Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact
a_film_by Main Page
Posts From the Internet Film Discussion Group, a_film_by
This group is dedicated to discussing film as art
from an auteurist perspective. The index to these files of posts can be found at http://www.fredcamper.com/afilmby/ The purpose of these files is to make our posts more accessible, for downloading and reading and to search engines.
Important: The copyright of each post below is owned by the
person who wrote the post, and reproducing it in any form requires
that person's permission.
It is possible to email the author of any post by finding a post
they have written in the a_film_by archives at
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/messages and
emailing them from that Web site.
14201
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 9:59pm
Subject: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ebiri@a... wrote:
> JPC:
>
> >
> > I was unaware of those NY screenings. Does that invalidate
> > Jonathan's information that Nicholson owns the rights and refuses
> to
> > show the film?
> >
>
>
> I don't know if any of this invalidates it (it's possible Nicholson
> is just preventing a DVD release, and allowing for rare
screenings),
> but THE PASSENGER was available on VHS for a long time, until
> relatively recently.
In 1993, when an otherwise comprehensive Antonioni retrospective came
through Chicago and elsewhere, Nicholson prevented THE PASSENGER from
being included in itrding to what I wrote at the time, the video that
was circulating then was both cut and panned-and-scanned.
14202
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:02pm
Subject: Shaw Brother's Directors ( Was: Miramax monopolism)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
wrote:
>
>
> Re: CY -- I still haven't managed to see any of his films (gasps
from
> the crowd). A gaping lacuna, yes. Especially during a time
when the
> world needs to be reminded that Ang Lee didn't invent wuxia
pien. Your
> description makes his films sound even more tantalizing than
before.
Well Chor Yuen has a few bad ones as well -- "Legend of the
Bat" is exposition and dialogue heavy, and mechanically moves
from one big set piece to the next-- and while I like when he
moves the camera to reposition the frame, he tends to rely on
zooms way too much at times. (Unless used well, I tend to find
zooms lazy, mechanical and ugly.) I tend to think that it may be
his investment or interest in the material.
The most striking elements, to me, of Chor Yuen's films are his
use of set design and color- particularly red- and when he works
the designs into an intergrated whole with camera placement
and movement --such as in "Death Duel"-- the results are
impressive. ( I love how he always is able to render the moon in
his Shaw Studio landscapes and sometimes use it as a source
of light.) The use of reds and blacks also give his film a very
brooding atmosphere, which lends to the final feeling of
overwhelming feeling of fatalism, as almost everyone is dead as
"The End" appears.
In his book on Hong Kong cinema, Stephen Teo praises the
work of Li Han-Xiang up to the mid- 60's and then believes that
he slipped into hackdom. (After leaving the Shaw Brothers and
creating his own independent company in the 70's.) I have
unfortunately only seen his work from the late 60's on, and it's
not very interesting. (Though his films concerning Tzu Hsi :
"Burning of the Imperial Palace", "Reign Behind a Curtain" and
the late 80's version of "The Empress Dowanger " are of note for
comparing the location photography over studio shooting.)
Michael Worrall
14203
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:10pm
Subject: Re: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
> The ending doesn't show a death, but rather a
> disappearance. Remember, Jenny Runacre says "I never
> knew him" when shown the body.
That's interesting, but it doesn't change the essential function of the
shot. Which, oddly, is to hide an event. The camera's slow motion
through space is timed to make a major upheaval in the film's world seem
like a gradual, incremental movement. Which is an interesting concept,
but to do it by moving the camera and the microphone in the wrong
direction seems, I dunno, a little too conceptual, so that the space and
time qualities of the shot feel to me as if they are defeated, cancelled
by the trick.
I love STORY OF A LOVE AFFAIR, IL GRIDO, L'AVVENTURA, and BLOWUP. But,
to me, Antonioni is one of those superbly talented guys who sometimes
seems to display questionable judgment about what to do with his talent.
- Dan
14204
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:28pm
Subject: Shaw Bros. Directors: was Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
wrote:
> Kevin Lee wrote:
>
> >All year long I have avoided going to video stores in Chinatown or
Flushing
> >because I can't afford to blow $50 on DVDs every visit.
> >
> I haven't tried it yet, but there seems to be a website out there
in the
> vein of Netflix which features a good selection of HK DVDs:
> http://www.nicheflix.com/
>
>
> >I place Chor (whose social determinist worldview seems to value
> >Nietzsche and Machiavelli over Confucius) alongside Chang and Hu
as the
> >best of the Shaw-teurs (I'm still not quite convinced of Lau Kar
Leung).
> >
> Re: CC -- Not quite in a class with King Hu, but a truly wonderful
> filmmaker in his own right. a major contributor to the gay
> aesthetic, if there is such a thing, though I have no idea whether
he
> was gay.
>
> He was.
> Re: LKL -- You're right, overall he's probably among the weaker of
the
> bunch -- he has done a number of real clunkers. I admire him more
as a
> performer than as a director; he has the reflexes of a rattlesnake
and
> an astounding onscreen presence. But there are a few masterpieces
in
> his filmography,
I assume his kung fu domestic comedies -- based on a true story about
his parents' weddin night -- are a big influence on the Bride-Bill
story and final showdown in Kill Bill.
I'm glad these first generation HK directors are becoming better
known and more available. I wish the same would happen for the
forgotten Japanese directors of Oshima's era. Now that it is
happening for Masamura, where are the Yoshida and Hani DVDs?
14205
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:30pm
Subject: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> I love STORY OF A LOVE AFFAIR, IL GRIDO, L'AVVENTURA, and BLOWUP.
But,
> to me, Antonioni is one of those superbly talented guys who
sometimes
> seems to display questionable judgment about what to do with his
talent.
> - Dan
For me, RED DESERT is his best film, and ZABRISKIE POINT not far
behind. I'm not sure I've caught up with IDENTIFICATION and CLOUDS
yet.
14206
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 11:21pm
Subject: Re: Shaw Bros. Directors: was Miramax monopolism
> >
> > He was.
>
> > Re: LKL -- You're right, overall he's probably among the weaker
of
> the
> > bunch -- he has done a number of real clunkers. I admire him more
> as a
> > performer than as a director; he has the reflexes of a
rattlesnake
> and
> > an astounding onscreen presence. But there are a few
masterpieces
> in
> > his filmography,
>
> I assume his kung fu domestic comedies -- based on a true story
about
> his parents' weddin night -- are a big influence on the Bride-Bill
> story and final showdown in Kill Bill.
>
> I'm glad these first generation HK directors are becoming better
> known and more available. I wish the same would happen for the
> forgotten Japanese directors of Oshima's era. Now that it is
> happening for Masamura, where are the Yoshida and Hani DVDs?
When Ric Meyers began reviewing the early Shaw Brothers re-releases
in ASIAN CULT CINEMA, he spoke very highly about the Chor Yuen films
in comparison to those of Chang Cheh which already had a theatrical
and video release previously.
Every director had some problem films. As we know, an auteur does not
make every film a good one and a "mise-en-scenerist" does not always
do mediocre films. However, the 50s and 60s films of Li Han-hsiang
are really worth waiting for especially the melodramas he directed
with Li-li-hua of King Hu's FATE OF LEE KHAN as well as those
featuring King Hu. Hopefully, Hu's first Shaw Brothers feature SONS
OF THE GOOD EARTH should not be long in appearing.
Tony Leung Kar-fai's roles in Li Han-siang's later films are worth
viewing. They got him "blacklisted" at the time when the anti-
Mainland Taiwan market took exception to him working in China. I
believe he was reduced to selling trainers on the streets of Hong
Kong until he returned to films with PEOPLE'S HERO and PRISON ON
FIRE.
However, for those familiar with Gordon Liu's work with Lau-
Kar Leung, the parodic RETURN TO THE 36TH CHAMBER is worth viewing.
THE 36TH CHAMBER OF SHAOLIN is a masterpiece and one cringed at the
idea of a comic sequel. But it really worked thanks to the director
and Gordon Liu.
Anyway, lots of interesting things to see from an auteurist and
visually excellent mise-en-scene perspective - to say nothing about
the different styles of martial arts choreography. Let us hope that
Harvey will not try to prevent even the VCD versions and Region 3 DVD
from circulating in the USA.
Tony Williams
14207
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Tue Aug 17, 2004 11:51pm
Subject: Re: Shaw Bros. Directors: was Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000" <
>
>. However, the 50s and 60s films of Li Han-hsiang
> are really worth waiting for especially the melodramas he directed
> with Li-li-hua of King Hu's FATE OF LEE KHAN as well as those
> featuring King Hu. Hopefully, Hu's first Shaw Brothers feature SONS
> OF THE GOOD EARTH should not be long in appearing.
Yes, I have been wanting to see them. I like Teo's book and trust his
evaluation, so I have held off on making any conclusions to Li Han-
hsiang.
>
> Tony Leung Kar-fai's roles in Li Han-siang's later films are worth
> viewing. They got him "blacklisted" at the time when the anti-
> Mainland Taiwan market took exception to him working in China. I
> believe he was reduced to selling trainers on the streets of Hong
> Kong until he returned to films with PEOPLE'S HERO and PRISON ON
> FIRE.
I wanted to mention that the films " Burning of the Imperial Palace"
and "Reign Behind a Curtain" were also of interest for Tony Leung Kar-
fai, but refrained because I get the two Tony's mixed up, so thanks for
the mentioning it.
Michael Worrall
14208
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 0:23am
Subject: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
Apologies to those list members I've already asked/bothered about this,
but I'm still looking to ID the interviewer in this 1965 Carl Dreyer
interview, which took place in New York:
http://mastersofcinema.org/mocmp3/dreyer.mp3
I've asked many folks, and have had multiple names put forward but
no-one's absolutely sure.
(The names put forward are: Stanley Kauffman, Charles Thomas Samuels,
and Richard Roud.)
The interviewer is going to go down in the annals of time as "unknown
interviewer" on a project I'm working on if I can't discover who it is
in the next two days. Which seems a real shame.
So here's a shout out, please ask anyone who you think might know!
Thanks!
-Nick Wrigley>-
14209
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:21am
Subject: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > I love STORY OF A LOVE AFFAIR, IL GRIDO, L'AVVENTURA, and
BLOWUP.
> But,
> > to me, Antonioni is one of those superbly talented guys who
> sometimes
> > seems to display questionable judgment about what to do with his
> talent.
> > - Dan
>
Doesn't that describe most talented people (I was going to
say "most of us" but good manners prompt "present company excepted"
of course)?
14210
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:21am
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley
wrote:
> Apologies to those list members I've already asked/bothered about
this,
> but I'm still looking to ID the interviewer in this 1965 Carl
Dreyer
> interview, which took place in New York:
>
For whatever it's worth, I knew Roud pretty well, and believe I
would have recognized his voice if it had been him. Have you tried
emailing The New Republic in order to ask Kauffmann himself if he
was the one?
JR
> http://mastersofcinema.org/mocmp3/dreyer.mp3
>
>
> I've asked many folks, and have had multiple names put forward but
> no-one's absolutely sure.
> (The names put forward are: Stanley Kauffman, Charles Thomas
Samuels,
> and Richard Roud.)
>
> The interviewer is going to go down in the annals of time
as "unknown
> interviewer" on a project I'm working on if I can't discover who
it is
> in the next two days. Which seems a real shame.
>
> So here's a shout out, please ask anyone who you think might know!
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Nick Wrigley>-
14211
From: Brian Darr
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:27am
Subject: Shaw Brothers in SF
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
> Celestial Pictures has also released the films in VCD, and they
> are the best VCD I have seen. You can find them for as low as
> 7.50 Chinatown here in SF, but I have yet to find an Asian video
> store here that rents them. ( Ihear that there is going to be a
> Shaw Brothers retrospective in NYC which I hopes makes it over
> to SF or the PFA)
In my neighborhood (the Richmond) there's a store that sells them for
$6.99 and I've picked up a few including "Eight Diagram Pole Fighter"-
haven't watched it yet.
The SF public library has started putting a few of the VCDs in their
collection too. I've seen them at the Main and the Richmond Branches.
As for the retrospective, I wouldn't hold your breath on the PFA
bringing it in; I hear that when they showed a few of them at a
mini-retro in May 2003 (including "Intimate Confessions of a Chinese
Courtesan" and "36th Chamber of Shaolin") it was one of the most
poorly-attended programs they''ve run.
In the meantime, don't forget that the Four Star is showing "One-Armed
Swordsman" and "Lady General Hua-Mulan" as part of the Asian Film
Festival this weekend. I'll be there.
-brian
14212
From: Jack Angstreich
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:32am
Subject: Re: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
It seems likely that Cronenberg would have preferred better actors
early in his career - and what director wouldn't? I am merely asserting
that most of his films would not be fatally diminished by the presence
of indifferent actors, and that this is true of most great directors.
Probably directors like Cassavetes, Garrel, or Eustache, who seem to
greatly rely on performance, would be more severely compromised than
most of the masters in the auteurist canon would be by indifferent
actors: this is because auteurism is focussed upon mise-en-scene, and
acting is usually a less crucial element in this. There is also
probably a good example of an excellent director who never was
especially interested in acting but who was able to produce powerful
work by purely visual means.
Jack Angstreich
On Aug 17, 2004, at 1:58 PM, cairnsdavid1967 wrote:
> I wouldn't call "Shivers" or "Rabid" "hackwork" although I don't
recall
> the direction of actors being striking;
Nevertheless, it was, quite literally, striking: Cronenberg resorted
to slapping an actress (with her consent) to get her to cry. Think
this shows that he was prepared to go to considerable pains (her's)
to get the best performances possible under the circumstances.
While I'm certain Cronenberg has improved over the years as a
director of actors, perhaps helped by his own experience as a very
able performer, I'm equally sure his early work is marred more by the
limitations of the casts available to him than by indifference on his
part. As his career has progressed he has been able to attract the
finest actors to work with him, so naturally he has been able to get
more out of them.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14213
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:34am
Subject: Re: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
> For whatever it's worth, I knew Roud pretty well, and believe I
> would have recognized his voice if it had been him. Have you tried
> emailing The New Republic in order to ask Kauffmann himself if he was
> the one?
I haven't done that, and will do it now. Thanks. ---- The Drum/Drum
book was putting me off that lead - it quotes Kauffmann's GERTRUD
review in the NYTimes, "This lady is not only unappealing, she is
limited to about one and half facial expressions and somewhat less
emotional fire."
Bordwell told me that Roud brought GERTRUD to the NY Film festival (and
was criticized for it) - so thanks for your voice information on that
too.
Drum/Drum mentions that Dreyer visited NY in September 1965, where
GERTRUD played 2,600 sold out seats at Linclon Center (but he wasn't
satisfied with the American subtitles).
-Nick>-
14214
From: Doug Cummings
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:45am
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
Nick, is this from the "Living Opinion" BBC series? If so, I can
probably figure it out...
Doug
14215
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:57am
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
> Nick, is this from the "Living Opinion" BBC series? If so, I can
> probably figure it out...
I doubt it's BBC. It was recorded in NY (for what, I don't know).
There's no audience on it, yet the interviewer says "Ladies and
Gentlemen" a few times as if he's addressing a radio audience?
I was sent the recording by a reader of carldreyer.com who got it via
interlibrary loan from somewhere in Ohio. No further info on the tape.
--
Some further Dreyer content, for those following this ---- THE PARSON'S
WIDOW is out on DVD next month from Image, USA (definitely coming this
time), featuring two Dreyer shorts.
...and Dreyer's MICHAEL will now be out late October, from Eureka/MoC
in the UK. The USA Kino version is due in December I believe.
-Nick>-
14216
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:22am
Subject: Re: Shaw Brothers in SF
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Darr"
wrote:
I think I know which one you are talking about --and hello to fellow
A_Film_By SFer-- is that the price for the new releases also? I am
going to watch "Eight Diagram Pole Fighter" again to see if my
impression of it against Chor Yuen still holds. (Though there is only
so much of an opinion I can make of a film on a VCD and a 19 inch
monitor.)
> The SF public library has started putting a few of the VCDs in their
> collection too. I've seen them at the Main and the Richmond Branches.
Yes, I now remember I saw some Shaw Brothers VCDs at the Excelsior
branch-- the area I live in-- and I had forgotten about that since the
location has been closed for remodeling.
> As for the retrospective, I wouldn't hold your breath on the PFA
> bringing it in; I hear that when they showed a few of them at a
> mini-retro in May 2003 (including "Intimate Confessions of a Chinese
> Courtesan" and "36th Chamber of Shaolin") it was one of the most
> poorly-attended programs they''ve run.
That's very dispiriting to hear.
>
> In the meantime, don't forget that the Four Star is showing "One-Armed
> Swordsman" and "Lady General Hua-Mulan" as part of the Asian Film
> Festival this weekend. I'll be there.
I didn't know that --just shows how pathetically out of touch I am with
what's going on in this town. Are the crowds there enthusiastic but
respectful, or mainly composed of snickering hipsters? (A friend had
Argento films ruined at the Roxie and De Toth's "Crime Wave" at the SF
International Film Festival destroyed by these types. The group behind
me at "Crime Wave" laughed at me when I asked them to please be quiet.)
I apologize to all if this too much of a local discussion.
Michael Worrall
14217
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:35am
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman wrote:
> Kevin Lee wrote:
> Re: CC -- Not quite in a class with King Hu, but a truly wonderful
> filmmaker in his own right. My favorites: _The Water Margin_, _The
> Heroic Ones_, _The Five Venoms_, _Crippled Avengers_, _Invincible
> Shaolin_, _Killer Army_, _Masked Avengers_, _Two Champions of
Shaolin_,
> _Chinese Super Ninja_. I am eager to see _One-Armed Swordsman_, now
> that it's finally been released. There's something particularly
> striking about Chang's use of faces and costumes that recalls Cocteau,
> Anger, Genet, Fassbinder... Certainly a major contributor to the gay
> aesthetic, if there is such a thing, though I have no idea whether he
> was gay.
Ethan de Seife, in his sensesofcinema.com biography of Chang, refers to his
homosexuality as an "open secret", but he also brings up the issue of
"yanggang" -- the Chinese concept of intense brotherhood, which in Chang's
films can be read with more homoerotic undertones than, say, the films of
John Woo, but can also be read asexually as well. My point being that I
wouldn't want to stress the homoeroticism at the expense of pointing out the
cultural particularities that inform this code of conduct. I spent two years in a
country where grown men with wives and children held hands or put arms
over each others' shoulders in public spaces and no one thought twice of it.
> Re: LKL -- You're right, overall he's probably among the weaker of the
> bunch -- he has done a number of real clunkers. I admire him more as a
> performer than as a director; he has the reflexes of a rattlesnake and
> an astounding onscreen presence. But there are a few masterpieces in
> his filmography, notably _Mad Monkey Kung Fu_ and _Disciples of the 36th
> Chamber_ (both of which feature Hsiao Ho, who has to be the most
> incredible aerialist ever to step before a camera). _Heroes of the
> East_ is also pretty fantastic, and _Executioner from Shaolin_ certainly
> isn't bad (neither are the first two films of the _36th Chamber_
> trilogy, for that matter).
36th Chamber is a landmark in the "training" subgenre of wuxia, laying down
the rules of conduct followed by many a wuxia film to follow (not to mention
half a dozen Tom Cruise movies, though perhaps not by direct influence). But
it's also the kind of film that's instantly ripe for parody. I see Jackie Chan's
DRUNKEN MASTER as being as much a spoof of it as the second 36th
Chamber movie.
>
> I often feel as though the art of gesture in cinema died with Griffith,
> to make only the occassional attempt at resurrecting itself (in the work
> of Eisenstein, Maya Deren, Riefenstahl, King Hu, and a few others). One
> can only imagine what wonders Deren might have spun had she a virtuoso
> like Hsiao Ho at her disposal...
What about Leone? By gesture do you mean human physical gesture, or
cinematic gesture? In both cases have you seen any Guy Maddin? I'd say
Zhang Yimou's HERO is 75-80% gesture, (and only a third of them are
empty). It's no King Hu but it's still more "pure cinema" than Crouching Sell-
Out.
Kevin
> -Matt
14218
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:37am
Subject: Re: Shaw Brothers in SF
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Darr"
wrote:
>
> In my neighborhood (the Richmond) there's a store that sells them for
> $6.99 and I've picked up a few including "Eight Diagram Pole Fighter"-
> haven't watched it yet.
$10.50 in NYC Chinatown. Might be cheaper in Flushing. In the meantime I
can console myself with 3 Guru Dutt or Raj Kapoor movies for $10 at Jackson
Heights.
> As for the retrospective, I wouldn't hold your breath on the PFA
> bringing it in; I hear that when they showed a few of them at a
> mini-retro in May 2003 (including "Intimate Confessions of a Chinese
> Courtesan" and "36th Chamber of Shaolin") it was one of the most
> poorly-attended programs they''ve run.
Odd -- the expanded retro at Lincoln Center played to packed houses.
14219
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:47am
Subject: Re: Shaw Brother's Directors ( Was: Miramax monopolism)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
>
> In his book on Hong Kong cinema, Stephen Teo praises the
> work of Li Han-Xiang up to the mid- 60's and then believes that
> he slipped into hackdom. (After leaving the Shaw Brothers and
> creating his own independent company in the 70's.) I have
> unfortunately only seen his work from the late 60's on, and it's
> not very interesting. (Though his films concerning Tzu Hsi :
> "Burning of the Imperial Palace", "Reign Behind a Curtain" and
> the late 80's version of "The Empress Dowanger " are of note for
> comparing the location photography over studio shooting.)
I saw THE LOVE ETERNE in Berlin with Chris Fujiwara. We were both blown
away by the ending, otherwise there's a long stretch in the middle that just
plays like filmed Chinese opera on a soundstage decorated like a kitschy
wilderness. But there's some really bizarre gender stuff going on in that one.
The story, based on a famous legend, is about a girl who cross-dresses to go
to school and falls in love with a boy, who thinks his/her affection is purely
fraternal. If this isn't confusing enough, in the movie both parts (the girl who
dresses as a boy and the boy) are played by women!
14220
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:48am
Subject: Re: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
--- Jack Angstreich
wrote:
> It seems likely that Cronenberg would have preferred
> better actors
> early in his career - and what director wouldn't?
Hey, early in his career he had Barbara Steele.
Doesn't get any better than that.
But on the whole he's a conceptual filmmkaer. Everyone
in "Crahs" (his best film,IMO) is teriffic. But the
primary dramatic tension in the film is derived from
Cronenberg's attempt (wildly successful) to keep pace
with Ballard's concepts.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14221
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:50am
Subject: Re: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
--- Nick Wrigley wrote:
>
> Drum/Drum mentions that Dreyer visited NY in
> September 1965, where
> GERTRUD played 2,600 sold out seats at Linclon
> Center (but he wasn't
> satisfied with the American subtitles).
>
I was in one of those seats. And it was one of the
greatest moviegoing experiences of my life. The film
was so above the audience it terrified them.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14222
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:50am
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
> I think Chor Yeun is quite strong, "Death Duel" I think can stand
> besides "Confessions", but I have only seen one Lau Kar-leung,
> "The Eight Diagram Pole Fighter" and I was totally affected by the
> film's searing intenisty and may be cinematically more
> accomplished than anything I have seen by Chor Yuen. (Though
> if we get into a more lengthy discussion Kevin, I think we are
> appreciating the films for different reasons.)
>
for what you're talking about, I'd put King Hu first and Chang Cheh second.
But these movies aren't just great because their action sequences make for
great cinema -- there's 90 other minutes to these movies that can be
appreciated on many other levels; the problem is that too often these aspects
are neglected by fanboys on the hunt for exotic chopsocky, which has led to
the generally superficial reappropriation (and subsequent audience
appreciation) of the wuxia aesthetic in mainstream Hollywood product.
Kevin
14223
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:03am
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman wrote:
> Re: CC -- Not quite in a class with King Hu, but a truly wonderful
> filmmaker in his own right.
Chang relies more on pathos than Hu -- and if one's valuation of cinema has
little room for pathos, Hu's films certainly feel "cleaner" and more "cinematic".
though few filmmakers have been able to envision their dirty, sweaty, psycho-
sexual and corporeal fixations as cinematically as Chang Cheh.
There's something particularly
> striking about Chang's use of faces and costumes that recalls Cocteau,
> Anger, Genet, Fassbinder... Certainly a major contributor to the gay
> aesthetic, if there is such a thing, though I have no idea whether he
> was gay.
>
I can definitely see Anger (fetishism!) and maybe Fassbinder (sensualized
cruelty), not sure about Cocteau... though come to think of it, there's
something in how a number of protagonists in CC movies seem to move
through their film as if it were a projection of their own tragi-romanticized
demise (thus linking protagonist with director), that does seam Cocteau-ian
(ORPHEE, TESTAMENT OF ORPHEUS). I'm thinking of GOLDEN
SWALLOW, BLOOD BROTHERS, and VENGEANCE! Like Cocteau, Chang
also has a strong affinity for the stage and incorporated elements from Peking
Opera into his films (the masks, for example).
14224
From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:28am
Subject: Re: Fw: Sort of, kind of, well almost off-topic but not really
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> > Well, it is a film question but it's also a Broadway theater
question
> > really.
> >
> > Last night I was watching a 1958 kinescope of some of the
original B'way
> > cast of Kiss Me Kate (mainly, Alfred Drake and Patricia Morison,
whose
> voice
> > had aged badly in decade) and my wife and I got to speculating
on why
> > Drake, who was a huge star on B'way, never made it to Hollywood.
He is in
> > one film -- Tars and Spars -- during his prime and that's it.
Instead we
> get
> > Howard Keel, definitely a poor man's Drake even at his best. What
the heck
> > happened? It can't be because he looks like the young Orson
Welles, so I'm
> > assuming either he had a major skeleton in his closet or just
didn't want
> to
> > go west.
> >
> > Can any of you enlighten me?
mine the very same question, and he didn't have an explanation as to
why Alfred Drake – the biggest Broadway musical star of his era –
didn't have even a tentative movie career (Tars and Spars used to be
a perennial on New York`s Channel 5's Comedy Showcase on Saturday
afternoons in the early 60s, but I only recall Sid Ceasar, not
Drake). I also noted that John Raitt, the other premiere male
musical theatre of the `40s and `50s has only Pajama Game on his post-
stardom resume.
Which got me realizing that most of the big names of `40s and `50s
Broadway musicals were generally shunned by Hollywood. Barbara Cook
made no movies, and other Broadway stalwarts with paltry – if any –
film credits include Carol Channing, Russell Nype, Gwen Verdon, James
Mitchell, Ella Logan, Pat Stanley, Chita Rivera. Even Julie Andrews,
now a cinematicic legend, had to wait a decade after hitting it big
on stage in The Boy Friend to make her screen debut. So it would
seem that overall Hollywood actually wasn't all that interested in
importing Broadway stars (and sometimes when they did, they didn't
make proper use of them – such as MGM's underutilization of the
singular talents of Delores Gray) and that the likes of Gene Kelly
and Yul Brynner were exceptions not part of the rule.
14225
From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:52am
Subject: Re: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
David Ehrenstein wrote:
>
>>Drum/Drum mentions that Dreyer visited NY in
>>September 1965, where
>>GERTRUD played 2,600 sold out seats ...
>>
>>
>I was in one of those seats. And it was one of the
>greatest moviegoing experiences of my life. ....
>
Well, so was I, at 17. My memory is different, though; I remembrer that
only about two thirds of the seats were occupied, and that half of those
people left quietly during the movie. The rest of us gave the film, and
Dreyer, a five-minute standing ovation. That I was a part of that
standing ovation is one of the things I'm proudest of. I'm almost sure I
posted about this before, but it's worth repeating, though perhaps my
memory is off (David, do you have contradictoryh memories?) I am sure
that after the applause died downt Dreyer said, seemingly quite moved,
"Thank you from the bottom of my heart."
Some background is needed here. The film had reportedly been laughed off
the screen almost literally at various European festivals. It was
ridiculed by critics, including many who expressed admiration for
Dreyer's earlier films. One called it "a two hour study in sofas and
pianos," which of course to me seemed (and still seems) quite appealing;
an ostensibly narrative film that's really a study in furniture could be
great. In light of the film's "failure," New Yorkers made me feel proud,
for once, for receiving it sympathetically.
Theat event also put the nail in the coffin of the film art consensus
for me. I already knew that the way I understood film was hardly shared
by many, but to see this obvious, flat-out highly poetic masterpiece
ridiculed made clear to me that these people didn't understand ANYTHING.
Fred Camper
14226
From: Noel Vera
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:26am
Subject: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
> I'm equally sure his early work is marred more by the
> limitations of the casts available to him than by indifference on
his
> part. As his career has progressed he has been able to attract the
> finest actors to work with him, so naturally he has been able to
get
> more out of them.
While I do think this is partly true (but where do you draw the line
on 'early work'--pre Fly? Or pre-Scanners?), I'd point out Michael
Ironside's performance in Scanners and James Woods in Videodrome and
even Christopher Walken in The Dead Zone as being quite remarkable.
14227
From: Noel Vera
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:38am
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
> Re: LKL -- You're right, overall he's probably among the weaker of
the
> bunch
I do think he's every bit a master, it's just that his emphasis is
different. He makes it more of a point to try and be authentic--at
least as authentic as this genre will allow, and he has a real
obsession about showing the different fighting styles.
That doesn't mean he doesn't show any psychology in his characters.
Gordon Liu's disciple in 36th Chamber strikes this balance between
obedient loyalty and maverick spirit that has the temple befuddled
and off-balance (actually they both have each other off-balanced, to
their mutual benefit); the give-and-take that goes on between him
and the temple masters is the emotional core of the movie.
8 Diagram Pole Fighter is a great film, but I'd say his masterpiece
was 36th Chamber of Shaolin.
14228
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:46am
Subject: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
where do you draw the line
> on 'early work'--pre Fly? Or pre-Scanners?
Scanners and Videodrome are among his best films, but it was clear at
the time it came out that with The Dead Zone he had moved into a new
league visually.
On the other hand, Stereo is already a masterpiece on all levels. I
recently saw it and Crimes of the Future for the first time at the
Cinematheque in LA, and I was stunned at how good Stereo is (if
that's the one about the telepathy experiment). All the qualities of
the later work are there, although I would definitely recommend
seeing it if possible on a big screen.
14229
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:59am
Subject: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Rector"
wrote:
>
> > There are some interesting comments concerning Antonioni's
"China"
> here:
> > http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/jc12-
> 13folder/yukongmovedmt.html
> >
> > The descriptions of Antonioni's practice might reflect
Antonioni's
> > indifference to actors.
> >
> > Paul
>
>
> Thank you Paul!
You might also be interested in these articles from Film Quarterly
(Summer 1975 and Summer 1977).
Antonioni is interviewed about "China" in the first article.
http://66.108.51.239/antonioni-china.pdf
Umberto Eco interprets the response to the film in the second
article.
http://66.108.51.239/eco-antonioni.pdf
Paul
14230
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:00pm
Subject: Re: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
> David Ehrenstein wrote:
>
> I was in one of those seats. And it was one of the greatest moviegoing
> experiences of my life. ....
> Fred Camper wrote:
>
> Well, so was I, at 17. My memory is different, though; I remembrer
> that only about two thirds of the seats were occupied, and that half
> of those people left quietly during the movie. The rest of us gave the
> film, and Dreyer, a five-minute standing ovation. That I was a part of
> that standing ovation is one of the things I'm proudest of. I'm almost
> sure I posted about this before, but it's worth repeating, though
> perhaps my memory is off (David, do you have contradictoryh
> memories?) I am sure that after the applause died downt Dreyer said,
> seemingly quite moved, "Thank you from the bottom of my heart."
Thanks for these reminiscences David and Fred. Truly fascinating.
Tom Milne told me about how he saw the GERTRUD premiere in Paris with
Dreyer in attendance and people were leaving in droves after only 15
minutes.
I don't know if you have the Drum/Drum Dreyer book, Fred, but there's a
Dreyer quote about the Lincoln Center screening of GERTRUD:
"I like to listen to the public. A great surprise for me, a great joy
for me, was when GERTRUD was shown in Lincoln Center in New York with
2,600 seats sold, really sold, and there was an absolute silence, an
absolute interest in every single shot and every single situation, and
in every word of the dialogue. That was a great, maybe the greatest,
experience I have had. And so much the more for I have been told that
the film festival in New York is an opportunity for some to make a
little scandal, yet there was no sign of that. I was very, very happy.
I am sure that GERTRUD is a film that in ten years will be more
appreciated. You see, they had the stupid idea to make the first
performance in France, in a small cinema which was not yet finished, so
people were walking in and out and I had the pleasure to see that the
critics who were recognized as the best in France wrote favourably
about the film, and the others were completely unknown and from small,
small papers. I know if I am content, then I know the film is good."
> Some background is needed here. The film had reportedly been laughed
> off the screen almost literally at various European festivals. It was
> ridiculed by critics, including many who expressed admiration for
> Dreyer's earlier films. One called it "a two hour study in sofas and
> pianos," which of course to me seemed (and still seems) quite
> appealing; an ostensibly narrative film that's really a study in
> furniture could be great. In light of the film's "failure," New
> Yorkers made me feel proud, for once, for receiving it
> sympathetically.
A different story in Los Angeles, where, according to Drum/Drum,
"GERTRUD was shown at a single theater for only three days, and with no
prior announcement in the press. To add to this disaster, the film was
given a special showing at the Screen Director's Guild Theater and was
hooted off the screen before it was over - the only time this has
happened in the history of that theater.
Things picked up when the film showed at Venice where Dreyer was met
with "a red carpet and a special speedboat", where he got "a monumental
press conference" and another standing ovation.
-Nick>-
14231
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:09pm
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
Kevin Lee wrote:
>Ethan de Seife, in his sensesofcinema.com biography of Chang, refers to his
>homosexuality as an "open secret", but he also brings up the issue of
>"yanggang" -- the Chinese concept of intense brotherhood, which in Chang's
>films can be read with more homoerotic undertones than, say, the films of
>John Woo, but can also be read asexually as well.
>
Very interesting--thank you for turning me on to that article. Of
course, in addition to the "all men are brothers" stuff and the
preponderance of beefcaky stars, there are some rather explicit moments
in his films that are pretty difficult to read asexually, as in
_Invincible Shaolin_ when Ching Miao asks Lo Meng to take off his pants,
Lo lets forth a gasp of surprise, then the film cuts to him slowly
putting them back on with a sigh.
>>I often feel as though the art of gesture in cinema died with Griffith,
>>to make only the occassional attempt at resurrecting itself (in the work
>>of Eisenstein, Maya Deren, Riefenstahl, King Hu, and a few others). One
>>can only imagine what wonders Deren might have spun had she a virtuoso
>>like Hsiao Ho at her disposal...
>>
>>
>By gesture do you mean human physical gesture, or
>cinematic gesture?
>
Both, in a way. Human physical gesture, but articulated through the
shape of the film (and often brought into dialogue with other things,
like landscape and architecture), so that it isn't empty Kracauerian
"canning." For some reason, only a handful of filmmakers seem really to
have mastered this art, Eisenstein being the major post-Griffith example
that springs to mind. But I think King Hu begins to approach something
like it in _Come Drink Wtih Me_, and so might have Lau had he been as
much a perfectionist with his editing and mise-en-scene as he was with
his drunken boxing. Leone is no slouch either, but aren't his films
made up, more or less, of static tableaux (as in people standing still
and talking, or shooting, or whatever) rather than gestures? This is
quite appropriate in their case.
>In both cases have you seen any Guy Maddin?
>
No. What would you recommend?
>I'd say
>Zhang Yimou's HERO is 75-80% gesture, (and only a third of them are
>empty). It's no King Hu but it's still more "pure cinema" than Crouching Sell-
>Out.
>
>
I'm not entirely sure about _Hero_, but I agree that it's more of a real
film than Crouching Tiger.
14232
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:47pm
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
>
>
Kevin Lee wrote:
>Like Cocteau, Chang
>also has a strong affinity for the stage and incorporated elements from Peking
>Opera into his films (the masks, for example).
>
>
The extraordinary visual imagination in _Orpheus_ is at least partially
borne out by the attention it pays to those peculiar balances in
costuming and the kinds of gender resonances they take on. Things such
as the otherworldly waves and discolorations in Jean Marais' hair or the
cyclists' slenderizing waistbelts seem to have their correlate in
Chang's masks, feathers, hairstyles, etc.
-Matt
14233
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:47pm
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
Noel Vera wrote:
>>Re: LKL -- You're right, overall he's probably among the weaker of
>>
>>
>the
>
>
>>bunch
>>
>>
>
>He makes it more of a point to try and be authentic--at
>least as authentic as this genre will allow, and he has a real
>obsession about showing the different fighting styles.
>
>
This is true -- Lau's martial arts purism is always a joy.
-Matt
14234
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:11pm
Subject: Re: Miramax monopolism
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
wrote:
> Both, in a way. Human physical gesture, but articulated through
the
> shape of the film (and often brought into dialogue with other
things,
> like landscape and architecture), so that it isn't empty
Kracauerian
> "canning." For some reason, only a handful of filmmakers seem
really to
> have mastered this art, Eisenstein being the major post-Griffith
example
> that springs to mind.
I think one can say that Bresson's movies are something close to 100%
gesture (human and cinematic). How about Ozu? Dreyer? Kurosawa?
Mizoguchi? Tarkovsky? The list could go on and on unless you can
offer distinctions and clarifications.
I guess by distinguishing between what you term "gesture"
vs. "canning", you are suggesting human movement that, through the
conscious use of cinematic tools, is more sculpted, more effect than
incident?
Leone is no slouch either, but aren't his films
> made up, more or less, of static tableaux (as in people standing
still
> and talking, or shooting, or whatever) rather than gestures? This
is
> quite appropriate in their case.
Well could stasis itself be a gesture? (cf. Dreyer's late films.) In
Leone I get the impression as with few other films that a gaze can be
a gesture in itself.
>
> >In both cases have you seen any Guy Maddin?
> >
> No. What would you recommend?
>
An interesting question, actually -- because I'm of the mind that if
you haven't seen any Maddin films, any one will do as an
introduction, because they're all so other-worldly. My own
introduction was CAREFUL, preceded by the 6 minute short THE HEART OF
THE WORLD. HEART OF THE WORLD was so overwhelming I wasn't sure what
I thought of it. CAREFUL allowed me to enter Maddin's mindspace more
freely and leisurely, and it was a blissful experience. His recent
films THE SADDEST MUSIC IN THE WORLD (his most political?) and
COWARDS BEND THE KNEE (his most personal?) are probably better and
richer efforts. But CAREFUL remains my favorite Maddin feature,
because it was my "first time." (Though HEART OF THE WORLD is my
favorite Maddin work, now that I've been able to sort out my thoughts
on it over a dozen viewings.)
>
> >
> I'm not entirely sure about _Hero_, but I agree that it's more of a
real
> film than Crouching Tiger.
The paradox being that it's a far more abstract film than the
character-oriented prose poetry of CTHD. On the one-hand we could
say it's even more of an abominable hi-gloss bastardization of old-
school wuxia elements repackaged for mainstream global consumption
than either CTHD or KILL BILL Vol. 2. But in defense of HERO, I'd
say that this film distinguishes itself from its contemporaries
because it can be seen as actually commenting on this contemporary
tendency to monumentalize the genre, and takes the monumentalizing
impulse as an occasion to create one of the most epic show-downs shot
in recent cinema: not Maggie Cheung vs. Zhang Ziyi or Tony Leung vs.
Donnie Yen, but narrative vs. non-narrative, story vs. spectacle, as
the locus of cinematic meaning and wonder.
For more on this I highly recommend Shelley Kraicer's review in
CINEMASCOPE:
http://www.chinesecinemas.org/hero.html
Kevin
14235
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:03pm
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
Tom Milne told me about how he saw the GERTRUD premiere in Paris
with
> Dreyer in attendance and people were leaving in droves after only
15
> minutes.
>
> Things picked up when the film showed at Venice where Dreyer was
met
> with "a red carpet and a special speedboat", where he got "a
monumental
> press conference" and another standing ovation.
>
> -Nick>-
Nick, You should check on some parts of this account. In his Dreyer
book, Tom Milne writes about attending the Venice screening, where
there were quite a few walkouts (something also reported on by Orson
Welles, by the way, in the book with Bogdanovich that I edited), but
never mentions anything about attending the Paris premiere (and
never said anything about this to me, either). I'm not contesting
your general description of the Paris opening, however. A good eye-
witness account of this can be found in Elliott Stein's piece about
the film in Sight and Sound.
14236
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:12pm
Subject: Fritz Lang on CinemaScope
Though this post refers to a topic that was discussed weeks ago, I
still wanted to post some extracts from an interview with Fritz Lang
that a co-worker gave to me. I do not have what publication it was
from, but it appears to be from a newspaper. The article's title is
"Views on the Screen Directed by Fritz Lang". (The interviewer was M.A.
Schmidt.)
I found that it gave a bit more insight than Lang's alleged
"rattlesnakes" comment.
"The power of the screen always has been its intimacy. On the old
screen"- Mr. Lang formed with his arms the rectangular style that
prevailed before CinemaScope-- "the director could command an audience
to see only what he regarded as dramatically important. He used the
close-up to say something without any distractions. He excluded
everything that seemed extraneous, that might take your attention off
what he wanted you to observe.
"I am not certain that we will still have the same power with
CinemaScope. I don't wish to sound like I am criticizing, especially
since I am only doing my first picture in the new form. One has to
learn to live with changes, to make compromises."
…The story does not call for the kind of sprawling action that is
tailored for CinemaScope. "It calls for mood, for atmosphere," he
said. "The smugglers work in the dark, on hazy days. I plan to light
my principals just as you would in a play, dropping shadows on the
sides of the stage to concentrate on the main action and the players
involved in it.
…"We have a very wide screen today,' he observed, but what do you see
on it? Roman legions, more Roman legions and cowboys. Everything, or
so it seems, is a recreation of the past. No one appears to be
interested in the present…"
Michael Worrall
14237
From:
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:04pm
Subject: Important: Group Members Please Read
We ask all members to NOT quote all of a previous message when
replying, unless there's a very good reason for doing so. Many of us
find that repeating one or more previous messages in yours makes the
post difficult to read. Many email programs automatically quote your
previous message; if yours does, please turn that feature off, or learn
the sequence of simple keystrokes that will delete it (in Windows:
CTRL+A followed by the "delete" key).
It's fine to quote the fragment of a post you're replying to (just edit
out the rest), or all of a post that's only a sentence or two, but
we've also observed that many posts that quote the previous message
would stand just fine on their own, and the subject line will refer the
reader to the previous messages in your thread.
Fred and Peter
14238
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:42pm
Subject: Re: gesture, movement
Kevin Lee wrote:
>> <>Both, in a way. Human physical gesture, but articulated through the
>> shape of the film (and often brought into dialogue with other things,
>> like landscape and architecture), so that it isn't empty Kracauerian
>> "canning." For some reason, only a handful of filmmakers seem really
>> to have mastered this art, Eisenstein being the major post-Griffith
>> example that springs to mind.
>
>
>I think one can say that Bresson's movies are something close to 100%
>gesture (human and cinematic). How about Ozu? Dreyer?
>
Well, if you extend the meaning of "gesture" to include more subdued
actions, complete stasis, gazing, etc. (which is not unreasonable) then
the list does go on and on. Dreyer, Ozu, and Bresson would most
certainly be included (actually, I'm glad you mentioned them -- they are
marvelous examples of a sort of understated cinema of gesture).
Tarkovsky probably would as well, although in comparison to those three
he's a bit of a flounderer. I don't think Kurosawa is really at all
attuned to these sorts of concerns, but then I don't really care for his
films (sorry, I know he has many fans here), so I may be biased.
Mizoguchi I'm still deciding on.
I guess that what I originally had in mind was more along the lines of
heavy emphatic gesture. Or possibly deliberate as opposed to habitual.
Bresson, for instance, seems much more interested in habitual movement.
>I guess by distinguishing between what you term "gesture"
>vs. "canning", you are suggesting human movement that, through the
>conscious use of cinematic tools, is more sculpted, more effect than
>incident?
>
>
Hmm...I don't think I'd go that far, because then I'd only be talking
about animation or pixilation. The distinction I was making between
"canned" dance performances and gestural cinema (or whatever) is the old
fashioned medium purist distinction between appreciating whatever you
can glean from a film about the event it recorded and appreciating the
film itself. This all gets very complicated very quickly, because being
a record is a lot of what it means to be a film...
The problem with formulating examples is that there is hardly any
agreement on what is an example of what. Nonetheless, I'd say that _The
Fog of War_, being a pretty crummy film, is primarily of interest as the
record of a bunch of interviews, whereas Lanzmann's _A Visitor From the
Living_ is of interest as a film. In the way that some of Trisha
Brown's footage of Baryshnikov might be of interest for what it shows us
of Baryshnikov, while something like Kumar Shahani's _Bhavantarana_ has
been given significant form as a film.
-Matt
14239
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:00pm
Subject: Shahani (Was: gesture, movement)
> while something like Kumar Shahani's _Bhavantarana_ has
> been given significant form as a film.
Wow, someone else who's seen a Shahani film. Where did you see this,
Matt? I was very impressed by TARANG, but have never had the chance to
see Shahani's other films. - Dan
14240
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:06pm
Subject: Re: Hero
Kevin Lee wrote:
>But in defense of HERO, I'd
>say that this film distinguishes itself from its contemporaries
>because it can be seen as actually commenting on this contemporary
>tendency to monumentalize the genre,
>
You know, when I was watching it I couldn't help but think "this
cinematography is so absurdly lavish it's practically a caricature of
itself." But I suspect the question of whether the satire here (if
satire there be) is intentional will have to go the way of the _Land
Without Bread_ debate.
-Matt
14241
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:16pm
Subject: Re: Shahani (Was: gesture, movement)
Dan Sallitt wrote:
>Wow, someone else who's seen a Shahani film. Where did you see this,
>Matt? I was very impressed by TARANG, but have never had the chance to
>see Shahani's other films. - Dan
>
>
There was an Indian film series earlier this year at the University of
Pittsburgh. An odd but enjoyable mix -- mostly contemporary Bollywood
stuff, with _Bhavantarana_ thrown in. Apparently Shahani has a
significant body of theoretical writing on film as well? I've not
gotten my hands on it yet.
In any case, there is no question that someone has to get it together
ASAP and do a retrospective. I would also love to see some of his other
films.
-Matt
14242
From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:09pm
Subject: VCR Alert
Ford's rarely-shown Four Men And A Prayer is airing on Action Max
Thursday morning the 19th at 6am E.S.T.
14243
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:11pm
Subject: Re: Hero
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
wrote:
> Kevin Lee wrote:
>
> >But in defense of HERO, I'd
> >say that this film distinguishes itself from its contemporaries
> >because it can be seen as actually commenting on this contemporary
> >tendency to monumentalize the genre,
> >
>
Critic and independent filmmaker Evans Chan has written a really
interesting article on HERO in the FILM INTERNATIONAL Web page noting
its disturbing political and ideological tendencies. It is still a
visually beautiful film but Chan has read it within a significant
cultural perspective not normally available to those of us not versed
in specific areas of Chinese history.
Tony Williams
14244
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:17pm
Subject: GODZILLA ALERT!
Apologies for lowering the tone of messages away from Dreyer, Ford,
and Lang but thought I'd mention that tomorrow I travel to St. Louis
to see the original restored Honda GODZILLA with Japanese subs and
MINUS RAYMOND BURR as Steve Martin. It is amazing that it has taken
50 years for this version to reach the U.S.A. especially after that
awful remake which anticipated George Bush by "blaming the French"
(not the U.S. who dropped the Bomb in the original version)for the
monster's creation.
Has anyone any thoughts about re-editing films for the American
market with special scenes involving American actors for a different
audience - apart from contempt and groans?
Tony Williams
14245
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:50pm
Subject: Re: VCR Alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
> Ford's rarely-shown Four Men And A Prayer is airing on Action
Max
> Thursday morning the 19th at 6am E.S.T.
A good time will be had by all.
14246
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 0:31am
Subject: Re: VCR Alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona" wrote:
> Ford's rarely-shown Four Men And A Prayer is airing on Action Max
> Thursday morning the 19th at 6am E.S.T.
That comes on Fox Movie Channel every now and then. That's how I have
a tape of it.
-Jaime
14247
From:
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:07pm
Subject: Silly thoughts on everything
1) Don't miss the original Godzilla! 3,000 people saw it here in Detroit. A
giant blow-up green statue of Godzilla, complete with red tongue, was outside
the normally Beaux Arts building of the Detroit Institute of Arts for its run.
Parents took little kids, and translated subtitles on the fly. Kids especially
loved it every time Godzilla showed up.
2) Could the Dreyer interviewer have been Howard Cosell? perhaps not :)
3) Am floored that people would walk out of Gertrud. I went to the movies a
lot in the 1960's, and NEVER saw any anti-film demonstration. Audiences in
Michigan at least were polite and respectful, every during turkeys. Standards of
polite public civility were very high.
Similarly, have read that previews of "Red Line 7000" (Hawks) caused gales of
derisive audience laughter in California in 1965. NEVER saw anything like
this myself in the 1960's.
4) Just saw "Le Cercle rouge" (Melville) on DVD. Really good! Melville shows
his own film studio in an interview afterwards. It has a screening room that
can project at four ratios: scope, 1.85, 1.66, 1.33 Here is a man with a black
belt in ar!
Melville also pays tribute to Allen Jenkins... I love Jenkins too. :)
Mike Grost
14248
From:
Date: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:10pm
Subject: Re: Re: Professione: (Was: Antonioni short in Chicago)
Unfortunately, did not enjoy "The Passenger" much in 1975, despite being a
huge Antonioni fan. Would love to see it again. Parts liked best at the time -
the views of Gaudi architecture in Barcelona. Later enjoyed Hiroshi
Teshigahara's documentary about Gaudi, widely available on video.
I would love to see Antonioni's dociumentaries, and the new short films.
Loved "Beyond the Clouds". It has features that recall "L'avventura", including
shooting in ancient cities.
The old Grove Press paperback of the screenplay of "L'avventura" is loaded
with extra features. One tells what a nightmare filming "L'avventura" on all
those volcanic islands was. Plus the production ran out of money.
Favorites: Il Grido, the trilogy, Red Desert, Zabriskie Point, Beyond the
Clouds.
Mike Grost
14249
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 1:26am
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan Rosenbaum" <
Back in Warwick University during 1976-1977, GERTRUD was screened in
the World Cinema class and later discussed by Andrew Britton in a
lecture also attended by Robin Wood. Although Robin gently teased
Andrew about his enthusiasm for the film, the viewing was also a
great experience for those of us there. We were overwhelmed by its
artistry and Andrew delivered a really good lecture on the film in
relation to Dreyer's other work which was screened during that great
period during the developing Warwick University Film Studies Program.
It then formed one of three university film courses funded by the
British Film Institute on the understanding that the universities
concened would continue funding after a three year period. Only Keele
University reneged when it got rid of Richard Dyer. Before there were
no film courses existing on any university campus in the U.K. apart
from the odd film screened in other classes.
This was a time when the institutional educational establishment
first began to take film seriously. The GERTRUD screening and
following lecture will always remain in my mind as one of the key
examples of this early movement. Now virtually every campus in
England teaches film but, often, to the neglect of these key
directors and early artistic movements in world cinema.
Tony Williams
14250
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:54am
Subject: Elmer Bernstein has died
My God, what film didn't he score?
Most recent success: an Oscar nomination for FAR FROM HEAVEN. Worked
with everybody at least once...everybody to include John Landis, John
Sturges, Robert Mulligan, Martin Scorsese, George Roy Hill, Bill Duke,
Phil Karlson, Anthony Mann, Paul Wendkos, Richard Fleischer, John
Frankenheimer, Henry Hathaway, Michael Moore (for CANADIAN BACON!),
John Cassavetes, and John Brahm.
His score for THE AGE OF INNOCENCE is one of my favorites, of his work
or anyone else's.
-Jaime
14251
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:23am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> His score for THE AGE OF INNOCENCE is one of my favorites,
of his work
> or anyone else's.
>
> -Jaime
As Bernstein's score blossomed over the Elanie & Saul Bass
designed credits, my eyes began to well with tears. His score is
a vital contribution to what I feel is one of the best American
films on the 90's.
14252
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:27am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died (correction)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
This was too big of a typo to ignore:
As Bernstein's score blossomed over the Elanie & Saul Bass
designed credits, my eyes began to well with tears. His score is
a vital contribution to what I feel is one of the best American
films OF the 90's.
14253
From: Damien Bona
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:41am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died (correction)
His extraordinary, brassy jazz scores for The Man With The Golden Arm
and Walk On The Wild Side are perhaps his most quintessential works,
but his most most evocative is undoubtedly his plaintive music for To
Kill A Mockingbird -- I can't even begin to imagine the film without
his score.
14254
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 7:19am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> My God, what film didn't he score?
Add The Ringer, which makes funny use of the Magnificent Seven theme.
My friend Giulia was going to interview him for her Landis catalogue
but was informed he was too ill. He was in fine fettle when I met him
7 years ago. He was a NY lefty and got graylisted. During that brief
period he wrote electronic scores -- possibly the first ever in film -
- for Robot Monster and Cat Women of the Moon.
14255
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 0:37pm
Subject: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
> While I do think this is partly true (but where do you draw the
line
> on 'early work'--pre Fly? Or pre-Scanners?), I'd point out Michael
> Ironside's performance in Scanners and James Woods in Videodrome
and
> even Christopher Walken in The Dead Zone as being quite remarkable.
There's a very blurred line, which I might attempt to tace around the
period he moves from stock music to Howard Shore and Michael Kamen,
with the process completed when the scores actually get GOOD - which
would be the lovely DEAD ZONE. But that's purely a personal line.
From THE BROOD on, DC is able to attract a higher calibre of actor to
his films - in selected roles. So while the leading man in THE BROOD
is not that great, Oliver Reed is very good value. Same in SCANNERS -
Ironside triumphs, but Stephenj Lack kind of lives up to his name:
where other actors have presence, he has ansence. he walks into the
room and it's like someone left.
In DEAD ZONE nearly every role is taken by a major character star,
which is almost distracting in a GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD WAY, but
just manages to be alright, helped by the fact that all the players
are marvellous. Blame DeLaurentis for the casting overkill, credit
Cronenberg for picking GOOD names.
The other significant division between early Cronenberg and late, is
the early films often have a hero with nothing to do: SHIVERS, RABID,
THE BROOD. While the monsters run around being interesting, the hero
looks confused and drives about, always missing the action.
Then in SHIVERS, the hero himself IS the monster. And this is a great
step forward in narrative cohesion and in making the films more
sympathetic. I like the earlier genre pieces (and the experimental
ones are something else) but they're a bit flawed by this need to
create a nromal hero. Once we get SCANNERS and THE DEAD ZONE the way
is paved for THE FLY...
14256
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 0:44pm
Subject: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
> It seems likely that Cronenberg would have preferred better actors
> early in his career - and what director wouldn't? I am merely
asserting
> that most of his films would not be fatally diminished by the
presence
> of indifferent actors, and that this is true of most great
directors.
Not fatally, but they would be marred. For most directors, a decent
narrative would be enough to make an interesting film, but bad sound,
cinematography, dialogue, editing or especially acting would
certainly hinder the production of a masterpiece.
> There is also
> probably a good example of an excellent director who never was
> especially interested in acting but who was able to produce
powerful
> work by purely visual means.
I struggle to think of one - for me, great directors are concerned
with every aspect of their film being as good as it can be, so how
could performance be allowed to be neglected?
Von Sternberg certainly has some oddball performances in his films,
and Jack Smith credits him with some eccentric methods, but we know
that Jo cared passionately about the actors' work and put them
through hell to get what he wanted. For whatever reasons, he wanted
those perfromances like that.
I suspect any director proven to be indifferent to performances would
not appear on my Great Directors List, though that's just me.
14257
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 0:46pm
Subject: Re: So no one else believes in "good bad acting"?
> But on the whole he's a conceptual filmmkaer. Everyone
> in "Crahs" (his best film,IMO) is teriffic. But the
> primary dramatic tension in the film is derived from
> Cronenberg's attempt (wildly successful) to keep pace
> with Ballard's concepts.
The performances are kind of zombified in that, in a good way.
He could possibly have achieved something similar using, say, the
cast of CARNIVAL OF SOULS, but I think there's an intensity to Spader
and Unger's low-affect work that fully justifies using top pros.
14258
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 2:23pm
Subject: Re: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
href="http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/bride/g001/b_elmerbernstein.shtml"
target="_blank">Elmer Bernstein
Damn!
Here's his website:
http://www.elmerbernstein.com
I was just thinking about him the other day. As far as
I'm concerned he's the greatest of all film composers
-- and yes, I'm including Bernard Herrmann.
No one had his range. No one. Think of "Airplane!"
Think of "The Grifters."
When
href="http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g001/haynes.html"
target="_blank">Todd Haynes made "Far From Heaven"
he went looking for a composer, and was informed to
his delight that Elmer was available. Todd never
dreamed he'd be able to have someone even remotely
like that do his score. So he showed Elmer the film --
for which he's been using "To Kill a Mockingbird" as a
temp track. Elmer said "Oh turn that thing off!" He
then sat down and told Todd exactly how much music
he'd need and where.
It's his last score.
--- hotlove666 wrote:
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14259
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:03pm
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Damn!
>
Yeah. And Goldsmith a few months before. Another important thing
about EB: he was a film music scholar. He recorded albums of his
fellow composers' work, including the Herrman score Hitchcock vetoed
for Torn Curtain.
14260
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:33pm
Subject: Re: Hero
Tony, that's quite a formidable article by Evans you mentioned --
here is the link for all to look at:
http://www.filmint.nu/netonly/eng/heroevanschan.htm
I could post a very long response to it but I'll just say that as
invaluable and full of insight as it is, it still isn't the full
story. The last paragraph of the Kraicer article I linked to can
serve as a worthy qualifier for now. Zhang Yimou is such a bundle of
contradictions, and always has been -- what he and his films
represent has always been a bone of contention. Defending him is
often a dubious enterprise, which is exactly why it is necessary to
do so (and I say this as someone who has lambasted Zhang Yimou on
many occasions). He is to Chinese filmmaking what Spielberg is to
Hollywood -- someone who could be seen as trying to create engaging,
meaningful films while serving and profiting from the existing power
structure, which makes it convenient to deride them as villainous
symbols of everything that's wrong and ideologically debilitating
about mainstream cinema. The problem is that these critiques end up
being just as limited and limiting, in what alternative interpretive
approaches they are unwilling to consider.
The chief problem with Chan's critique (which happens to be tied with
its many virtues) is in how it tries to nail Zhang's film down as a
simplistic apologia on behalf of beneficent totalitarianism (Zhang as
the new and improved Chinese Leni Riefenstahl). Even as he supports
this argument with a lot of substantive observations on thematic and
narrative tendencies throughout Zhang's career and their implications
in constructing a new popular nationalist ideology that conforms with
the agenda of a dubious regime, I feel that he sidesteps how these
films can be argued in the exact opposite direction, the very quality
that makes Zhang's cinema so elusive -- an elusiveness that in turn
can be viewed as rich ambiguity or cunning fence-straddling. I can
understand Chan's impulse to grab Zhang's elusive filmmaking by the
tail and strike at what sinister ideological implications may lurk at
the heart of his movies, but I think this risks being too reductive
towards the film. Because it is quite possible that with HERO, Zhang
has made the Chinese answer to IVAN THE TERRIBLE PART I, a film of
nearly infinite and often contradictory meanings.
Kevin
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
> wrote:
> > Kevin Lee wrote:
> >
> > >But in defense of HERO, I'd
> > >say that this film distinguishes itself from its contemporaries
> > >because it can be seen as actually commenting on this
contemporary
> > >tendency to monumentalize the genre,
> > >
> >
>
> Critic and independent filmmaker Evans Chan has written a really
> interesting article on HERO in the FILM INTERNATIONAL Web page
noting
> its disturbing political and ideological tendencies. It is still a
> visually beautiful film but Chan has read it within a significant
> cultural perspective not normally available to those of us not
versed
> in specific areas of Chinese history.
>
> Tony Williams
14261
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:11pm
Subject: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
copy and paste this link into address bar (based on past experience,
this link is probably too long to work as clickable text)
http://www.star-ecentral.com/news/story.asp?
file=/2004/8/7/movies/8577041&sec=movies
14262
From: Damien Bona
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 5:45pm
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
The Internet site Streaming Soundtracks is currently playing nothing
but Elmer Bernstein music:
http://www.live365.com/stations/jericthor
14263
From: Joseph Kaufman
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 5:55pm
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
Bill wrote:
>Yeah. And Goldsmith a few months before. Another important thing
>about EB: he was a film music scholar. He recorded albums of his
>fellow composers' work, including the Herrman score Hitchcock vetoed
>for Torn Curtain.
The other relatively recent film music losses were David Raksin of
LAURA fame and Laurence Rosenthal of EAST OF EDEN and REBEL WITHOUT A
CAUSE.
I must say that Elmer Bernstein was a wonderful man to meet and talk
to. I've never heard anyone say a single bad word about him.
--
- Joe Kaufman
14264
From:
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:28pm
Subject: Re: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
This is a great loss. Of course, I immediately think of his work with Robert
Mulligan ("To Kill A Mockingbird," "Love with the Proper Stranger," "Baby the
Rain Must Fall," et al). I am at work on an oral history about Mulligan's
films and Bernstein was one of the people I was hoping to interview.
The theme for "Mockingbird" will live forever.
R.I.P.
Peter
14265
From: mediafun2001
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 7:55pm
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
Two perfect "noir" urban scores for movies that ain't particularly
noir at all--"Man with the Golden Arm" and "Walk on the Wild Side"--
plus one great noir TV score ("Johnny Staccato"), and two of the
most-quoted, still-exciting action-movie scores ("Magnificent
Seven" and "Great Escape") make him one of the greatest of all time.
Those last two have seeped their way into the consciousness of every
movie fan, even those who go no further than Best Buy's DVD-sale-of-
the-week.
I was amazed that Bernstein got namechecked only one time in the
recent reissue on DVD of "The Great Escape" (with way too many
overlapping History Channel supplements, but some nice source audio
of interviews with now-departed performers and director Sturges).
He's mentioned only by a supporting performer, think it was David
McCallum--for many people, his music is the defining aspect of that
film, as indelible as the image of McQueen on his cycle.
Ed
14266
From: Noel Vera
Date: Thu Aug 19, 2004 9:47pm
Subject: Re: Digest Number 778
Liddle sumting I wrote on the subject:
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/noelmoviereviews/message/372
For the record, the film opened in Manila in February, 2003.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14267
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:10am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
> The other relatively recent film music losses were David Raksin of
> LAURA fame and Laurence Rosenthal of EAST OF EDEN and REBEL WITHOUT A
> CAUSE.
>
Did you mean Leonard Rosenman (EDEN, REBEL, THE COBWEB)?? I took a quick look on Google news and couldn't find that either of them had died (Rosenthal was quoted in an obituary for Goldsmith last month...)
14268
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:38am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee" to
work as clickable text)
>
> http://www.star-ecentral.com/news/story.asp?
> file=/2004/8/7/movies/8577041&sec=movies
Dear Kevin,
I've just returned from st. Louis and am scanning my mail. I would be
inclined to agree with you since HERO appears to be a multi-faceted
film which Harvey will, hopefully, release is ZATOICHI does well at
the box office.
Tony Williams
14269
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:45am
Subject: Re: Silly thoughts on everything
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> 1) Don't miss the original Godzilla! 3,000 people saw it here in
Detroit. A
>> Mike Grost.
Your humble correspondent has just returned from St. Louis after
watching said film. Much better without Raymond Burr as "Steve
Martin" and full of taboo "Bomb" references which I'm sure were
edited out of the American release version.
However, apart from the family melodrama, some interesting insights
on the changing face of post-war Japanese females.
1. In a fishing village an elder rebukes an outspoken young girl
telling her that in the old days they would have fed her to Godzilla.
2. During a debate in the Japanese Parliament, three feisty post-war
female journalists speak out against a patriarchal politician urging
secrecy because of G's effect on international diplomacy and
economics (or Cold War politics involving keeping in with the
Americans). When they continue to argue, he tells them to "shut up".
But they days of obedience to the Emperor are now over and a scuffle
results.
Will now check my VHS copy of the Burr version to see what is missing.
Tony Williams
14270
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:56am
Subject: Re: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
>
> Dear Kevin,
>
> I've just returned from st. Louis and am scanning my mail. I would be
> inclined to agree with you since HERO appears to be a multi-faceted
> film which Harvey will, hopefully, release is ZATOICHI does well at
> the box office.
'Zatoichi' -- or, rather, 'The Blind Swordsman: Zatoichi!!' (as it's
been retitled in America by Harvey et al) isn't going to do mainstream
bank when it doesn't get a wide theatrical roll-out in the first place.
Whoever decides what goes nationwide and what doesn't at these
companies is clearly crazy -- unless, of course, part of the reason
'Swordsman: Zatoichi -- So Blind!' didn't go wide with its distribution
is because Miramax has larger plans in store for 'Hero' -- and don't
want to release two Asian martial-arts based pictures back to back.
Having said that, 'Hero' -is- being released soon, or is out now in NYC
and LA or something, and I'm assuming will be near-nationwide soon,
because Jet Li has been promoting it on Craig Kilborn and probably in
other quarters too. (Like other talk show interviews with Jackie Chan
and Chow Yun-fat that I've seen, Jet Li's attempts at "being funny" --
trying way too hard to be likable and win over the American
potential-fanbase -- are difficult to watch; partially because he's
painfully unfunny, and then partially and resultingly because the
studio audience greets the actor with stone-cold silence.) I know that
SpikeTV is doing some kind of infotainment tie-in in which Jet Li and
Quentin Tarantino rap about their favorite action scenes in cinema.
craig.
14271
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:26am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller wrote:
> Whoever decides what goes nationwide and what doesn't at these
> companies is clearly crazy -- unless, of course, part of the reason
> 'Swordsman: Zatoichi -- So Blind!' didn't go wide with its distribution
> is because Miramax has larger plans in store for 'Hero' -- and don't
> want to release two Asian martial-arts based pictures back to back.
> Having said that, 'Hero' -is- being released soon, or is out now in NYC
From what I understand, Tarantino was the one who finally got Harvey to
release it (there's a website, www.monkeypeaches.com, that covers the
film's hold up in great detail) so it's being advertised as "Quentin
Tarantino presents Jet Li in Hero.) I gather Yimou's name doesn't have
enough box office power and Harvey is afraid people will think it's an
art film. The release got pushed back also because Miramax did not want
it to compete with either "Kill Bill" installment. The trailer I have
seen totally reduces the film with its moronic and generic voiceover as
it attempts to go for the widest audience possible. (I really dislike
how the films/genres that Tarantino loots wind up needing his blessing
to get a theatrical release.)
I have seen the shorter cut on DVD that Harvey persuaded Yimou to make,
but the original version--clocking in at about 150 minutes, I believe--
has been available for sale on DVD and VCD in Chinatown here in SF.
I doubt I'll ever get to see a print of Tsui Hark's reworking of "Zu"
because Miramax has recut it twice, both times resulting in poor test
screening results, so they have shelved it with no plans to release it.
Michael Worrall
14272
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:57am
Subject: Re: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
>
> I gather Yimou's name doesn't have
> enough box office power
FYI (and maybe you already know this and are just in a first-name kind
of mood what with Harvey and all) -- his surname is Zhang, not Yimou.
> The trailer I have
> seen totally reduces the film with its moronic and generic voiceover as
> it attempts to go for the widest audience possible. (I really dislike
> how the films/genres that Tarantino loots wind up needing his blessing
> to get a theatrical release.)
Indeed. "Quentin Tarantino Presents Jet Li in 'Hero.' " What billing.
Jet Li can kiss my ass; if I ever see this film (and it won't be the
Miramax), I can tell you straightaway it will be for Zhang Zi-yi,
Maggie Cheung, Chris Doyle, and Tony Leung, in roughly that order. I
can hear the trailer now: "In a world... where chaos rules... where
history and magic commingle..."
Also fascinating to me is how Quentin will even put his name to an
edited version of an Asian film. It just doesn't bother him at all.
(Of course I'm not so naive that this doesn't strike me as an obvious
case of scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours in regard to him and the
Weinsteins, but at what point has he finally paid his debt to Harvey
Godfather? Favors spawn more favors etc. etc.) Less insidiously but
just as grossly, I love how the American 'Chungking Express' DVD has
"QUENTIN TARANTINO PRESENTS A ROLLING THUNDER PRODUCTION" as the real
eye-popper on the cover. It wasn't until the third (okay, second) time
I saw the package that I realized it wasn't 'Switchblade Sisters' after
all.
And when is Martin Scorsese, the Face of Film Preservation himself,
going to stop making deals with the devil? Harvey's still treating his
imports like it's 1978 and they'll only ever play a Times Square
grindhouse. I understand Marty's in his DeMille phase now, but give me
a break. The son of a bitch won't even give him final cut.
craig.
14273
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 6:12am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller wrote:
> FYI (and maybe you already know this and are just in a first-name kind
> of mood what with Harvey and all) -- his surname is Zhang, not Yimou.
>
Yes, I am sorry- I do that sometimes-- I've been working on my website
and I found there are times when I switch the surname-- which is
troubling to me considering how many Chinese influences I have in my
life. (Just can't kick that Western upbringing. Thanks Mom and Dad!)
>
I can hear the trailer now: "In a world... where chaos rules... where
> history and magic commingle..."
You nailed it
>Less insidiously but just as grossly, I love how the American 'Chungking Express' DVD has "QUENTIN TARANTINO PRESENTS A ROLLING THUNDER PRODUCTION" as the real eye-popper on the cover.
The laserdisc cover is just the same.
What Mirmax/Dimension does with Asian films is criminal. (A friend and
I once made up a list of "Crimes against Cinema" and Harvey was on it
along with Oliver Stone and Joel Schumacher. If I ever flatline I hope
I see neon lights too.) I tend to think that Columbia Pictures and
Miramax are trying to cripple the HK film industry for their own
benefit. Both studio have invested large sums into HK productions only
to give them a straight to video release. (Tsui's "Zu" and "Black Mask
2" --yes, I will defend that one-- for example.)
Michael Worrall
14274
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 6:23am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
I tend to think that Columbia Pictures and
> Miramax are trying to cripple the HK film industry for their own
> benefit. Both studio have invested large sums into HK productions only to give them a straight to video release. (Tsui's "Zu" and "Black Mask 2" --yes, I will defend that one-- for example.)
I just realized that "Zu" is not a good example because Miramax has no
plans that I know of to release it in any format. The irony of Jackie
Chan's "The Accidental Spy" was that it was made with an eye on the US
market, but Dimension still cut it, dubbed it and dumped it on video.
BTW: I like Jet Li --he's the Fred Astaire of Martial Arts to me-- but
I can see your point.
> Michael Worrall
14275
From: Joseph Kaufman
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 6:35am
Subject: Re: Elmer Bernstein has died
>Did you mean Leonard Rosenman (EDEN, REBEL, THE COBWEB)?? I took a
>quick look on Google news and couldn't find that either of them had
>died (Rosenthal was quoted in an obituary for Goldsmith last
>month...)
You're; I may have gotten him (them) confused with someone else.
(In fact I just now see an article on the Film Score Monthly website
about Leonard Rosenman recording a score late last year.) I know
it's been a rough period for film composers who started in the 1950s
passing on. My apologies for posting inaccurately.
--
- Joe Kaufman
14276
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 10:45am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
> I just realized that "Zu" is not a good example because Miramax has no
> plans that I know of to release it in any format.
>
> > Michael Worrall
Miramax seemed to have had plans to release "Zu 2" in theaters. I
remember seeing a preview for "Zu: Warriors" before seeing
"Brotherhood of the Wolf."
I found a New York Times article that mentions Miramax's plans:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/02/arts/02TIGE.html?ex=1093147200&en=7bb0df93bb65cba3&ei=5070
Of course, Miramax changed its plans.
Paul
14277
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:30pm
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
Oh, I'd say it's definitely worth your while to watch it on the big
screen, even if it's been Miram-axed. (Michael, regarding running
times, the original is 107 minutes, the Miramax cut is 95 -- why they
even bothered to trim it is beyond me). This baby's got compositions
to make one's eyes melt. In fact I'm seeing it at AMMI tonight for
this very reason. But if you want to see the original it's readily
availabe in Chinatown.
Definitely more sumptuous and evocative cinematography on display
here by Chris Doyle than what I saw last night with LAST LIFE IN THE
UNIVERSE.
(I really dislike
> > how the films/genres that Tarantino loots wind up needing his
blessing
> > to get a theatrical release.)
I totally agree with this and was about to criticize Tarantino's
gentrification and Wal-Marticization of minority underclass (or what
the bougies refer to as "cult") cinema, but this morning my local hip
hop station dished out some remarkably sound advice: "Hey all you
playa haters, don't hate the playas, hate the game!" It's not
Tarantino that's the problem, it's the system that designates him as
the cine-cultural tour guide to navigate viewers safely through a
world of international and U.S. minority cinema that is deliberately
supressed and obscured to preserve Hollywood's stateside market
advantage. One by-product of this touristy appreciation of these
cinemas is that it perpetuates an ethnocentric perspective towards
the alternative cultures represented in these films (an
ethnocentricity made explicit in the form of KILL BILL's protagonist).
Kevin
14278
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:32pm
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
wrote:
> BTW: I like Jet Li --he's the Fred Astaire of Martial Arts to me--
but
> I can see your point.
>
Did Fred Astaire ever need wires? (just kidding)
14279
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:41pm
Subject: fixed Hero link and friendly advisory to print critics
This link I posted still didn't work. The best way I can think of to
find the article is google "Hero layers of truth" and click the I'm
Feeling Lucky button.
For those who will be writing about HERO in the coming days or weeks,
please don't make the same ill-informed presumptions Peter Brunette
makes in IndieWire:
http://www.indiewire.com/movies/movies_040818heronic.html
"Zhang had threatened for years to begin making blatantly generic
films "for the people," and "Hero" and its follow-up, "The House of
Flying Daggers," which has yet to be released, amply fulfill that
threat. Yet while both these films shy away from the deeper
philosophical, psychological, and political introspection of Zhang's
earlier films, they more than make up for their lack of depth with a
dazzling, delightful surface."
Given the recent discussion and related links posted on this board, I
hope it's clear how off his nut Brunette is. If anything, it can be
argued HERO is more complex, formally as well as ideologically, than
anything Zhang has made before. You don't even have to like the film
to realize this; just ask Evans Chan.
Kevin
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
to
> work as clickable text)
> >
> > http://www.star-ecentral.com/news/story.asp?
> > file=/2004/8/7/movies/8577041&sec=movies
>
14280
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:42pm
Subject: Re: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
> I love how the American 'Chungking Express' DVD has "QUENTIN TARANTINO
> PRESENTS A ROLLING THUNDER PRODUCTION" as the real eye-popper on the
> cover.
The actual wording on the cover is more insidious. It says (very large
down the lefthandside): "Quentin Tarantino's", and then, smaller at the
top: "rolling thunder pictures" and then even smaller, "presents"...
The result being... that it looks like "Quentin Tarantino's Chungking
Express". Wong's name is microscopic.
It's one of the messiest DVD covers I've ever seen... replete with
idiotic "Incredibly sexy!" and "Intoxicating and irresistible!" quotes
too.
-Nick>-
14281
From: iangjohnston
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:27pm
Subject: Re: Hero
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000"
wrote:
>
> Critic and independent filmmaker Evans Chan has written a really
> interesting article on HERO in the FILM INTERNATIONAL Web page
noting
> its disturbing political and ideological tendencies. It is still a
> visually beautiful film but Chan has read it within a significant
> cultural perspective not normally available to those of us not
versed
> in specific areas of Chinese history.
>
> Tony Williams
The review in POSITIF (last year, I think) also picked up on
these "disturbing" tendencies -- the only review in the print film
mags that I've come across that does so.
Ian
14282
From: iangjohnston
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:43pm
Subject: Re: Hero
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
wrote:
>
> The chief problem with Chan's critique (which happens to be tied
with
> its many virtues) is in how it tries to nail Zhang's film down as
a
> simplistic apologia on behalf of beneficent totalitarianism (Zhang
as
> the new and improved Chinese Leni Riefenstahl). Even as he
supports
> this argument with a lot of substantive observations on thematic
and
> narrative tendencies throughout Zhang's career and their
implications
> in constructing a new popular nationalist ideology that conforms
with
> the agenda of a dubious regime, I feel that he sidesteps how these
> films can be argued in the exact opposite direction, the very
quality
> that makes Zhang's cinema so elusive -- an elusiveness that in
turn
> can be viewed as rich ambiguity or cunning fence-straddling. I
can
> understand Chan's impulse to grab Zhang's elusive filmmaking by
the
> tail and strike at what sinister ideological implications may lurk
at
> the heart of his movies, but I think this risks being too
reductive
> towards the film. Because it is quite possible that with HERO,
Zhang
> has made the Chinese answer to IVAN THE TERRIBLE PART I, a film of
> nearly infinite and often contradictory meanings.
>
> Kevin
Kevin,
I suspect this comes down to how close to "China" one is standing.
For myself, being married to a Taiwanese and living in Taiwan, I
found the film's ideology oppressive and monolithic; there were no
signs for me of "infinite and contradictory meanings".
Ian
14283
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:05pm
Subject: Feuillade at MoMA maybe?
Sorry to interrupt the discussion about Tarantino being responsible
for all the world's ills, but I heard a rumor yesterday that one of
the bigger events to inaugurate the newly-renovated Museum of Modern
Art will be a Feuillade series. Can anyone corroborate?
-Jaime
14284
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:53pm
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Worrall"
> wrote:
>
> > I just realized that "Zu" is not a good example because Miramax has no
> > plans that I know of to release it in any format.
> >
> > > Michael Worrall
>
> Miramax seemed to have had plans to release "Zu 2" in theaters. I
> remember seeing a preview for "Zu: Warriors" before seeing
> "Brotherhood of the Wolf."
Yes I remember hearing about that trailer and seeing a poster and
then...
Kevin, thank you for clarifying the running time of "Hero", I had read
somewhere that the film orginally ran at 2 hours. I've asked several
merchants about the running time (it says 150 minutes on the cover )
and they all said it was 150 minutes--which didn't seem right to me.
Perhaps some moments that Harvey considered "too Chinese" and would not
play with American audiences --look what Miramax did with Stephen
Chiau's "Shoalin Soccer"--were the ones that were cut.
As for Jet Li's use of wires: on a wire or not, I get great pleasure
from watching Li move.
More on Tarantino and the "game" later.
Michael Worrall
14285
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:05pm
Subject: Re: Hero
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "iangjohnston" wrote:
> Because it is quite possible that with HERO,
> Zhang
> > has made the Chinese answer to IVAN THE TERRIBLE PART I, a film
of
> > nearly infinite and often contradictory meanings.
> >
> > Kevin
>
>
> Kevin,
>
> I suspect this comes down to how close to "China" one is standing.
> For myself, being married to a Taiwanese and living in Taiwan, I
> found the film's ideology oppressive and monolithic; there were no
> signs for me of "infinite and contradictory meanings".
>
> Ian
Hi Ian,
For the record, I have family and personal ties to both Taiwan and
China (and I have more family in Taiwan than in China), and I do not
endorse China's plans to re-incorporate Taiwan into the mainland.
I can certainly see how HERO can be perceived as a rah-rah call
towards embracing a monolithic nationalism -- this was my own
prevailing sentiment after my second and third times watching this
film. I just don't think the discussion should end here. For one
thing, if we want to criticize the film for apparently endorsing a
nationalist sentiment that borders on rigid neo-fascism, we must also
be aware our own critical tendency towards rigidity in defining the
film along these terms. Otherwise we remain entrenched in an
oppressive dialectic -- where the oppression comes as much from our
own definitions of the terms of opposition as from the forces we are
trying to oppose -- and we end up supporting the dominant power
structure, instead of truly subverting it.
I think what can be seen as truly subversive about HERO is, in how
much it seems to dutifully depict the noble formation of a
totalitarian state, it shows how disastrous and tragic this state
formation really is. Half the protagonists are killed and Maggie
Cheung is left stranded in solitary exile (ironically, the two rebels
who ultimately changed their minds about their resistance to the
Emperor are the ones who wind up dead in the end -- Evans Chan might
dismiss this as a bogus endorsement of heroic sacrifice, but I don't
consider this much different from what I see in my favorite John Ford
movie, FORT APACHE). Multiple narratives are suppressed to form a
single authoritarian narrative. Even on a visual level, the rich
color palettes that alternated through most of the film are abandoned
for an oppressive black -- if this is pro-fascist I certainly don't
find it inspiring me to say "Heil Hu Jingtao" (the Chinese
president). Along these lines, I don't find this film necessarily
more "fascist" or "monolithic" in its conclusions than, say, THE MAN
WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE -- and couldn't one say that the ending of
RASHOMON works in a "fascist" manner, by asserting a monolithic
sentimental humanist conclusion for us to accept as "Truth" instead
of remaining in the far more complex realm of competing
subjectivies? Hell, along these lines you could even call CITY OF
SADNESS, one of the most brilliantly anti-fascist movies ever made, a
fascist film for depicting the violent unification of a multi-
cultural society with an ending that may be characterized as a tepid
fatalist resignation. But that would be totally mischaracterizing
the film!
Now, is it dubious to make this kind of anti-monoideological argument
on behalf of HERO, when there seems to be so much evidence to the
contrary? It certainly is, especially when most Chinese viewers
probably don't seem to appreciate the film quite this way. But if
you believe Evans Chan, you'll believe that a billion people were
duped into adulating this film and became more dutiful slaves to the
capitalist totalitarian state. But why should we believe Evans Chan
any more than we would believe the Chinese government for their
respective attempts to spin the movie into a simplistic ideological
package? My point is that we can't lie down and take the film's
meaning -- or to be more precise, our own interpretation of the
film's meaning -- as a given. If we really care about defending
complexity and diversity on behalf of the freedom of the world, then
we have to practice what we preach.
One thing that might help is to try to understand the social forces
that have brought the film, its maker, its approving government and
its audience (given that they made it the top-grossing film of all
time in China) to this point, otherwise we are merely engaging in neo-
Imperialist China-bashing (and by extension paying lip-service to
Taiwan's effort for self-recognition). I see this inadvertent China-
bashing (whose political ramifications should not be ignored in
evaluating post-Colonial power struggles between China and the West)
in one of the most salient quotes in Chan's essay, when he labels the
film "a rallying cry for the populace to mute dissent, and to accept
the ruthless flogging of the authoritarian, post-socialist capitalist
machine that is spinning in full force, with Zhang himself as one of
its most valuable export items." Given how Chan here describes the
Chinese government as exploiting its own people in the service of
global capitalism, why not direct as much scorn to global capitalism
itself? So I propose that we understand this question of nationalism
not as a phenomenon created in a vacuum, but as a cultural reaction
to China's relatively recent entry into global market capitalism.
Similarly, in Zhang's film, I think the idea of nationalism should be
approached as a question, not as a truism asserted by the film.
Kevin
14286
From: Kevin Lee
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:06pm
Subject: Re: Feuillade at MoMA maybe?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> Sorry to interrupt the discussion about Tarantino being responsible
> for all the world's ills,
Just for the record, I wasn't one of the Tarantino-bashers this
time. Proud of me?
Anyway I hope that Feuillade rumor is true.
14287
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:09pm
Subject: Re: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
>
> The actual wording on the cover is more insidious. It says (very large
> down the lefthandside): "Quentin Tarantino's", and then, smaller at the
> top: "rolling thunder pictures" and then even smaller, "presents"...
Ahh... that's right.
In the battle of design taste though, there is no big-name studio that
has wrought in recent times a package more garish and tasteless than
this --
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0767809688.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
cmk.
14288
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:28pm
Subject: Re: Feuillade at MoMA maybe?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee" wrote:
> Anyway I hope that Feuillade rumor is true.
If they're showing TIH-MINH I'll go on vacation to see it. Knowing
MoMA, they'll show each serial once, every episode on the same day.
But still.
-Jaime
14289
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:33pm
Subject: Re: Re: Feuillade at MoMA maybe?
Back in 1969 I saw "Tih Minh" and "Barabbas" at MOMA.
Each of them was shown in one sitting. "Tih Minh" is
incredible.
--- "Jaime N. Christley"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
> wrote:
>
> > Anyway I hope that Feuillade rumor is true.
>
> If they're showing TIH-MINH I'll go on vacation to
> see it. Knowing
> MoMA, they'll show each serial once, every episode
> on the same day.
> But still.
>
> -Jaime
>
>
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14290
From: Michael Worrall
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 10:57pm
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
wrote:
> Oh, I'd say it's definitely worth your while to watch it on the
big
> screen, even if it's been Miram-axed.
Here's some more news on the tactics Miramax is using to
protect "their" films:
http://www.monkeypeaches.com/0408M.html#040814A
Michael Worrall
14291
From: Adam Hart
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:03pm
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
I got that beat. My all-time favorite video cover is Sonatine. Takeshi Kitano's masterpiece
and one of my favorite films of the last ten (or so) years, all they could find to put on the
cover (other than Quentin's face) was that it was "Strongly reminiscent of Goodfellas."
-adam
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley wrote:
> > I love how the American 'Chungking Express' DVD has "QUENTIN TARANTINO
> > PRESENTS A ROLLING THUNDER PRODUCTION" as the real eye-popper on the
> > cover.
>
> The actual wording on the cover is more insidious. It says (very large
> down the lefthandside): "Quentin Tarantino's", and then, smaller at the
> top: "rolling thunder pictures" and then even smaller, "presents"...
>
> The result being... that it looks like "Quentin Tarantino's Chungking
> Express". Wong's name is microscopic.
>
> It's one of the messiest DVD covers I've ever seen... replete with
> idiotic "Incredibly sexy!" and "Intoxicating and irresistible!" quotes
> too.
>
> -Nick>-
14292
From: Adam Hart
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:07pm
Subject: Re: Carl Th. Dreyer interviewer needs IDing
> Some background is needed here. The film had reportedly been laughed off
> the screen almost literally at various European festivals. It was
> ridiculed by critics, including many who expressed admiration for
> Dreyer's earlier films. One called it "a two hour study in sofas and
> pianos," which of course to me seemed (and still seems) quite appealing;
> an ostensibly narrative film that's really a study in furniture could be
> great.
I just watched Gertrud for the first time last night (on dvd). While I found the film itself
wonderfully hypnotic and beautiful in every possible way, I have to say that I was
disappointed by the furniture. The sofas just didn't quite cut it for me.
14293
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:12pm
Subject: Re: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
>
> Here's some more news on the tactics Miramax is using to
> protect "their" films:
> http://www.monkeypeaches.com/0408M.html#040814A
The question is who's going to be the first one to go through the
trouble (and the money) of filing the lawsuit. Isn't this what Mitch
Kapor and the EFF used to handle?
I was just completely surprised to find out Seijun Suzuki is currently
shooting (has finished shooting?) a geisha-musical with Zhang Zi-yi.
(Who will be a Japanese again in Rob Marshall's forthcoming 'Memoirs of
a Geisha.') Can't -wait- to see this...
craig.
14294
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 0:41am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
For the record, count me in as a Tarantino basher.
Forgot to say what the link I posted earlier was for:
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/noelmoviereviews/message/372
Hero opened in Manila on February, 2003.
14295
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 3:38am
Subject: Re: Feuillade at MoMA maybe?
From a friend:
"Yes, MOMA is doing a Feuillade series early next year. (They
mentioned it in a press release.) He will be paired with Griffith. It
was very vague about what films they'll actually be showing. I fear
4 or 5 7-hour films crammed into 2 weeks. Other interesting stuff
on the plate included Otar Iosseliani, and the premiere of a new
Godard film (reportedly a 90-minute condensation of
HISTOIRE(S) DU CINEMA). Less interesting: Christopher Guest,
George Stevens, Julien Duvivier."
-Jaime
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> Back in 1969 I saw "Tih Minh" and "Barabbas" at MOMA.
>
> Each of them was shown in one sitting. "Tih Minh" is
> incredible.
>
> --- "Jaime N. Christley"
> wrote:
>
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Lee"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Anyway I hope that Feuillade rumor is true.
> >
> > If they're showing TIH-MINH I'll go on vacation to
> > see it. Knowing
> > MoMA, they'll show each serial once, every episode
> > on the same day.
> > But still.
> >
> > -Jaime
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14296
From:
Date: Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:38pm
Subject: Milwaukee Plays Itself??
Sorry I'm coming late to this fascinating post but I moved 1200 miles away
(to Austin - AMAZING film town, btw) last week. I have mixed feelings about Los
Angeles Plays Itself which I posted a while back (basically, I thought the
Neo-Realism Is The Answer ending was facile). But as I was walking out of the
theatre, I said to my friend something along the lines of "Boy, I never realized
that cities could be stereotyped too." To which she replied, "Well, I'm from
Los Angeles so I know that very well." And I got to thinking that in 3 hours,
the film never touched on city bigotry overall. I mean, at least he COULD make
a 3 hour film about Los Angeles. Or Paris, as someone mentioned. Certainly
NYC. Milwaukee's streets and monuments could not be stereotyped for anyone except
people who live in Milwaukee and even then, I doubt the local media has
transformed the landscape so radically. At the end of the day, we're talking about
a city that already has more than enough discourse larding it down. That
doesn't automatically invalidate Andersen's project. But it left me a bit cold.
Now I'd LOVE to see a film about Canada, how Alberta now stands in for the
American West, how Bollywood productions regualrly set up camp there, etc.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14297
From: Jaime N. Christley
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 3:55am
Subject: Re: Further reading on Hero and Zhang Yimou
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller wrote:
> In the battle of design taste though, there is no big-name studio that
> has wrought in recent times a package more garish and tasteless than
> this --
>
> http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0767809688.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
>
> cmk.
Oh wow. But the cover doesn't make it clear, is it a DVD? What
studio produced it? Is it about the navy or something?
-Jaime
14298
From:
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 0:14am
Subject: Smilin' Through/They All Laughed
It was a week for the list creators' fave films.
So Fred (and whoever else), I finally saw Smilin' Through (1941) and I'm now
certifiably perplexed that you find it the best Borzage. The first half hour
or so was quite lovely. I admired the lazy introductions of the songs, the
intense blues peering through the windows, the lush vegetation that seemed to work
like a dissolve. And the father's portrait made for some gorgeous
compositions (as well as a nagging reminder of the past). But eventaully, the direction
became workaday. Very establishing shot, shot-reverse-shot, etc. Right now, I
have to agree with Kehr that it seems like a tepid run through for Moonrise. I
guess I prefer genius worn on the sleeve.
Have you written on it? I'd love to learn more.
Also took in They All Laughed, Peter. Liked it much more than Smilin'
Through. I'm not convinced that women control this universe, especially when the end
has Ben Gazzara reminiscing about Audrey Hepburn but nothing from her POV. And
I find all the "real" connections a bit privileged if not downright eerie
(eg. the Stratten idolatry ooks me out). But it truly has this drifty, ineffable
feel to it. I'm surprised to hear Bogdanovich say he tried to reign it in
through genre conventions because it's quite unfettered. And yet, NYC never seemed
so specific, so loved. Hard to say something final about the film but I dug
it fine (and I see the seeds of The Sleepy Time Gal and All The Real Girls).
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14299
From:
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:00am
Subject: Re: Smilin' Through/They All Laughed
Kevin John wrote:
>I'm not convinced that women control this universe, especially
>when the end
>has Ben Gazzara reminiscing about Audrey Hepburn but nothing from her POV.
The concept of women in control of things is certainly a part of
Bogdanovich's cinema, in my opinion, but that doesn't mean that the POVs are necessarily
evenly dispersed between the genders. For instance, I don't think there's a
single shot in "Daisy Miller" seen from Daisy's perspective, and yet
Bogdanovich's profound sympathy for her character comes through; his camera is often
seeing things specifically from Winterbourne's eye, but he allows the audience to
see Winterbourne for what he is and how profoundly wrong he is. Anyway, in
"They All Laughed" there's one extraordinary shot in the film (which I detail in
my piece) where Dolores takes command of a sequence (visually speaking) seen
heretofore from Charles's perspective. I think that shot sort of sums up the
view of the film, but obviously most of it is literally "seen" from the
perspectives of these private eyes who fall for these amazing women.
As far as its relation to genre, it's certainly not a standard detective
film, I'll grant you, but it's laced with a certain kind of acting and a certain
tone which lends it a "movie" feel that I think Bogdanovich was aiming for (as
opposed to a more realistic, explicitly autobiographical feel.)
I'm glad you liked the film. Were I to name ten films I return to every year
like a great novel or piece of music, "They All Laughed" would be among them
no questions asked. Writing my piece was a total joy because it necessitated
my watching of it - as well as "Targets," "Daisy Miller," "Saint Jack," etc.,
etc. - many times over.
Peter
14300
From: Fred Camper
Date: Sat Aug 21, 2004 6:38am
Subject: Re: Smilin' Through/They All Laughed
Well, I don't think you can ever that film is or is not well directed,
or is or is not great art, by, for example, seeing how much it hews to
establishing shot and reverse angle conventions. The very greatest of
films could look on the surface like it's mechanically following
Hollywood rules, and plenty of horrible films do all sorts of
"inventive" things.
I do recognize I'm in the minority on "Smilin' Through." And no, I've
not written on it, though I guess I'm about to a bit.
Two comments. The first, in this paragraph, involves a spoiler. The
couple find a scene from the past in an abandoned house. Later, in
flashback, we see how this frozen-in-time tableau had been created
decades earlier. This "trope," though it's not exactly a trope, seems to
me the most devastatingly great piece of storytelling in Borzage. As the
actions in the real time of the flashback fill in the spaces "between"
the dramatic tableau that the couple had encountered, the effect is not
at all fatalistic, as one might expect, but rather to imbue every piece
of the frame, every static object, with a similar life. One then feels
that there's a story and a romance we can only guess at, but that we
should imagine, behind everything we see, including every other moment
of the film.
The second point is that aside from this moment, the greatness of the
film for me lies in the incredible tension between the sensuousness of
the colors and textures and the feeling that they are fleeting,
momentary apparitions; that there's a mysterious lightness and
immateriality to every object we see; that all encounters, whether
between people and people or people and objects or objects and objects,
are kin to the proverbial two carriages that pass in the night (and
those who have seen the film will know why I chose this) metaphor. What
I'm describing is generally true of Borzage at his greatest -- witness
the ending of "The Mortal Storm" as the other hyperbolic example -- but
this particular visual vision seems the strongest, the fullest, the
richest in "Smilin' Through."
The two points, of course, support each other; the second is the
"formal" version of the first, and the second also determines the
non-fatalistic way in which one takes the first.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, did you see it on video?
I'm guessing that you did because this is not exactly screened very
often in prints. I've seen it in a print exactly twice in my life.
I find it extremely frustrating to argue films with people who, in my
view, haven't seen them. I'm not saying that no film survives video, but
color films on video can be especially dubious. I myself saw "Smilin'
Through" for the first time on color TV, and liked it only mildly. The
things that make it great, the things that make so many films great for
me, are *not* acting or "mise en scene" (in the sense of, for example,
blocking, placement of objects, et cetera) and certainly not the script
or narrative or even the relationship between the things I've just
listed -- and all of them actually do survive video pretty well -- but
the subtler visual elements, that which is uniquely filmic, the
particular qualities of surface texture and depth and shape and light,
which video at best mistranslates and at worse destroys.
If you want further evidence that I'm totally nuts, as many think, take
a look at my favorite of the Hollywood Vidors sometime, another film on
which I am very much in the minority, "An American Romance." The great
parts are so great that it's my favorite Vidor even though it's
incredibly uneven.
Fred Camper
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact