of the
New Asian Genre Cinema. Not to mention tear Frémaux's "programming of
reconciliation" (and Tarantino) to shreds.
-News to me at least, from the back cover ad -- Wellspring has picked
up the North American distribution (and thus DVD) rights to Godard's
'Notre musique.' (Which will be released by Wellspring as 'Our Music,'
rather than retaining the French title.)
-To Jonathan: In the Global Discoveries section, where you mention the
running time of the French R2 Arte disc of 'Céline & Julie vont en
bateau,' and note the running time coming in at 186 minutes, six
minutes shorter than the previously documented run-time of 192 minutes
-- my guess is this would probably be due to the 4% PAL speedup,
although I could be wrong. (Although by my calculations it should be
closer to a little over 7-1/2 minutes shorter -- maybe additional
company-logo titles or anti-copyright scrolling text on the previous
video versions make up for that extra 1-1/2 minutes...?) It will be
interesting to see whether the piano music over the end titles
reappears on the (rumored) Criterion disc of the film -- unless this
was a new decision by Rivette..?
craig.
11891
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 5:33am
Subject: Friedkin's "Sorcerer"
Finally saw Friedkin's amazingly intense "Sorcerer" and enjoyed it
quite a bit. It got me wondering if the picture received ANY
favorable reviews when it was originally released?
Also, reading through Dan Sallitt's wonderful review of "The Hunted"
(http://www.24fpsmagazine.com/Archive/Hunted.html), I notice that the
numbers 3, 4 and 5 components of Friedkn's style hold true
for "Sorcerer" as well: the cinema-verite style which captures the
character's opening origins, an acting manner that's laidback and
restrained (Bruno Cremer doesn't really emote any real feelings
despite the fact that he may never see his wife again), and a
tendency to loop (albeit secondary characters here).
-Aaron
11892
From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 7:38am
Subject: can't remember endings
I noted this 'can't remember endings' myself and attributed
it to leaving the theater as soon as the movie was over. Memory
probably needs a few minutes to crystalize in our brains and
when there is a new influx of 'outside of the film / theater'
info, the last part of the film doesn't get well grounded in
our minds.
I sometimes sit through the credits with my eyes closed to allow
the film to get stored completely.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Josh Mabe"
And often I can't remember
> stories at all (especially endings - which is odd), but I am always
> able to remember the exact camera and character movements.
11893
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 7:39am
Subject: Re: Friedkin's "Sorcerer"
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Graham"
> Finally saw Friedkin's amazingly intense "Sorcerer" and enjoyed it
> quite a bit. It got me wondering if the picture received ANY
> favorable reviews when it was originally released?
>
> Also, reading through Dan Sallitt's wonderful review of "The Hunted"
> (http://www.24fpsmagazine.com/Archive/Hunted.html), I notice that the
> numbers 3, 4 and 5 components of Friedkn's style hold true
> for "Sorcerer" as well: the cinema-verite style which captures the
> character's opening origins, an acting manner that's laidback and
> restrained (Bruno Cremer doesn't really emote any real feelings
> despite the fact that he may never see his wife again), and a
> tendency to loop (albeit secondary characters here).
>
> -Aaron
If you found "Sorcerer" intense, then you will probably get a heart
attack if watching the original which has more intensity during the
credits alone; "Le Salaire de la peur" by Clouzot. Friedkin even had
the nerve to use the translated title "Wages of Fear" as the
alternative title.
I find "Sorcerer" incredible boring and pastiche. I know that several
here think highly of Friendkin, even consider "The Hunted" a great
film; Why I cannot understand. Where Friedkin has a thematic signature
of the the rejected loner who works within a system against the
system, I find that, despite showing that he is a very skilled
director when he has a good script, he often has gotten / chosen (?)
bad scripts and thus made openly bad films, seriously flawed in the
narrative, for some reason, which either is financial or naive pursuit
of his auteurism.
Henrik
11894
From: joe_mcelhaney
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 0:51pm
Subject: Re: Belle de Jout (was: Luis's Mom and her amnesia)
>
> LB didn't get Alzheimer's, but his memory was imperfect. He insists
> in Objects of Desire, the book-length interview, that the sequence
> with the necrophiliac Duke in Belle de Jour is reality, not
>daydream. Carriere reports in his book on film language that they
>wrote it as real, based on a true anecdote (one they presumably
>picked up doing their research in Paris brothels), then made it a
>fantasy -- you can see how in the published screenplay. But Michael
>Wood spends a chapter in his excellent BFI monograph trying to
>reconcile the director's statement with what's on-screen, which is
>obviously a fantasy. Hey, he forgot!
Oh, I don't know...I think that the sequence invites us to read it
simultaneously as fantasy (or dream) and reality. That's why it's so
interesting. I'd have to look at the entire film again but I seem to
remember that this is a key scene in which the film's concern with
placing the space and the moment in which Deneuve is dreaming or
having her fantasies declines, reaching its culmination with the
film's final sequence. In terms of the scene with the Duke, there are
cues that link it up with the opening dream/fantasy: the bells on the
soundtrack, the presence of the coachman, the Duke's reference to
cats, etc. And there is also the way that Bunuel takes us out of the
Duke sequence by cutting to Deneuve's empty bed, the primary place of
sleep and dreams. But by this time, Deneuve has thoroughly become
Belle de Jour and her encounter with the Duke seems entirely logical
within the world of prostitution, which in this film is always tied
to fantasy scenarios. Even that cut to the bed can be read as both a
genuine cue pointing towards the world of dreams and an ambiguous one
in that the bed is turned down and she hasn't even gone to sleep
yet. Michael Wood may have gone over all this in his monograph. I
haven't read it. But I do think it's important to retain some
possibility of the real in this sequence. I think that Deneuve's
character has moved beyond simple fantasies by this point.
11895
From: Nick
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 1:31pm
Subject: Re: Celine et Julie
> It will be interesting to see whether the piano music over the end
> titles
> reappears on the (rumored) Criterion disc of the film -- unless this
> was a new decision by Rivette..?
New Yorker have recently said, in an email, that they will be releasing
it.
Natch.
Expect another PAL > NTSC conversion (because they can't be bothered
going to the expense that Criterion go to and doing their own HD
transfer especially for NTSC.)
I live in hope but expect the worst. Perhaps Artificial Eye will get it
and then we'll have a nice English version.
-Nick Wrigley>-
11896
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 1:37pm
Subject: Re: Belle de Jout (was: Luis's Mom and her amnesia)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "joe_mcelhaney"
> >
> > Oh, I don't know...I think that the sequence invites us to read
it
> simultaneously as fantasy (or dream) and reality. That's why it's
so
> interesting.
... and very consistent with Bunuel's and Surrealism's objective
to abolish the barriers between fantasy and reality, as best
expressed in Breton's famous statement in the Second Manifesto
(1930): "Everything leads us to believe that there exists a certain
point of the mind from which life and death, the real and the
imaginary, past and future... cease to be perceived contradictorily.
The surrealist activity has no other motivation than the hope to
determine that point..."
11897
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 1:57pm
Subject: Buñuel's book
The recent talk of a potentially more complete version of the Hitch-Truffaut
book got me also thinking about Buñuel's splendid MY LAST SIGH/BREATH: I've
read (I think in a piece by Jonathan) that the English version, now
reprinted a few times, is only about two thirds of the French (I think
French) original. (Was this the publisher's decision? The translator's?) Can
anyone confirm or deny this? And give any indication of what's missing? If
it's true, that would be a great book to re-issue properly one day: although
publishers, as we know, rarely like to revise such things so completely!
Adrian
11898
From: Michael Lieberman
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 3:07pm
Subject: Re: Celine et Julie / New Yorker DVDs
I've been weary of the New Yorker DVDs. I picked up "The Son" and there was some pretty horrendous ghosting here and there. And to think, they just released "Lancelot of the Lake" and "A Man Escaped", as well as "La Belle
Noiseuse." Are those just as badly PAL transferred?
ML
----- Original Message -----
From: Nick
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:31:06 +0100
To: a_film_by@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [a_film_by] Celine et Julie
> It will be interesting to see whether the piano music over the end
> titles
> reappears on the (rumored) Criterion disc of the film -- unless this
> was a new decision by Rivette..?
New Yorker have recently said, in an email, that they will be releasing
it.
Natch.
Expect another PAL > NTSC conversion (because they can't be bothered
going to the expense that Criterion go to and doing their own HD
transfer especially for NTSC.)
I live in hope but expect the worst. Perhaps Artificial Eye will get it
and then we'll have a nice English version.
-Nick Wrigley>-
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor | |
| |
Yahoo! Groups Links
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">mailto:a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--
_______________________________________________
Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free!
http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143
11899
From: joe_mcelhaney
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 3:39pm
Subject: Re: Celine et Julie / New Yorker DVDs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Lieberman"
> I've been weary of the New Yorker DVDs. I picked up "The Son" and
there was some pretty horrendous ghosting here and there. And to
think, they just released "Lancelot of the Lake" and "A Man Escaped",
as well as "La Belle
> Noiseuse." Are those just as badly PAL transferred?
I have A MAN ESCAPED but haven't look at it yet. But I did look at my
LA BELLE NOISEUSE disc and it ain't much. The usual PAL transfer.
I'm not returning it. I love the film and the disc is better than
nothing. But still... Anyway, DVD Beaver reviews both the Rivette
and the Bresson discs and apparently the Bressons are also PAL
transfers.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nick
> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:31:06 +0100
> To: a_film_by@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [a_film_by] Celine et Julie
>
>
>
>
>
> > It will be interesting to see whether the piano music over the
end
> > titles
> > reappears on the (rumored) Criterion disc of the film -- unless
this
> > was a new decision by Rivette..?
>
> New Yorker have recently said, in an email, that they will be
releasing
> it.
>
> Natch.
>
> Expect another PAL > NTSC conversion (because they can't be
bothered
> going to the expense that Criterion go to and doing their own HD
> transfer especially for NTSC.)
>
> I live in hope but expect the worst. Perhaps Artificial Eye will
get it
> and then we'll have a nice English version.
>
> -Nick Wrigley>-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor | |
| |
M=288055.5065205.6192284.2004029/D=groups/S=:HM/A=2193924/rand=8005919 19"> |
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
m/group/a_film_by/
>- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
subject=Unsubscribe">a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes
free!
> http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143
11900
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Jul 7, 2004 3:51pm
Subject: Re: Celine et Julie / New Yorker DVDs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "joe_mcelhaney"
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Lieberman"
>
> > I've been weary of the New Yorker DVDs. I picked up "The Son" and
> there was some pretty horrendous ghosting here and there. And to
> think, they just released "Lancelot of the Lake" and "A Man
Escaped",
> as well as "La Belle
> > Noiseuse." Are those just as badly PAL transferred?
>
>
> I have A MAN ESCAPED but haven't look at it yet. But I did look at
my
> LA BELLE NOISEUSE disc and it ain't much. The usual PAL transfer.
> I'm not returning it. I love the film and the disc is better than
> nothing. But still... Anyway, DVD Beaver reviews both the Rivette
> and the Bresson discs and apparently the Bressons are also PAL
> transfers.
I have seen their "A MAN ESCAPED" last week and it is quite decent.
Hope "CELINE" turns out as good.
JPC
Home Film Art Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits) Links About Contact