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.


14801


From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:15pm
Subject: Re: The Village (visuals vs. narration??)
 
But what the hell are you talking about, Bill? There is nothing
there of secondary interest. What shall we talk about then? The
colour of a flower, of a cape? Is that enough? No. We should talk of
the paling face when the branches are cracking. We should talk of
the tensing faces when all convictions are collapsing. We shall talk
of Ivy's face looking to the sun when repressed desire comes to
light. But Joaquim Phoenix is a trunk and M. Night can't handle the
chisel. The flowers are red but I can't smell any sent. The capes
are orange but so are all worldwide firms' logos now. Ivy is a
charm, but M. Night doesn't know how to look at her. This is what
the movie is about, buried fears and desires. With M. Night in
charge to find for them a visual equivalent. But, according to what
I saw, he stuck to easy production values.

I was under the impression that, with Signs, he succeeded in doing
something close of what he had to do: the impression that the mise-
en-scene reproduced, all along the film, and with some brio, the
idea that "everything is linked to everything", "the feeling that
every single shot was not fortuite, as part of a solid
construction", as I said in a previous post. An idea of the world,
and maybe, an idea of the cinema. But, unfortunately, there again, I
could not differentiate the actors from the corn cobs.

An idea of the world, let's talk about it. Why? Because the film is
there, not its impulse (yes, we don't care about the plot, we don't
care about the tricks – silly or not), but its finality. Stale I
said? I stick to that. Urban violence and its conjuration? Really?
Fear of the Stranger, fear of what we are, negation and withdrawal,
yes. That's a sick idea I guess. This withdrawal is the one of M.
Night too, as a filmmaker: refuse to look at his actors, to look at
their faces, to look at their fear.

Maxime


--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> So (in my kindest, gentlest tone) what is the stale idea conveyed
by > SPOILER> >
> the murder and Ivy's journey? The purpose of the village is to
> eliminate violence -- all the founders lost someone to urban
> violence. But when violence of the worst kind happens there, it
never
> raises questions for the founders. Ivy's ordeal -- which, IMO, has
> none of the sadism of the treatment of Mia Farrow in Speak No
Evil,
> Damien: Fleischer or no Fleischer, that's a stomach-turning film,
and
> no touchstone of cinematic culture in my book -- is a function of
> that gaping contradiction: the withdrawal doesn't keep out
violence,
> but it does keep out medicine. As long as we're doing narratology,
> does anyone want to comment on that?
>
> My main point, in any case, is that one doesn't even have to talk
> about this stuff, which is of secondary interest, to review one of
> these films. If ever there was a chance for critics, pro or con,
to
> simply talk about the visual plan of the film they're reviewing,
this
> is it! But it's never mentioned. That's because no one talks about
> film as a visual medium in the mainstream press. Instead they
soldier
> on while whining about not being able to reveal the plot -- which
> would enable them to conclusively damn the thing, so silly is it.
In
> a way, denying them that habitual crutch may be the best
> justification for MNS's "trick endings." (PS, this film doesn't
have
> one. The real nature of the beasts is revealed halfway thru.)
>
> Hearing Fred defend Collateral as a film definitely makes me want
to
> see the whole thing. I love Husbands and Wives, but I might be
> disoriented walking into it 2/3 of the way through. And Fred, from
> what has been drifting to my ears from the interview FX's book is
> based on, city-consciousness is supreme to Mann (as it is to
> Friedkin). I'm still not sure what De Niro was doing living in a
$2
> million house in Heat, my last full viewing of a Mann film, but
> that's a Thom Andersen gripe, not a hotlove gripe -- maybe he was
on
> the take. For the record, I didn't like the picture.
>
> As for MNS, his films are eschatological fables, and narrative
> probability isn't a main consideration in that genre. Actually, I
> really don't consider either The Sixth Sense or Unbreakable to
have
> silly stories -- in addition, the story of Unbreakable is rather
> original, IMO -- but again, that's not the main thing I pay
attention
> to in them. What is clear is that a lot of people who write about
> film -- and some who make them -- are driven up the wall by what
this
> guy is doing!
>
> The last two have raised the most hackles, because they are rather
> risky compared to Sixth Sense, a recycled Twilight Zone. Using a
Rube
> Goldberg causality model consisting of greenskinned aliens, a
> horrible car wreck and glasses of water to justify the ways of God
to
> Man isn't silly -- it's outrageous. And I like outrageous.
14802


From: Craig Keller
Date: Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:17pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
>>
> http://www.suntimes.com/output/eb-feature/sho-sunday-gallo29.html
>>
> The only good Republican is a dead Republican.
>
> Preferably one who has been subjected to a slow and
> extremely painful death.

That's not true, David. Shannen Doherty is a Republican -- only one in
a long list of traits that would seem to suggest she's semi-satanic --

-- which of course only makes her all the more sickly appealing. Like
no-one on this list has ever fantasized about being made love to by a
succubus.

cmk.
14803


From:
Date: Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:31pm
Subject: Love stories
 
Saw two recent love stories at the Detroit Film Theater:
Zhou Yu's Train (Sun Zhou, China, 2002)
La Finestra di fronte / Facing Windows (Ferzan Ozpetek, Italy, 2003)
Both are well worth seeing. They combine mildly experimental techniques, such
as mixing past and present, juggled chronology, montage, to tell their
stories in non-linear fashion. The influence of Resnais is present here, as in so
much else, although both are much softer-edged and langorous than Resnais. Zhou
Yu's Train is permanently mystifying - the plot is never fully clarified,
whereas Facing Windows ultimately explains everything. Both are full of romantic
imagery, and both have a lot going on - neither one is minimalistic (and a good
thing too, IMHO).
Both films have really been getting panned here in the United States.
Although Facing Windows got a strong positive review from Andrew Sarris. Apparently,
we are so innundated with tender love stories at the multiplex that we can
condescend to good love stories from other sources. Right!
Mike Grost
14804


From:
Date: Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:50pm
Subject: Frazetta: Painting with Fire (Lance Laspina)
 
Frazetta: Painting with Fire (Lance Laspina, USA, 2003) is a documentary
about artist Frank Frazetta. Frazetta, who is thankfully still alive, had a long
career, first in the comics field, then as a painter of paperback book covers.
He became famous in the 1960's and 1970's for his cover illustrations for
"Conan the Barbarian" and other sword and sorcery fantasy novels.
This documentary is really gripping. It is straightforward, trying to show us
as much as possible about Frazetta's life, art, and influence on many
different media. It is being shown on the Independent Film Channel (IFC) here in the
United States.
I have never had the slightest interest in Conan or other swordsman types.
But I have to admit that seeing lots of Frazetta's covers in sequence brings out
all sorts of subtle beauties in his work that were not apparent to me before.
My favorite Frazetta work is not discussed in the documentary: the racecar
comic strip "Johnny Comet" (1952-1953). This exciting strip by the 24 year old
Frazetta is still considered a classic by comics enthusiasts. The whole strip
has been reprinted in a single paperback volume.
This movie is definitely recommended. It is a joyful look into the
accomplishments of a talented person.

Mike Grost
14805


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 0:59am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Craig Keller wrote:

Like
> no-one on this list has ever fantasized about being
> made love to by a
> succubus.
>
In which case I prefer expert professionals

http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g008/barbarasteele.html





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14806


From:
Date: Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:08pm
Subject: Re: Love stories
 
MILD SPOILERS

Mike, my main problem with Facing Windows is that it indulges in “
homosexuality as secret” which is one of the more insidious forms of homophobia.
Curiously (or not), a lot of homophobic constructions run throughout the openly gay
Ozpetek’s oeuvre. Fortunately, in Facing Windows, the wife’s story somewhat
mitigates the effects of this disturbing, at best, impulse. She gets to see her
apartment and her life from the perspective of the hunky bachelor’s pad and
thus gains the rare opportunity to step outside her self. Also, it's nice to
see a film with Hitchcockian overtones that isn't suspenseful or terrifying.

Kevin John


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14807


From: Craig Keller
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 1:24am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
>
> Like
>> no-one on this list has ever fantasized about being
>> made love to by a
>> succubus.
>>
> In which case I prefer expert professionals
>
> http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g008/barbarasteele.html

Touché. Keeping '8-1/2' in mind, I'd cite Sandra Milo in the hotel
bedroom -- swooping down in eyebrow-paint with the white sheet
stretched to envelop.

cmk.
14808


From: Dave Kehr
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:50am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
I've got to go with David on this one. Not only is he a jerk, he's
a racist, homophobic possibly dangerous jerk. But his movie isn't
half bad.

After the screening in Cannes last year, I ran into Claire Denis who
had a very funny story. It seems that one of the prosthetic penises
used in "Trouble Every Day," in which Ms. Denis directed Mr. Gallo,
went mysteriously missing after the shoot. Claire said she
recognized it immediately when it appeared on screen in "The Big
Bunny," and later confronted Gallo about it. According to her, he
stammered and turned away.

Claire was relating this marvelous anecdote to lots of people so I
don't think it was meant to be a big secret. In any case, it has a
certain ring of authenticity.

Dave
14809


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:53am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Craig Keller wrote:


> Touché. Keeping '8-1/2' in mind, I'd cite Sandra
> Milo in the hotel
> bedroom -- swooping down in eyebrow-paint with the
> white sheet
> stretched to envelop.
>
And don't forget Edy Vessel in the harem sequence who
says "He said I could be in the movie if I changed my
dress" -- which is precisely what Fellini told her
only moments before.






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14810


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:00am
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Dave Kehr wrote:


> After the screening in Cannes last year, I ran into
> Claire Denis who
> had a very funny story. It seems that one of the
> prosthetic penises
> used in "Trouble Every Day," in which Ms. Denis
> directed Mr. Gallo,
> went mysteriously missing after the shoot. Claire
> said she
> recognized it immediately when it appeared on screen
> in "The Big
> Bunny," and later confronted Gallo about it.
> According to her, he
> stammered and turned away.
>
> Claire was relating this marvelous anecdote to lots
> of people so I
> don't think it was meant to be a big secret. In any
> case, it has a
> certain ring of authenticity.
>


BUSTED!

I'd heard that it was a prosthetic penis from those
who saw the thing last year at Cannes.

It only goes to show that Mr. Gallo is a truly
dedicated Republican.



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14811


From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:18am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
> ALL SPOILERS ---
>
> > And it's not so much realism as it is convincing me that
> > people would act that way. Send your blind daughter off alone in
> the
> > woods (she should have gone off on her own, as an act of
> rebellion)?
>
> He sends her with two strong young men as companions.

Two strong young men with my blind daughter? I wouldn't trust her
with a gay cousin, I don't care how strong-willed she is. Hurt must
really want a son, I think.

> > Leave a blind girl in the forest (she should be as much in danger
> of
> > having her mission aborted by the guy dragging her home with
him).
>
> The companions are cowards, a trait bred into them by Hurt and
> company. Would you try to drag Bryce Howard home at the cost of the
> life of the man she loves?

Wouldn't bother me for a second. No, I'd probably court her myself,
afterwards, after a respectful mourning period (hell, maybe not even--
women are so susceptible when in grief) and point out that I saved
her life.

>She has more balls than all the other
> young adults in the community put together -- she'd claw the kid's
> eyes out.

I'd liked to have seen that, but Night doesn't seem to go for that
sort of thing. It would shake all the cobwebs from the movie.

> I'm tilting the interpretation toward a critique of Hurt, but I'm
> still waiting to hear ANY interpretation except: "Naw, couldn't
be."

Maybe because it really and truly couldn't? What else can it be
anyway?
14812


From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:00am
Subject: Re: Love stories
 
> Saw two recent love stories at the Detroit Film Theater:
> Zhou Yu's Train (Sun Zhou, China, 2002)

I rather liked ZHOU YU'S TRAIN also, and am a little surprised at all
the negative reactions to it. - Dan
14813


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:11am
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
David E. wrote:
> BUSTED!
>
> I'd heard that it was a prosthetic penis from those who saw the thing
> last year at Cannes.
>
> It only goes to show that Mr. Gallo is a truly dedicated Republican.


..and because it might not be his real penis the film should be
dismissed?

btw. for those who care whether it's his real penis, Gallo's line is:

"Gallo said the scene was crucial to the film and that it is his real
penis, not a prosthetic."
interview in the Toronto Sun.


Dave K. wrote:
> Not only is he a jerk, he's a racist, homophobic possibly dangerous
> jerk.

Like Lenny Bruce, he's not afraid to use certain words, but I doubt
he's any of the above (except maybe an occasional jerk). Oh, and he has
a lovely voice http://warprecords.com/image.php?id=1684

Gallo is a complicated character and, as Gabe intimated, it's very easy
to read interviews with him and write him off as many things, but I
think he deserves a closer look (if only because he was on UK TV in the
late 90s promoting BUFFALO 66 and did nothing but riff about Ozu all
the time! - oh, and BUFFALO 66 is a great film.)

Many of his (often hilarious) articles are here:
http://www.galloappreciation.com/index2.html


from a recent NYTimes magazine piece:
-Nick>-


>> Why are you a Republican?
>
> If we were going to see a show of Dennis Hopper's photographs, do you
> think Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton would be more sensitive to the
> work? I see Nixon as an intellectual. I consider Bill Clinton a
> huckster.
>
>> There are so few right-wing actors like yourself, now that the
>> generation of John Wayne has died off.
>
> I agree with you. It is not an interesting group. But I would rather
> have dinner with Newt or Dick Armey than with Bruce Springsteen.
>
>> Perhaps you can speak at the Republican convention.
>
> I would like to. They haven't invited me yet.
14814


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:15am
Subject: All the Ships at Sea Screening
 
Still time to get a ticket for one of two screenings of Dan's movie
at EZTV, thereby contributing a double sawbuck to the Kery campaign.
The event is now listed on the JohnKerry.com website under the
plan/attend an event section. Enter in zipcode and distance as
queried and you will find it under Sept. 22. Tickets are selling
briskly.
14815


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:29am
Subject: Re: Terre sans pain (was: voiceover)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman
wrote:
> hotlove666 wrote:

> Here's what I'm wondering: it often seems to happen in documentary
that
> something unforseen intervenes during the shooting of a scene that
can't
> be reshot, and including it in the final cut ends up radically
changing
> the nature of the film.

It could easily have affected the narration, written later, by making
it more upfront about manipulation -- a common element in docs of
that time. They had seen the newsreel of King Alfonso's visit, which
parctically shows no HURDANOS, while describing their tearful
gratitude at the (soon-to-be-defunct) monarch's dropping in. (It was
a photo op to distract from a Middle Eastern venture -- a war in
Morocco -- that had gone bad for Alfonso...) Seeing that, you don't
need a diagram to know that documentaries can lie, and it's very
pointed the way this one doesn't. And certainly both authors were
very interested in film theory. So that dimension is there, and the
accident may have prompted them to develop it. Remember, documentary
was considered by the Surrealists -- Dali had writen well on this --
as a device for liberating the unconscious, comparable to automatic
writing, because the camera automatically registered events beyond
the director's control.

But there are so many other dimensions to the film. For one thing, it
is really about "the Spain of Spain" -- that's how Legendre saw Las
Hurdes, and made the case in great detail. The equation is conveyed
by the initial setup -- a map of Spain dissolving to La Alberca, a
wealthy but very retro village that borders the region, and a contest
where young men ride thru the square and rip off a hanging cock's
head. It's significant that the Republic, when they finally paid for
the soundtrack in 1936, asked for the map of Spain to be removed,
although it's still in some versions. They also made Bunuel cut a
closeup of a cock's head being ripped off (which would have been the
slit eyeball of Terre sans pain), which the writers had described as
conveying some sexual symbolism they weren't going to comment on.
Spain.

Charles Tesson has said that the presence of Terre sans pain in most
of Bunuel's Spanish-language films distinguishes that period from the
French period that begins with Belle de jour. It's everywhere --
maybe even in the prologue of L'age d'or, made before Terre sans pain
but after the publication of Legendre's book in 1927.
14816


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:43am
Subject: Re: Re: Terre sans pain (was: voiceover)
 
> Charles Tesson has said that the presence of Terre sans pain in most
> of Bunuel's Spanish-language films distinguishes that period from the
> French period that begins with Belle de jour. It's everywhere --
> maybe even in the prologue of L'age d'or, made before Terre sans pain
> but after the publication of Legendre's book in 1927.

btw. The bfi release L'AGE D'OR and UN CHIEN ANDALOU together on DVD in
November. List price appears to be a whopping GBP £30, which will
probably be about US $100 in Nov if Bush wins.

-Nick>-
14817


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:48am
Subject: Re: The Village (visuals vs. narration??)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
> But what the hell are you talking about, Bill? There is nothing
> there of secondary interest. What shall we talk about then? The
> colour of a flower, of a cape? Is that enough? No. We should talk
of
> the paling face when the branches are cracking. We should talk of
> the tensing faces when all convictions are collapsing. We shall
talk
> of Ivy's face looking to the sun when repressed desire comes to
> light. But Joaquim Phoenix is a trunk and M. Night can't handle the
> chisel. The flowers are red but I can't smell any sent. The capes
> are orange but so are all worldwide firms' logos now. Ivy is a
> charm, but M. Night doesn't know how to look at her. This is what
> the movie is about, buried fears and desires. With M. Night in
> charge to find for them a visual equivalent. But, according to what
> I saw, he stuck to easy production values.

Well-said, and not wrong, except for the last sentence.

> An idea of the world, let's talk about it. Why? Because the film is
> there, not its impulse (yes, we don't care about the plot, we don't
> care about the tricks – silly or not), but its finality. Stale I
> said? I stick to that. Urban violence and its conjuration? Really?
> Fear of the Stranger, fear of what we are, negation and withdrawal,
> yes. That's a sick idea I guess. This withdrawal is the one of M.
> Night too, as a filmmaker: refuse to look at his actors, to look at
> their faces, to look at their fear.

SPOILERS --

Since we're talking about the content again, Ali, a UCLA film student
who works in Cinefile, told me tonight that she's seen the film twice
and thinks the villagers are psychotic. As someone whose adult life
to date has been spent in under a proto-fascist regime built on media-
hyped fear, she was of course quick to spot the metaphor for Bush's
War on Terror. And I have no doubt that you noticed that Hurt --
whose loony schemes keep out medicine, but not violence, and
whose "game preserve" contains not one living animal: a wasteland
that permits the existence of an artificial paradise at its center --
is afraid to take Sigourney Weaver's hand. It IS a film about fear,
and it is also completely inexplicit in what it is doing. (Definition
of Hell for an American critic: He can't pan the movie by telling the
story sarcastically [= "wittily"], and there's no dialogue to explain
the point to him! Yikes!) But Ivy is not confused with the corncobs.
It's the first MNS film built around a heroine, in a world of elders
who are terrified children and children whose emotional life has been
sucked out of them by rituals of repression. Maybe that's why women
like it -- Ali isn't the only one I know who does.
14818


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:50am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
> > I'm tilting the interpretation toward a critique of Hurt, but I'm
> > still waiting to hear ANY interpretation except: "Naw, couldn't
> be."
>
> Maybe because it really and truly couldn't? What else can it be
> anyway?

See my reply to Maxime.
14819


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:53am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
> > I'm tilting the interpretation toward a critique of Hurt, but I'm
> > still waiting to hear ANY interpretation except: "Naw, couldn't
> be."
>
> Maybe because it really and truly couldn't? What else can it be
> anyway?

And Maxime's comments that I'm replying to. Together they constitute
a complete reading of the film on four levels: visuals, acting,
politics, psychology. I should also add a 5th: formal radicalism,
which consists in blocking all habitual "critical" responses by the
people who are paid to do that. They're still furious.
14820


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:55am
Subject: Re: Terre sans pain (was: voiceover)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley wrote:
> btw. The bfi release L'AGE D'OR and UN CHIEN ANDALOU together on
DVD in
> November. List price appears to be a whopping GBP £30, which will
> probably be about US $100 in Nov if Bush wins.
>
> -Nick>-

The one good thing for me in the last four years: I am often paid in
Euros, and the destruction of the US economy by these hyenas
increases their dollar value.
14821


From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:50am
Subject: Re: The Village (visuals vs. narration??)
 
> who works in Cinefile, told me tonight that she's seen the film
twice
> and thinks the villagers are psychotic.

I agree, but what do we see about their psychosis? I think it's
barely explored (I think it's barely sustainable for five years,
much less the decades they seem to have had).

>she was of course quick to spot the metaphor for Bush's
> War on Terror.

Hm. Seen Anacondas recently, and it has this subtext too of white
men (with the occasional ethnic minority) adventuring in a foreign
country for an idealized prize (in this case, The Fountain of
Youth). I can't quite fit in the villainous English-accented
scientist--a symbol for Tony Blair, perhaps?

> and it is also completely inexplicit in what it is doing.

Agree on that too.

>obs.
> It's the first MNS film built around a heroine, in a world of
elders
> who are terrified children and children whose emotional life has
been
> sucked out of them by rituals of repression.

Didn't see that--the kids, actually the entire village seems
perfectly happy to live their lives and be occasionally terrorized
by Those Who We Don't Talk About Much.
14822


From: Damien Bona
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 7:14am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny and Brown Shirts
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
. The only good Republican is a dead Republican.
>
> Preferably one who has been subjected to a slow and
> extremely painful death.


David, just be thankful you're not in New York right now, the
Republicans having crawled out from under the rocks where they live
their rotten lives. You can spot them a half a block away, and they
have a vacant dead look in their eyes -- they're uncannily like the
Pod People in Invasion of the Body Snatchers (a lot of the women look
like Dana Wynter). And the way they dress -- you can tell they have
money but they ain't got no class.

Their presence is so infuriating that I find myself yelling at them
every time they pass by on the sidewalk. But it's not just me --
from a number of reports, thousands of good folks are doing their
best to make the Republicans feel unwelcomed. "Go back home! We
don't want you here!" and "Assholes!" seem to be particularly popular
greetings. I saw one website which had a picture section devoted to
delightful photos of the G.O.P.ers being harrassed -- there was a
hilarious shot entitled "Republican Couple Fleeing DOwn 42nd Street."

Today some well-heeled old fool outside the Marriott Marquis Hotel
wasn't watching where he was going, so I saw my opening and took it –
I increased my pace and stepped in front of him, sticking out my
elbow out so that his prominent stomach walked right into it. This
then gave me the opportunity to loudly berate him while he profusely
apologized.

The United For Justice and Peace rally was exhilerating and
inspirational. Some of the more memorable signs included:

I VOTED IN 2000 AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY PRESIDENT

DUDE, WHERE'S MY SURPLUS?

LOOK AT THE MESS YOU'VE MADE YOU DIRTY, DIRTY MAN

CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS FRIGGIN' GUY?

RNC, YA'LL DON'T COME BACK NOW, YA HEAR?

BUSH + DICK = FUCKED

IT'S EASY TO FIGHT TERRORISM: STOP PARTICIPATING IN IT

I DON'T WANT TO BURN OUR FLAG, I JUST WANT TO WASH IT

BUSH CAN KISS MY BLACK ASS

BUSH IS A TURD

WMDs ARE IN MSG

4 MORE YEARS? I CAN'T STAND 4 MORE MINUTES

Repulsive
Evil
Power-mad
Unprincipled
Bigoted
Lying
Immoral
Cold-hearted
Anti-Environment
Neanderthal
Sleazeballs


AND MY THREE FAVORITES:

"YEE-HAW" IS NOT A FOREIGN POLICY

DRUNKEN FRAT BOY DRIVES COUNTRY INTO DITCH

DEAD IRAQI CIVILIANS FOR KERRY


My own sign read, "My Cat Tiffany Only Scratches Republicans"
14823


From: Adrian Martin
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:28am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
"Joaquim Phoenix is a trunk and M. Night can't handle the
chisel"

Maxime, you should get the A FILM BY award for best critical bon mot for
that one! Fantastic stuff!

To enter the fray on this film - which I just saw and didn't like much - I
was intrigued by what you say, Maxime, about the film's theme being
'withdrawal from the world'. You put that in a negative light, as if MNS is
advocating this withdrawal - and enacting it himself, in his slick, evasive
style. What is puzzling me about the film is its stance or attitude towards
this withdrawal and repression (it's definitely a film about social
repression and 'scapegoating' - something Bill K has often mentioned in this
group). How ironic is the film being at the end? The 'system' reconstitutes
itself on the basis of further repression, etc. Surely that's not a
Spielbergian happy upbeat ending?

On the other hand, and without surrendering to any banal code of
verisimilitude, I find myself agreeing with Noel that there is so little
'reality' (even of a highly stylised and fictional sort) established in this
movie that where it then tries to go does not really 'take' for me. (And,
for what it's worth, I found the characters pretty dull except for the main
girl, and some of the actors bad or at least miscast: Phoenix, Michael Pitt,
twitchy-screaming Adrien Brody.) I got no sense of the community, its
rituals, how it sustains itself (other than in the abstract, symbolic
sense), etc. Instead, MNS went for strange Dreyer-Malick effects with houses
stuck in fields, painterly compositions of folk-groupings, etc - and they
didn't ever coalesce into an overall 'plan' (Bill's word) for me. Near the
start, I mentally noted that shot Peter mentioned, it's even better than he
remembered, because the choreography - from the women sweeping to a spot of
twirling-dancing and then back to strict sweeping - is keyed to several
large shifts of the camera position; that's good mise en scène to me. But
the shot never connected to anything else later, that I could sense on one
viewing.

As with a lot of American horror-fantasy stuff, however, I did like some of
the more way-out, quasi avant-garde effects with blur, out-of-focus fields,
coloured objects scarcely visible in the dark, etc (and some of this keyed
to the sound design - by the way, it's a rarity for such a prominent credit
actually for Sound Design in a Big Hollywood Movie like this. David Lynch
once had to use subterfuge to get this credit under the radar of industrial
regulations!) But if I really want avant-garde blur in a fractured narrative
about all things violent, it's surely time for me to get out my DVD of
Philippe Grandrieux's SOMBRE (1998)! Bill, is that one in your serial killer
book? I hope so, it's a masterpiece!!!

Adrian
14824


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:46am
Subject: Re: The Village (visuals vs. narration??)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
ALL SPOILERS

> > who works in Cinefile, told me tonight that she's seen the film
> twice
> > and thinks the villagers are psychotic.
>
> I agree, but what do we see about their psychosis? I think it's
> barely explored (I think it's barely sustainable for five years,
> much less the decades they seem to have had).

It is gradually revealed by their actions, and by things uncovered in
Ivy's journey. Hurt is particularly scrutinized; sexual repression
seems to be a widespread symptom, not valorized as cute by the
filmmaker.

> >she was of course quick to spot the metaphor for Bush's
> > War on Terror.

> Hm. Seen Anacondas recently, and it has this subtext too of white
> men (with the occasional ethnic minority) adventuring in a foreign
> country for an idealized prize (in this case, The Fountain of
> Youth). I can't quite fit in the villainous English-accented
> scientist--a symbol for Tony Blair, perhaps?


I'm sure the metaphor is there. This particular film seems
consciously allegorical: a community of false innocence maintained by
fake boogeymen who are supposed to live in the woods, just waiting to
kill everyone.
>
> > and it is also completely inexplicit in what it is doing.
>
> Agree on that too.
>
> >obs.
> > It's the first MNS film built around a heroine, in a world of
> elders
> > who are terrified children and children whose emotional life has
> been
> > sucked out of them by rituals of repression.
>
> Didn't see that--the kids, actually the entire village seems
> perfectly happy to live their lives and be occasionally terrorized
> by Those Who We Don't Talk About Much.

aka Those We Talk About Constantly. Most of this country seems happy
to do the same, although a Zogby Int'l poll sponsored by a couple of
9/11 victims organizations, published today, shows that 49.3% of
NYers polled believe the administration knew 9/11 was coming and
consciously failed to act, and 66% polled want a new 9/11 inquiry.

Now Bob can tell me that it was really s stunt by "Night" to bolster
The Village's sagging rentals...
14825


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 11:07am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
But if I really want avant-garde blur in a fractured narrative
> about all things violent, it's surely time for me to get out my DVD
of
> Philippe Grandrieux's SOMBRE (1998)! Bill, is that one in your
serial killer
> book? I hope so, it's a masterpiece!!!
>
> Adrian

Of course it will, along with J'ai pas sommeil, another art film with
a serial killer, and I pretty much agree with your assessment, but
(serial killers aside: I don't think we do them well, except for a
few Sombre-like marginal films: Honeymoon Killers, Henry) I also like
H'wd films that break the mold and are widely seen, particularly when
there seems to be a rather specific subversive political allegory
going on, which is the case here. And the performances are part of
it. I think Joaquim Phoenix is daring casting, and I thought Brody,
who is playing a character who appears to have been made totally
insane by the situation, had a right to be tic-infested.

My informant at Cinefile said this should have been marketed as an
art film, and I don't agree. You could say that about Vertigo, too.
The glory of H'wd cinema has been its ability to produce films like
The Birds, Once Upon a Time in America, Days of Heaven, Barry Lyndon,
Heaven's Gate, AI and The Village which someone made because he
could, and which show us great things on a great screen. I'm fond of
small-audience art films too -- some of them -- but I think as a
group we tend to make a beeline for them and ignore the films made
for a large international audience. Discussions here of Hero and
Collateral -- by two directors I'm not enamored of, as it happens,
but so what -- have broken with that tendency, and I'd like to see us
doing it a bit more.
14826


From: George Robinson
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 0:02pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny and Brown Shirts
 
I haven't seen Brown Bunny; I suppose I'll get around to it eventually.
Gallo's ostensible Republicanism is of a piece with the rest of his mouthing
off.

What Damien neglected to mention -- I was at the march also; I was one of
the
pallbearers -- is the other side of the sign "WMDs ARE IN MSG," which read,
"Dump Bush/Dump Sather" referring to Glenn Sather, general manager of the
New York Rangers (home ice: MSG; but they only destroy themselves).

Incidentally, Damien, if Tiffany only scratches Republicans, your furniture
must
be in terrible shape, 'cause I know you wouldn't install a Republican in
your house,
not even to save the sofa.

George (We encourage our cats Walter and Stella to scratch bill collectors)
Robinson


What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.

-- Theodore Roethke
14827


From: Zach Campbell
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 0:37pm
Subject: OT: Brown Shirts
 
Damien:
> David, just be thankful you're not in New York right now

Yeah they barely touch Lower Manhattan though, bless them. My
friends and co-workers are talking among themselves: "Have you seen
any yet?" Like they were bizarre unwanted visitors from another
planet. Oh, wait ...

> And the way they dress -- you can tell they have
> money but they ain't got no class.

And the one Republican sighting I've seen was when I was finishing
my lunch yesterday in my favorite Chinese-owned Mexican
establishment. In walked two guys slightly older than me. One of
them was wearing a bright blue football jersey--with 'George W.
Bush' emblazoned all over it in white letters. It was so tacky
(made even tackier by the fact he was sporting this thing *in the
fucking Village*) that I was too stunned to come up with anything
good to say. I took my last bite and walked out.

> Their presence is so infuriating that I find myself yelling at
> them every time they pass by on the sidewalk.

It's really frustrating given that these aren't just the people who
are wrong (like the Republicans I have to be related to), they're
wrong and crazy and dangerous. They're like the nearly catatonic
mother of my old friend (a mother who, I swear, formed the basis for
Kathleen Turner in THE VIRGIN SUICIDES), who asked me in 2000 if I
was voting. "And Bush is your man, riiiight?" came the smug,
slurred question. Ugh.

> The United For Justice and Peace rally was exhilerating and
> inspirational. Some of the more memorable signs included:

I didn't see as many as you, Damien, but my favorite was a shirt
that said something along the lines of, "My breakfast will never
taste better than on Nov. 3."

Film-related posts to come in the future!

--Zach
14828


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 1:46pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Nick Wrigley wrote:


> ..and because it might not be his real penis the
> film should be
> dismissed?
>
> btw. for those who care whether it's his real penis,
> Gallo's line is:
>
> "Gallo said the scene was crucial to the film and
> that it is his real
> penis, not a prosthetic."
> interview in the Toronto Sun.
>
>

He's a liar.

Or to put it anothewr way, he's a Republican.
.
>
> Like Lenny Bruce, he's not afraid to use certain
> words, but I doubt
> he's any of the above (except maybe an occasional
> jerk). Oh, and he has
> a lovely voice
> http://warprecords.com/image.php?id=1684
>

He is NOT Lenny Bruce. Lenny Bruce was not about
self-arrgandizement. That's gallo's whole act. And on
that level he's not up to Joan Rivers.

> Gallo is a complicated character and, as Gabe
> intimated, it's very easy
> to read interviews with him and write him off as
> many things, but I
> think he deserves a closer look (if only because he
> was on UK TV in the
> late 90s promoting BUFFALO 66 and did nothing but
> riff about Ozu all
> the time! - oh, and BUFFALO 66 is a great film.)
>

Like riffing about Ozu makes him Serge Daney?





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14829


From: joey lindsey
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:25pm
Subject: Buffalo 66 - (was: Re: Re: Brown Bunny)
 
I hope the below is quoted correctly, it's pulled from David's response

>
> --- Nick Wrigley wrote:
>
> > riff about Ozu all
> > the time! - oh, and BUFFALO 66 is a great film.)
> >
>
Could someone please explain to me how that movie (B 66) has any merit
at all outside of Ricci? Pointing me to links is good. I saw it twice
in the theater and it got worse instead of better.




joey lindsey
14830


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:45pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny / Joe May's ASPHALT
 
> He's a liar.
>
> Or to put it anothewr way, he's a Republican.

Looks like he's both doesn't it?


>> Like Lenny Bruce, he's not afraid to use certain words, but I doubt
>> he's any of the above (except maybe an occasional jerk). Oh, and he
>> has a lovely voice http://warprecords.com/image.php?id=1684
>
> He is NOT Lenny Bruce.

I didn't say he was, but like Bruce, neither are/were afraid to use
certain words/phrases that others might find offensive - and they get
labelled because of it.


> Lenny Bruce was not about self-arrgandizement. That's gallo's whole
> act. And on that level he's not up to Joan Rivers.

He's a damn sight funnier than Joan.


> Like riffing about Ozu makes him Serge Daney?

David, you have such high standards!
I'll get back to you when I've actually seen THE BROWN BUNNY. Bet you
can't wait.

---

To change the subject completely --- has anyone here seen Joe May's
ASPHALT (1929) lately? I wondered what sort of release/exposure this
film has had in the West over the last 50 or so years?

I just saw it the other night, loved it, and wondered why I never hear
anything about it....

-Nick>-
14831


From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:55pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
> > Not only is he a jerk, he's a racist, homophobic possibly dangerous
> > jerk.
>
> Like Lenny Bruce, he's not afraid to use certain words, but I doubt
> he's any of the above (except maybe an occasional jerk).


What's the deal with Gallo's interviews in gay magazines? These two were posted in another group:

http://www.hx.com/index.cfm
http://64.227.165.55/features/index.shtml
14832


From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:08pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
> Gallo's interviews in gay magazines?
Sorry, first link (to HX magazine) was outdated. Not sure this is worth it, but try: http://tinyurl.com/6uapt
14833


From: thebradstevens
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:19pm
Subject: BITTER VICTORY
 
The version of BITTER VICTORY screened yesterday by BBC2 was
letterboxed, albeit at a heavily compromised 1.85 ratio. It was also
the longest version I have seen, running 97m 20s at 25 fps
(approximately 101m at 24 fps). It contained 2 minutes of material
not present in either the pan-and-scan version shown on BBC2 in 1986
(which clocked in at 96m 11s) or the 82-minute version, mostly small
moments at the beginnings and ends of scenes: the first post-credits
shot is longer at the start, and there is a lot more of Jane watching
the men return (and hoping that Leith will be among them). Curiously,
the BBC's transfer is missing a 40-second sequence showing supplies
being parachuted into the desert - a sequence that appears in both
the BBC's old transfer and the 82 minute version! Adding this scene
to the new transfer would result in a running time of exactly 98
minutes at 25 fps (or 102 minutes at 24 fps - Bernard Eisenschitz's
Ray biography lists a running time of 103 minutes).
14834


From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:25pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
I think BROWN BUNNY is very good. Obviously David will not see it because he thinks
Gallo is homophobic. Who knows and who cares?

This talk about Republicans is pretty silly too. David and Damien have offended or
chased away any Republicans that were part of this group. OK, we probably don't have
any, though I say, let's live with the Republicans -- we could use a couple in this
group, maybe even a total fascist! --, lest we become overly secular and so unrealistic
that we deny that there are other people in the world who are different from us.

We're here for movies, not as a haven for the far left.

Gabe
14835


From: iangjohnston
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:36pm
Subject: Re: Voiceovers (Was: A Fuller without VO)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley
wrote:
> > Don't forget The Magnificent Ambersons. And Barry Lyndon.
>
> and DOGVILLE's John Hurt narration, where LvT showed BARRY LYNDON
to
> Hurt and said, "Just do it like Michael Hordern did here".
>
> I thought of DIARY OF A COUNTRY PRIEST, but that's the main
character
> narrating. I love how he says one thing and does another.
>
> -Nick>-

And, as one of the great examples, FONTANE EFFI BRIEST, with
Fassbinder himself reading the narration (as Truffaut did on LES
DEUX ANGLAISES). Plus there's Joanne Woodward's narration on THE AGE
OF INNOCENCE.

Ian
14836


From: Chris Fujiwara
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:42pm
Subject: brown bunny, hero
 
A few hours ago I interviewed Vincent Gallo and found it interesting
that in criticizing one of his directors he called him among other
things "racist, homophobic." He also went out of his way to volunteer
the information (during a disquisition that began with the subject of
Monte Hellman) that he liked Fox and His Friends and Querelle. So...
make of it what you will. I found the man charming during our
conversation, and I like both his films, especially the second. He
had some very interesting things to say about Robert Kramer and Abel
Ferrara (for whom he says he will "probably" do a film "next month").
I chose not to go into the whole Republican thing.

I benefited, silently, from the comments of Kevin and others before
writing a review of Hero, which is here:

href="http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/movies/documents/04074955.as
p">http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/movies/documents/04074955.asp a>

I saw the film twice. If I hadn't read Kevin's defense of the film, I
wouldn't have watched it a second time. Thank you very much, Kevin.
14837


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:50pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- jess_l_amortell wrote:


>
>
> What's the deal with Gallo's interviews in gay
> magazines? These two were posted in another group:
>
> http://www.hx.com/index.cfm
> http://64.227.165.55/features/index.shtml
>
>
>

He began his "career" as a hustler.

Give me Joe Dallesandro.

Or even Steve Antin.



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14838


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:53pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Gabe Klinger wrote:

> I think BROWN BUNNY is very good. Obviously David
> will not see it because he thinks
> Gallo is homophobic. Who knows and who cares?
>

I know and I care.






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14839


From: Patrick Ciccone
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:19pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
Gabe:
> let's live with the Republicans -- we could use a couple in this
> group, maybe even a total fascist! --,
>
> We're here for movies, not as a haven for the far left.

Hear, hear--and I say this as a Clinton Democrat, which is a total
fascist on this group! I will only flag my surprise at the often far
leftism of the group because I had always associated auteurism, or at
least its origins, with conservative or a least apolitical Catholicism.
Rohmer is still on the Royalist side of 1789, at least from the
surface evidence of THE LADY AND THE DUKE!

PWC

PS. About to inspect the convention at my lunch break.
14840


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:29pm
Subject: Re: brown bunny, hero
 
--- Chris Fujiwara wrote:

> A few hours ago I interviewed Vincent Gallo and
> found it interesting
> that in criticizing one of his directors he called
> him among other
> things "racist, homophobic."


Very interesting in light of his remarks about Gus and
Chereau at cannes.

He also went out of his
> way to volunteer
> the information (during a disquisition that began
> with the subject of
> Monte Hellman) that he liked Fox and His Friends and
> Querelle. So...
> make of it what you will.

Not much. "See I like fag directors too, so I'm not a
homophobe."


I found the man charming
> during our
> conversation, and I like both his films, especially
> the second. He
> had some very interesting things to say about Robert
> Kramer and Abel
> Ferrara (for whom he says he will "probably" do a
> film "next month").

I should have predicted that.


> I chose not to go into the whole Republican thing.

WHY?!?!!!





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14841


From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:36pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
> This talk about Republicans is pretty silly too. David and Damien have offended or
> chased away any Republicans that were part of this group. OK, we probably don't have
> any, though I say, let's live with the Republicans -- we could use a couple in this
> group, maybe even a total fascist! --, lest we become overly secular and so unrealistic
> that we deny that there are other people in the world who are different from us.

Sorry to offend my anti-Republican friends, but I'm very much with Gabe
here. I'd hate for intolerance to become the official tone of this
list. - Dan
14842


From:
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 0:38pm
Subject: Re: brown bunny, hero
 
SPOILERS

In Chris' review of Hero, he mentions that the Great Wall doesn't appear in
Hero. I have not seen Hero in American theatres but have the Hong Kong DVD.
After Nameless' body is taken away, there is a fade out and then a fade in to a
shot of the Great Wall. There are titles over the shot but DVD offers no
English subtitles for them (nor for the opening titles). Does this shot of the Great
Wall appear in American film prints?

And Chris, you write "Swordsmanship’s ultimate achievement is the absence of
the sword" — an absence that, at the end of the film, we see inscribed,
literally, on the palace gates." You're talking about the arrows and the outline of
Nameless' body, right?

Kevin John


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14843


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:46pm
Subject: Buffalo 66 - (was: Re: Re: Brown Bunny)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, joey lindsey wrote:

> Could someone please explain to me how that movie (B 66) has any
merit
> at all outside of Ricci? Pointing me to links is good. I saw it
twice
> in the theater and it got worse instead of better.
>
>
>
>
> joey lindsey

I never saw the movie, but I tried to get financing for Monte Hellman
to make it, so I read the script, which he had described as the best
he'd read since Reservoir Dogs: It IS a good script. Don't know how
the film turned out. I had recently "met" Gallo on the phone doing an
interview for the presskit of Palookaville, and learned that he had
become rich selling his paintings during the 80s boom. Monte's
manager asked Gallo about it and informed me that he had put all his
money from the paintings into NY City municipal bonds, which pay him
$250,000 a year tax-free.

So why would he have to be a Republican? Why did Marilyn Manson tell
his fans in Florida to vote for Bush in 2000, thus arguably
contributing to the debacle we have been living with since? Why did
Ed Koch write a lengthy editorial in The Jewish Press this week
endorsing Bush? Mysteries abound these days.

Let me add, for comrade Gabe, that the Republicans started it. These
are not the Republicans of yore -- these ARE brownshirts, whose
hatred of many groups my friends and I belong to puts Democrats and
liberals, their ostensible loyal opposition in a two-party democracy,
at the top of the list. Their motto is no quarter asked, none given,
and we have to be vigilant about them the way we would about an
indigenous fascist party on the rise. I can't imagine anyone from
among them landing in this group, which seems to me to amenable to a
pretty wide spectrum of political orientations, but not to people who
joke publicly about exterminating Chelsea Clinton. Because they have
embraced fanatical hatred for and rejection of other political
viewpoints, they appear to me not to be capable of dialogue about
anything, including movies.

We need more women, not "Republicans." Where are the ladies?
14844


From: Sam Adams
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:51pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
 
brief thoughts on Gallo/Bunny since I'm ostensibly on vacation. Gallo seems to be, if such a thing is possible, a self-loathing narcissist, which can be seen most clearly in BUNNY in the way the camera incessantly trains on him but the frame often cuts off crucial parts of his face/body. This strikes me as one of the more violent things an actor can do to his own image. I don't know if his vile public pronouncements are entirely (or fractionally) sincere, but they seem calculated to manufacture ire/publicity, and seem like the actions of a man who dislikes himself and believes others feel the same way to control the source of that dislike -- i.e. if he mouths off about "fags and spics", at least he knows what people dislike him for. I don't think BUNNY is unalloyed brilliance, but I found it deeply emotional and sincere, only rarely contrived, and in love with film *as film* in a way few movies are. I.e. the limitations of film-- lens flares, overexposures, etc. -- are the source of some of its most beautiful moments, the way the grain of GREENDALE's 8mm blowup was so entrancing. As far as the sex scene goes, I may be in the minority in finding unsimulated sex less distracting than faked: I'd rather sex scenes were left out than conspicuously simulated, since it only makes more clear exactly what the actors *aren't* doing. The final "twist" is a huge mistake, I think, and it's the scene which follows the blowjob which is the movie's only really embarrassing moment.

Sam
14845


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 4:57pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny
 
--- Patrick Ciccone wrote:

I will only flag my surprise
> at the often far
> leftism of the group because I had always associated
> auteurism, or at
> least its origins, with conservative or a least
> apolitical Catholicism.
> Rohmer is still on the Royalist side of 1789, at
> least from the
> surface evidence of THE LADY AND THE DUKE!
>
Ah but Rohmer is a TRUE Conservative -- not a neo-con
scumbag.

Sadly his most overtly political (small p) film "The
Tree the Mayor and the Mediatheque" has yet to be
released in the U.S.



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14846


From: Craig Keller
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:16pm
Subject: Re: Buffalo 66 - (was: Re: Re: Brown Bunny)
 
> We need more women, not "Republicans." Where are the ladies?

True that. There are exactly two women on this list that I know of --
Elizabeth Nolan and Michelle Carey.

Two other quick notes: You shouldn't go around elbowing visiting
Republicans in the gut, because then you're the boor, the hypocrite,
and the bully. If you must hit them, hit them with the kino-fist.

Also: re: the Next magazine interview with Gallo -- as
something-like-a-designer, one of whose pet-peeves is the awful
packaging so many great films come in on DVD, and a long time hater of
the auburn miasma-smear of the modern American movie poster, I was
heartened to read the following, about the infamous 'Brown Bunny'
billboard --

Interviewer: I saw pictures of it. It had kind of a 70s feel.

Gallo: No. What the fuck do I give a fuck about the 70s? I'm a fucking
modernist! The 70s was not a good period for me. The purpose of the
billboard was simply this: In the movie business, the people in the
creative departments, like the people in the art department of a
record label, are filled with a bunch of sad-ass, knuckleheaded
bullying broads who should be doing arts and crafts classes in the
suburbs for five-year-olds. But they call themselves artists, so when
film companies hire them, it's just ridiculous when they come to you
with an idea for a poster. What I wanted to do with that billboard was
to bring as sophisticated a language and sensibility as I possibly
could to a film advertisement. And not using what would be obvious
color images, instead using black and white images; using very
blown-out, real graphic design. And to have this giant billboard which
would be plain, simple and clearly have a sensibility that would set it
apart from the generic film poster. That's what was bold and shocking
about the billboard; not this scene of suggested sexual behavior. It
was clearly not as graphic as your classic Calvin Klein underwear ad
across the street, where the chick's crotch is open or her hand's in
the guy's ass. There was nothing blatantly graphic about that image.
What I think shocked people was the overall sensibility of the poster;
the overall plainness. The large "X" and the phrase "Adults only."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14847


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:24pm
Subject: Re: Buffalo 66 - (was: Re: Re: Brown Bunny)
 
--- Craig Keller wrote:
You shouldn't go around
> elbowing visiting
> Republicans in the gut, because then you're the
> boor, the hypocrite,
> and the bully. If you must hit them, hit them with
> the kino-fist.
>

A large blunt object repeated thrust into their thick
skulls is a lot more effective.

> Interviewer: I saw pictures of it. It had kind of a
> 70s feel.
>
> Gallo: No. What the fuck do I give a fuck about the
> 70s? I'm a fucking
> modernist! The 70s was not a good period for me.

Yeah, cause that's when he was peddling his skinny ass
cheap!

It
> was clearly not as graphic as your classic Calvin
> Klein underwear ad
> across the street, where the chick's crotch is open
> or her hand's in
> the guy's ass.

Gallo Fortified Wino is clearly upset he hadn't
thought of that first.



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14848


From: George Robinson
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:25pm
Subject: Fw: Schedule change for TCM's Ulmer tribute
 
Bizarre doings at TCM -- reported by my friend Ira Hozinsky

g

What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.

-- Theodore Roethke



----- Original Message -----
From: HOZEE@a...
To: grcomm@g...
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:14 PM
Subject: [JunkMail] Schedule change for TCM's Ulmer tribute


The documentary EDGAR G. ULMER -- THE MAN OFF SCREEN has been yanked from the September 17 schedule. At least it has been replaced by a rarely-screened title, TOMORROW WE LIVE (1942).


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14849


From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:10pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny and Brown Shirts
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
>
> "YEE-HAW" IS NOT A FOREIGN POLICY
>
> DRUNKEN FRAT BOY DRIVES COUNTRY INTO DITCH
>
> DEAD IRAQI CIVILIANS FOR KERRY
>
> My own sign read, "My Cat Tiffany Only Scratches Republicans"

Great post, Damien! Personally, I'm planning a sign that
says "Before Bush, how many Americans were beheaded in Saudi Arabia?
Before Bush, how many Americans were beheaded in Iraq?" (I speak as
someone who managed to keep my head while visiting Iraq and living
in Saudi Arabia for two years, the only country on earth that
forbids movie theaters yet has flourishing video stores).

--Robert Keser
14850


From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:45pm
Subject: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley
wrote:

> --- has anyone here seen Joe May's
> ASPHALT (1929) lately? I wondered what sort of release/exposure
this
> film has had in the West over the last 50 or so years?
>
> I just saw it the other night, loved it, and wondered why I never
hear
> anything about it....
>

ASPHALT is terrific and HEIMKEHR (made the year before) is equally
intense. Joe May's mise-en-scene is maybe a bit schematic but
nevertheless looks fresh and striking. These are major finds, in my
opinion, that have totally dropped off the radar in terms of
criticism. The DVD release of May's DAS INDISCHE GRABMAL seemed like
it might lead to a rediscovery (though it's a much lesser work, to
my mind), as well as the revival of his protege Dupont's excellent
PICCADILLY (his MOULIN ROUGE is just as good). Alas, it hasn't
happened yet, and the only way to see ASPHALT and HEIMKEHR is on
undistinguished VHS tapes, rentable from Facets in Chicago and
purchasable here and there among silent film purveyors.

Although he was a formidable producer in Germany, May was never able
to establish himself with comparable power in Hollywood. One of his
best tries, I think, is the quite delirious and complex CONFESSION,
a remake of Willi Forst's MAZURKA even to the extent of Kay Francis
sporting the same hairstyles as Pola Negri in the earlier film, yet
also putting her in a blonde Dietrich-like wig. It's all about
mother love and murder and cabaret, like BLONDE VENUS reimagined by
Sirk. The movie plays now and then on Turner Classic Movies, to
satsify the surprising number of Kay Francis enthusiasts.

Though I haven't seen it in quite a while, May's HOUSE OF THE SEVEN
GABLES also quite impressed me (and provided the young Vincent Price
with his first real leading man role).

Is ASPHALT getting a second chance in Britain or elsewhere?

--Robert Keser
14851


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:56pm
Subject: Re: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
Thanks for the reply Robert.

> the only way to see ASPHALT and HEIMKEHR is on undistinguished VHS
> tapes, rentable from Facets in Chicago and purchasable here and there
> among silent film purveyors.

I saw the recent (superb) Martin Koerber restoration from Germany,
complete with beautiful score. It was ravishing.


> Is ASPHALT getting a second chance in Britain or elsewhere?

Yes! :) -- (hopefully February)

-Nick>-
14852


From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 7:00pm
Subject: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley
wrote:
>
> I saw the recent (superb) Martin Koerber restoration from Germany,
> complete with beautiful score. It was ravishing.
>
> > Is ASPHALT getting a second chance in Britain or elsewhere?
>
> Yes! :) -- (hopefully February)

Send it over here!! Has anyone seen MUSIC IN THE AIR?

--Robert Keser
14853


From: Robert Keser
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 7:34pm
Subject: Women or Brown Shirts?
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>Let me add, for comrade Gabe, that the Republicans started it.
> These are not the Republicans of yore -- these ARE brownshirts,
> whose hatred of many groups my friends and I belong to puts
> Democrats and liberals, their ostensible loyal opposition in a two-
> party democracy, at the top of the list. Their motto is no quarter
> asked, none given, and we have to be vigilant about them the way
> we would about an indigenous fascist party on the rise. I can't
> imagine anyone from among them landing in this group, which seems
> to me to amenable to a pretty wide spectrum of political
> orientations, but not to people who joke publicly about
> exterminating Chelsea Clinton. Because they have
> embraced fanatical hatred for and rejection of other political
> viewpoints, they appear to me not to be capable of dialogue about
> anything, including movies.
>
> We need more women, not "Republicans." Where are the ladies?

I certainly agree with Bill that the brown shirts are here. Nobody
is turning away opposing viewpoints in this group: people are free
to defend their own viewpoints, and I don't see anyone being
rejected. But how can we ignore that the U.S. is leading the U.K.
(and precious few others) in a war that's a war crime in itself, and
so regarded by many others in the world? This is permeating society
and will concern how we understand the movies of the past, the
present, and the future.

--Robert Keser (stepping down from soap box)
14854


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:02pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Schedule change for TCM's Ulmer tribute
 
>
>
> The documentary EDGAR G. ULMER -- THE MAN OFF SCREEN has been
yanked from the September 17 schedule. At least it has been replaced by a
rarely-screened title, TOMORROW WE LIVE (1942).

This is astonishing news. The only (16mm) print of this film that I know of was
sold by a collector to Arianne, who gave it to the Academy for preservation. I
have seen it, and it is the Don't Miss Movie of the month...for Ulmer lovers (I
hasten to add). It is not a PRC film. I learned from Shirley just before her death
that they made it independently and sold it to PRC. It is very poor financially,
like one of the ethnic films, and many scenes are played in master shots. The
most amazing thing -- if my eyes did not deceive me when I saw it years ago
in Bergamo -- is that it begins with the last shot of Another To Conquer, the
Navajo TB doc that marks the end of the ethnic period. I envision them
working their way across country back from NY shooting in the South (Let My
People Live), in El Paso (Cloud in the Sky) and finally in Arizona (Another to
Conquer), and finally showing up in H'wd with this THING, which I believe
was also shot in Arizona. If I wasn't hallucinating -- and JP, I saw it on
espresso and pasta, I swear to God -- it begins with the last shot of the ethnic
period and ends with a parade of tanks, signalling Ulmer's assumption of his
identity as an American filmmaker, after half a decade making films with,
about and for ethnic minorities. Hey, maybe they put something in my pasta...
14855


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:07pm
Subject: Re: BITTER VICTORY
 
> The version of BITTER VICTORY screened yesterday by BBC2 was
> letterboxed, albeit at a heavily compromised 1.85 ratio.

It was so tantalising too - it started in full 'Scope for the titles,
then, when it faded up from black into the first scene, it was 1.85:1.
Whoever thought that was a good idea should, frankly, be flogged.

-Nick>-
14856


From: Elizabeth Anne Nolan
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:15pm
Subject: Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings
 
I've seen a few TV screenings that begin with letterbox
and end up with the usual TV full box ratios. Does any
one know what is happening and why? I think I saw one
western that started as letterbox, went full screen, and
then back to letterbox at the end.
14857


From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:36pm
Subject: Re: Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings
 
> I've seen a few TV screenings that begin with letterbox
> and end up with the usual TV full box ratios.  Does any
> one know what is happening and why?  I think I saw one
> western that started as letterbox, went full screen, and
> then back to letterbox at the end.

It's because the titles are off the screen at the edges if they don't
go wide for the titles at the start and end.

-Nick>-
14858


From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:45pm
Subject: Re: Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings
 
> I've seen a few TV screenings that begin with letterbox
> and end up with the usual TV full box ratios. Does any
> one know what is happening and why? I think I saw one
> western that started as letterbox, went full screen, and
> then back to letterbox at the end.

Sometimes the titles fill the whole screen, so cutting them off is too
conspicuous. Between the titles, anything goes. - Dan
14859


From: George Robinson
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 8:54pm
Subject: Re: Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings
 
This happens with the credits, which I gather are impossible for a
pan-and-scan version to deal with.
So the credits and final crawl -- and any pre- or post-credit sequences are
'boxed.
It's a pain in the ass because you sit there, thrilled to see Film X finally
letterboxed, your VCR is rolling
merrily away, then they cut to the first sequence after the credits and the
damned thing is pan-and-scan.

George (I'm always letterboxed, although I'm trying to lose enough weight to
be Academy ratio) Robinson

What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.

-- Theodore Roethke



----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Anne Nolan"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 4:15 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings


> I've seen a few TV screenings that begin with letterbox
> and end up with the usual TV full box ratios. Does any
> one know what is happening and why? I think I saw one
> western that started as letterbox, went full screen, and
> then back to letterbox at the end.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
14860


From: Fred Camper
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:06pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
Gabe, as one of the seven in on the original discussions that started
this group, is right. We are for the discussion of films. Political
posts where they are relevant to the films under discussion are good.
Other political posts should be few and labeled OT (which stands for
"Off Topic") in the subject line.

Typically I would run a post like the one I am about to make by Peter
first, so Peter, if you do disagree with me let me know and I'll
retract this (since I'm speaking as co-mderator here) and we reach a
compromise and post that. But I wanted to post this promptly before
things got out of hand, and to be plain, Peter and I have *not* been
disagreeing about how to run our group.

The key statement here in our Statement of Purpose
(http://www.fredcamper.com/M/Purpose.html) reads

*****************
Personal insults against anyone, in or out of our group, are banned. You
can write, "That was a moronic film review," but not, "You're a moron."
*****************

I think David's "The only good Republican is a dead Republican" as well
as his later equation of Republicans with liars both qualify as personal
insults.

The problem with personal insults in Internet discussion groups (where
email lacks the nuances and smiles of, say, face-to-face conversation)
is that they tend to be taken literally and they tend to multiply and
escalate, and pretty soon someone is calling someone else a douche-bag,
to which the usual reply is something like "Your mother is a douche
bag," and things go downhill from there. Keep in mind that our group was
founded in part as a refuge from a group that relished personal insults
(though nothing quite that bad).

And yeah, a Republican cinephile is certainly welcome here.

Now stepping out of my role as co-moderator and speaking personally, I
want to make clear that it was I who invited David to join, I've always
been glad that I did, his posts are tremendously entertaining and
informative, and I know he will continue to make them. It's just that
his own hyperbolic style occasionally clashes with the kind of
discussion we're trying to maintain here.

Also speaking personally and now OT, I have occasionally voted for
Republicans in local races (never for President). Most recently about
six years ago I voted for Jim Ryan for governor of Illinois. I think
David would have too, if he lived in Illinois; Ryan was running against
a Democrat who opposed reproductive rights and gay rights; the
Republican favored both. Just before leaving office, Ryan commuted every
death sentence in Illinois, and made a statement that he thought the
whole death penalty system was wrong, making me extra proud that I voted
for him. Despite a very messy corruption case in which he could have
been involved, I would have voted for him again if he had been running.

That said, I find Bush supporters today personally sickening. On the one
hand we have a president who committed a war crime (see the charge
"crimes against peace" at Nuremberg against the Germans for starting
World War II) by invading a country we were not at war with. He has
mismanaged the war so horribly that even an imperialist white racist
Republican who thinks it is our right to spill blood for oil ought to
oppose Bush now: terrorists have free reign in Fallujah; Sadr goes free
and his army is armed; much of the Islamic world hates us; all our "aid"
to Iraq goes not to Iraqi businesses that might contribute to the
reconstruction but to foreign (as in: US) companies. The whole war is a
mechanism to transfer wealth from ordinary taxpayers to the elite, which
according to one study I heard about years ago is how British
Imperialism worked - to transfer wealth within Britain. By installing
our own regime in Iraq and denying the majority the right to form an
Islamic state we offer support for bin Laden's accusation that we are
warring against Islam. (And I'm personally for the First Amendment and
against religious states.) Rumsfeld sat on those damaging porn photos
for months before ordering an investigation only after they were leaked.
And on and on and on. How *anyone* who truly understands what's going on
in the world could support the Repubicans at this moment is utterly
beyond me. Many have observed that Bush is Al Qaeda's top recruiter.

Then he pulled ahead in the polls when the lies about Kerry's service
record were spread in TV commercials.

So let's assume that you are an imperialist who believes it is America's
right to conquer other countries, and that the Vietnam war was a great
idea, and let's also assume that the lies about Kerry were true. How can
mismanaging a war that's costing us $150 billion outweigh lying on one's
resume (which Kerry did not even do)? I found that little jump Bush took
in the polls to be extremely frightening, especially since the two are
about even. It wouldn't have bothered me as much if Kerry were at 70 per
cent and Bush went from 18 to 21 after the commercials. (And I do *not*
like Kerry.)

As I wrote a friend yesterday, I think this is Germany in the year 1931.

But perhaps (I hope) I'm too alarmist. I heard third hand that Yale
literature professor Harold Bloom called a friend during the 1984
Republican convention (which was treated as a kind of coronation of
Reagan for his second term) and said, "Are you enjoying your view of
Nuremberg in 1934"? In hindsight, Reagan, horrible as we was, did I
think believe in democracy, at least for Americans. I'm not sure that
Bush or his thugs do at all.

If anyone knows of a teaching position I might qualify for in New
Zealand, please email me off list.

Fred Camper
14861


From: Fred Camper
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:11pm
Subject: NY Film Festival info
 
This document doesn't have any dates, but I thought it might be of
interest anyway

I strongly recommend seeing Peter Kubelka (which I believe will be
October 17). His new film is unlike anything else he's done; he's a
great speaker; he's one of my ten favorite filmmakers.

Fred Camper
___________________________________________________________________________

The Film Society of Lincoln Center Presents

THE 42nd NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL

Oct. 1 - 17, 2004

The Best in World Cinema

Showcasing 25 Features and 9 Shorts from 21 Countries

and Several Special Events

THE 42ND NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL IS SPONSORED

BY DIET COKE, HSBC BANK USA, N.A., & THE NEW YORK TIMES

THE 42ND NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL, opening Friday, October 1, 2004, will
offer an extraordinary selection of 25 features and 9 short films from
around the world. In all, some 21 countries are represented in this
year's annual 17-day showcase of the best in world cinema, from Sweden
to Senegal, Egypt to Argentina, Israel to Thailand, Lebanon to Brazil.
All the feature films in the Festival are U.S. premieres. At press time,
among the stars expected to attend the Festival are Gael García Bernal,
Ellen Barkin, Paul Giamatti, Thomas Haden Church, Ivy Ling Bo, Virginia
Madsen, Imelda Staunton, Sandra Oh, and Zhang Ziyi, as well as many of
the directors whose films have been chosen. The Festival also presents
several special events, including a tribute to Pedro Almodóvar and
conversations with Agnès Jaoui and Mike Leigh.

"The combination of works by established world-class directors and
talented emerging filmmakers that characterizes the selections of the
42ND NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL would seem to suggest the whole question of
legacy and succession, and indeed such themes can also be found in
several of the films," says Richard Peña, program director of the Film
Society and chair of the Festival selection committee. "Parenting, or
mentoring, is a motif that emerges in a wide variety of this year's
selections. The transference of ideas and values, for good or
questionable purposes, can be seen in films as diverse as Agnès Jaoui's
Look at Me, Ingmar Bergman's Saraband, and Ousmane Sembene's Moolaade,
not to mention David Gordon Green's Undertow, Jonathan Caouette's
Tarnation, Lodge Kerrigan's Keane, and this year's Cannes Festival
Camera d'or winner, Keren Yedaya's Or (My Treasure).

Festival selections were made by Richard Peña; Kent Jones, Film Society
associate program director; author and critic Phillip Lopate; John
Powers, critic-at-large, NPR, Village Voice, and L.A. Weekly; and Lisa
Schwarzbaum, film critic, Entertainment Weekly.

The Opening Night film is Agnès Jaoui's LOOK AT ME. With her first film,
the Oscar-nominated The Taste of Others, filmmaker-actress Jaoui and her
writing partner-lead actor Jean-Pierre Bacri gave us a deliciously
bittersweet ensemble comedy. Jaoui becomes a world-class director with
this witty, visually accomplished comedy that was a triumph at this
year's Cannes Film Festival. The masterful script (Best Screenplay at
Cannes) shows us a bunch of pushy, ruthless Parisians who would be quite
at home in Manhattan. The women are unhappy with their looks while the
men are looking for something on the side. When not intent on seduction,
these artistic careerists specialize in elegantly humiliating and
one-upping each other. Bacri plays a novelist-turned-publisher, a tyrant
of egotistical self-regard, who has little use for his homely daughter
with an angelic voice; Jaoui is the daughter's celebrity-smitten singing
coach. The surprise is how much tenderness Jaoui manages to elicit for
her neurotic, self-absorbed characters. She demonstrates beautifully, as
Jean Renoir put it, that "Everyone has his reasons." 110 min. France,
2004. Sony Pictures Classics.

The Festival Centerpiece is Pedro Almodóvar's BAD EDUCATION. Only now,
at the peak of his artistic powers and with two Oscars to his name, has
Pedro Almodóvar felt ready to exorcise the demons of his troubled
Catholic boyhood. The creator of Talk to Her and All About My Mother has
designed a ravishing, labyrinthine narrative that centers on the reunion
of two school friends, one a film director, the other an aspiring
screenwriter (Y Tu Mamá También's fast-rising star Gael García Bernal),
who become intertwined in memories of Catholic education, multiple
identities, sexual dualities, and, above all, a passion for film.
Gorgeously photographed by José Luis Alcaine, this complex and
passionate film pays tribute to such familiar archetypes as the femme
fatale and the enfant terrible in surprising new ways. Almodóvar's most
challenging, provocative, and beautifully made film to date. 110 min.
Spain, 2004. Sony Picture Classics.

Closing Night is Alexander Payne's SIDEWAYS. From the glittering high
school satire of Election to the poignant tale of a retired insurance
executive in About Schmidt (NYFF Opening Night, 2002), director
Alexander Payne (aided by co-writer Jim Taylor) has established himself
as a great comic chronicler of ordinary American lives. Here, Payne
takes the oldest of Hollywood formulas- the buddy picture- and elevates
it to an hilarious and insightful portrait of the seemingly clueless
male psyche. Superb as ever, Paul Giamatti plays the tormented Miles, a
failed novelist and wine snob- he'll kill you if you order merlot- who
takes his vain, hedonistic actor friend (Thomas Haden Church in a
breakthrough performance) on a tour of California's wine country. Soon
they're awash in wine, whining, and amorous exploits with the exquisite
Sandra Oh and a revelatory Virginia Madsen- a grand misadventure shot
through with an awareness of their own futility. Laugh-out-loud funny,
yet peculiarly heartbreaking, Sideways is as intoxicating as your first
sip of champagne. 124 min. USA, 2004. Fox Searchlight.

Following are film descriptions for all Festival feature films and the
several Festival Special Events. All films are shown in Alice Tully Hall
(ATH) at Lincoln Center unless otherwise noted.

Sam Fuller, the cinematic poet laureate of hard-boiled America, made The
Big Red One as a deeply personal memoir of his time in the most renowned
WWII U.S. infantry unit. When the film was released in 1980, it was cut
drastically, for reasons of length and, perhaps, for fear of offending
general audiences. Over the years, the complete Big Red One remained a
legend. Now, thanks to Richard Schickel and Brian Jamieson, it has
become a reality: THE BIG RED ONE: THE RECONSTRUCTION. To say that it
lives up to expectations is an understatement. What was once a stately,
old-fashioned epic following the progress of Lee Marvin's hard-bitten
sergeant and his four young charges (Robert Carradine's Zab is Fuller's
alter ego), as they work their way from Northern Africa to the death
camps of central Europe, is now a powerful, one-of-a-kind portrait of
war. The hell of it, the tedium of it, the craziness of it- few war
movies have ever achieved such eloquence. 158 min. USA, 1980 (restored
2004). Warner Bros.

TRIPLE AGENT is a major departure for Eric Rohmer- a stark psychological
melodrama based on a true story. It is 1936, the era of the Popular
Front and the Spanish Civil War. A White Russian general, Fyodor, has
immigrated to Paris with his lovely wife, Arsinoé. She sympathizes with
the Communists upstairs; he finds them naïve, but his own political
convictions are continually shifting. Weighing aloud whether to keep
serving the irrelevant White Russians, go over to the Soviet Union, or
throw in his lot with the Nazis, Fyodor invites speculation that he is a
spy- a double or triple agent or perhaps merely an opportunist trying to
reinvent himself. Alongside this espionage story is the subtle drama of
a marriage being tested. The husband's glib confidence makes us question
the nature of trust; the viewer is placed in the same position as
Fyodor's wife, forced continuously to parse sincerity from insincerity.
Triple Agent is a moving love story of two people trying to outrun the
juggernaut of history. 115 min. France, 2004.

There may be no more beguilingly mysterious film this year than TROPICAL
MALADY, the Festival debut of the lavishly gifted Thai director
Apichatpong Weerasethakul. Leaving Bangkok for the seemingly peaceful
Thai countryside, the story begins as a conventional, if marvelously
achieved, love story between a young soldier and a young man from the
country. But just when we've gotten comfortable with Apichatpong's
tender account of two men falling for each other (including one
startlingly erotic moment), he launches us into the realm of myth and
legend, in which human and animal join together in a fantastic union. As
formally audacious as it is visually stunning, this strikingly original
work reminds us that when we wander the forests of love we encounter the
most unexpected of creatures. 118 min. Thailand, 2004. Strand Releasing.

UNDERTOW retains the dreamlike lyricism and empathy with adolescents
that were among the hallmarks of George Washington, David Gordon Green's
accomplished debut (NYFF 2000). With this tense, atmospheric tale of a
family in peril, he adds Southern gothic to the mix. A widowed Georgia
farmer (Dermot Mulroney) is visited by his jailbird brother (Josh
Lucas), who is looking to settle old scores. He soon becomes the nemesis
of the farmer's two troubled young sons, who embark on a fast-paced
escape across forests, backwood villages, small cities, and shantytowns-
a journey reminiscent both emotionally and visually of The Night of the
Hunter. Green's feeling for offbeat people and out of the way places is
wondrous to behold, and his star Jamie Bell- last seen dancing the title
role in Billy Elliot- is a revelation as the older son who fights the
lethal currents of family misery. 107 min. USA, 2004. United Artists.

Jean-Luc Godard's new film, NOTRE MUSIQUE, is a work of great refinement
and serenity about the least refined or serene of human phenomena- war.
Godard works from Dante's template, and splits his vision into three
panels. "Hell" is a brilliantly colored and paced video montage of
images of warfare, some documentary and some fictional, in which the
evidence of our collective fascination with carnage and destruction
becomes overwhelming. "Purgatory" is set in the becalmed environment of
post-war Sarajevo, during a cultural conference in which Godard plays
himself, grappling with the unbridgeable divide between conqueror and
conquered. "Paradise" is a pastoral vision of the afterlife: a woman who
has martyred herself in an effort to end the Palestinian/Israeli
conflict walks in the sunlight by a river, improbably guarded by U.S.
servicemen. Godard, now the very definition of an "old master," has made
some exquisite films in the past, but he may never have made one as
graceful, as lucid, or as moving as this.

80 min. France/Switzerland, 2004. Wellspring.

Lebanon in the early Eighties. Bombs are going off on the edges of
Lina's middle-class Beirut neighborhood, but they're nothing like the
fireworks exploding behind the closed doors of the area's well-appointed
apartments. IN THE BATTLEFIELDS, Danielle Arbid's impressive first
feature, follows 12-year-old Lina as she painfully discovers the
contradictions and hypocrisies of adult life. Largely ignored by her
parents, her only solace is her monstrous Aunt Yvonne's domestic, Siham,
a poor girl with whom Lina forms a warm, caring relationship- but that
friendship, too, will be sorely tested. Arbid is known for several
highly acclaimed documentaries about her native Lebanon. Here, the
amorous and financial intrigues that so consume the everyday lives of
her characters form a counterpoint to the political and military turmoil
happening just offscreen. 88 min. Lebanon/France, 2004.

Winner of this year's Camera d'or at Cannes for best first feature,
Keren Yedaya's riveting psychological study, OR (MY TREASURE), focuses
on an aging Tel Aviv prostitute and her eighteen-year-old daughter, Or,
who fights to keep her mother off the streets, even to the point of
locking her indoors. Immensely winning if perhaps overly confident, Or
is convinced that she has all the right answers and that she can
redirect this helpless woman into a new occupation. The girl is not
without her own sexual desires, which complicates her role as
puritanical overseer. Grounded in a rich specificity of detail about
daily life in working-class Tel Aviv, favoring moral doubt over pat
judgments, Or avoids clichés, evades political speechmaking, and unfolds
with a simple, direct visual style unerringly suited to its material.
This remarkably self-assured debut offers us glimpses of a substratum of
Israeli society rarely seen onscreen.

100 min. Israel, 2004.

To say that Jonathan Caouette has had a challenging life is to put it
mildly. His father abandoned the family when he was a child, and his
mother, a diagnosed schizophrenic, has been in and out of institutions
for much of her adult life. Jonathan was largely raised by his
grandparents, who had problems of their own. Now in his thirties, the
director has been documenting his life since he was eleven. With
TARNATION he has created a devastating, often shocking, but finally
deeply moving portrait of family life. Combining snapshots, home movies,
video diaries, old answering machine messages, and snippets of pop
culture, Caouette has created a bracingly direct meditation on coming to
terms with oneself and one's responsibilities. At Tarnation's emotional
core is the story of Caouette's relationship with his mother, a complex,
tragic woman who is one of the most remarkable real-life characters
you'll see on screen. 88 min. USA, 2004. Wellspring.



Arnaud Desplechin's new film, KINGS AND QUEEN, is not one but two
stories of the converging lives of Ismaël (Mathieu Amalric) and Nora
(Emmanuelle Devos). Ismaël 's is a nightmarishly comic vaudeville turn,
in which he is whisked away to a mental hospital where he matches wits
with the administrator (Catherine Deneuve), raids the in-house pharmacy
and pitches woo to a delicate young suicide survivor. Nora's story is
more somber- she's survived her lover's suicide and now contend with the
prolonged dying of her father (Maurice Garrel). She eventually goes
looking for Ismaël, her former husband, in an effort to convince him to
adopt her son. As he did with the wonderful My Sex Life (NYFF 1996),
Desplechin explores the uncharted territory between comedy and tragedy,
exhilaration and despair, belief and godlessness. Kings and Queen is one
of the richest, most rollicking movies you're likely to see this
year.150 min. France, 2004.

Top French producer Marin Karmitz- acclaimed for his work with Chabrol,
Kieslowski, Kiarostami, and many others- was so impressed by Hong Sang
soo's Turning Gate (NYFF 2002) that he offered to produce WOMAN IS THE
FUTURE OF MAN. The first snows have fallen on Seoul. Heon jun, a
filmmaker recently returned from the U.S., looks up an old college
friend, now a respected university professor. The conversation moves
from work to personal lives and finally to past loves- or at least to
their memories of love, especially those concerning Seon hwa, a painter
and former lover of both men. Hearing she now runs a bar, they decide to
pay her a visit- but could the woman they find ever really be the woman
they remember? Aided by a trio of superb actors, Hong captures every
nuance in the shifting emotional and erotic relations among his
characters. His still young, still attractive protagonists are haunted
by the fear that the best of times may be behind them. 88 min. South
Korea/France, 2004.

VERA DRAKE is one of Mike Leigh's very best, a shattering drama about
the unintended consequences of virtue. Vera Drake (a superb performance
by Imelda Staunton), hardworking cleaning woman, fond mother of two,
friendly neighbor, has a secret: she helps out women who find themselves
"in trouble" with unwanted pregnancies. As this illegal activity comes
to light, its ramifications tear apart her family and the world around
her. Leigh abjures satire for compassion and moral complexity,
employing a meticulously controlled realism in portraying a precise
historical moment- Great Britain in the early 1950s, still shell-shocked
from World War II, pulling itself up out of drabness and shortages. In
the process, the values of decency, stoical restraint, and class
solidarity are put to the test, the admirable disentangled from the
hypocritical. 125 min. UK, 2004. Fine Line Features.

THE 10TH DISTRICT COURT: MOMENTS OF TRIAL, veteran photographer and
filmmaker Raymond Depardon's look at the inner workings of a Parisian
courtroom, is a fascinating study of clashing egos and dueling
rhetorical styles- where the American legal system occasionally reaches
the level of scintillating prose, its French counterpart seems
inherently poetic. Within a deceptively simple framework, Depardon gives
us an absorbing and entertaining sketch of contemporary French society,
as a parade of African immigrants, pickpockets, threadbare artists, and
self-righteous academics come face to face with the formidable judge
Michèle Bernard-Requin. She's tough, more than a little bemused, and
understandably tired of all the shenanigans she has to witness, day in
and day out, on both sides of the law. Far more than a documentary on
the frustrations of the legal system, The 10th District Court is a film
about the endless complexity of human behavior. 105 min. France, 2004.

Even his legions of admirers will be amazed at the cinematic wizardry of
Zhang Yimou's HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS, a touching ode to love and
loyalty. The year is 859 AD and opposition to the corrupt Tang Dynasty
is growing. When a blind dancer named Mei, an agent of the rebel group
The Flying Daggers, is captured, the regime sends a double agent to free
her, hoping that she'll lead him to the group's headquarters. Their path
is strewn with dangers- but none more perilous than those lurking in
their hearts. A dazzling collage of color, movement, dance, and
acrobatics, House opens a new chapter in the creative use of CGI
technology, yet even its most eye-popping displays of martial-arts
prowess lay bare the deeply emotional core of this epic tale. The
brilliant cast, featuring Zhang Ziyi (China), Andy Lau (Hong Kong), and
Takeshi Kaneshiro (Japan), points to the emergence of an exciting new
pan-Asian cinema that incorporates the best of several film traditions.
119 min. China, 2004. Sony Pictures Classics.

THE HOLY GIRL is a coolly knowing dramatization of the thrumming
sexuality of teenage girls drawn in equal parts to religious fervor and
erotic mischief. Amalia, a moody, moony, and only semi-holy girl, is a
droopy parochial-school student who comes alive when a stranger rubs up
against her in a crowd. The culprit happens to be a prestigious doctor.
It's his ironic bad luck that he is staying in the hotel run by Amalia's
divorcee mother while attending a medical convention. Inflamed by a
kind of warped love and the sheer adventure of it, the pious-perverse
girl begins to stalk her molester with a clammy ardor. Is she trying to
save him or seduce him? The promise of Lucrecia Martel's brilliant
debut, La Ciénaga (NYFF 2001), is more than fulfilled with this
provocative second feature.106 min. Argentina, 2004. HBO Films.

Four generations of an Argentine family hit the road in Pablo Trapero's
enchanting and buoyantly funny new movie, ROLLING FAMILY. An aging
matriarch, her frazzled middle-aged daughters, exasperated sons-in-law,
hormonal grandchildren, and newborn great-grandson pile into a
temperamental camper to travel to a clan wedding far from Buenos Aires.
Along the way, old passions and enmities are re-ignited, emotional and
mechanical mishaps abound, and the landscapes and folkways of Argentina
are endowed with a wonderfully fleeting beauty thanks to Trapero's keen
camera eye and gentle, patient rhythms. As in his debut, Crane World
(NDNF 2000), Trapero works with non-actors and builds his narrative
around everyday events, giving us a road movie with a difference, in
which reality has a magical aura. 103 min. Argentina, 2004.

The latest triumph from Jia Zhangke (Platform, Unknown Pleasures), THE
WORLD is about people who aren't sure where they belong in the new,
globalized world order. The story focuses on a young dancer and her
security-guard boyfriend who work at a Beijing theme park, a weird cross
between Las Vegas and the Epcot Center that offers scaled-down versions
of famous landmarks- the Pyramids, the Eiffel Tower, even the twin
towers of the World Trade Center. Rather than dwell on the kitsch, Jia
casts a compassionate eye on the daily loves, friendships, and desperate
dreams of the provincial workers at World Park. They've come to the
capital to get ahead in the big glamorous world but end up offering
tourists surreal simulacra of the real thing. Sly, poetic, and pulsing
with life, this funny, touching work confirms, yet again, that Jia is
one of the new millennium's most inventive cinematic talents. 143 min.
China, 2004.

It takes a master to transform a well-meaning story about "social
issues" into a buoyant work of art. The great Senegalese filmmaker and
novelist Ousmane Sembene does just that with one of his finest works,
MOOLAADE. Now 81, Sembene deals with the most daunting topic imaginable-
female genital mutilation. Yet in telling the story of one woman's
resistance to this traditional practice, he offers a novelistically rich
portrait of a modern African village torn between three religions:
spirit worship, Islam, and free-market globalization. This movie has
everything- scheming imams and heroic feminists, benevolent mercenaries
and Paris-educated tribal chiefs, bloody murder and explosions of song
and dance. Too wise to mistake the earnest for the serious, Sembene's
powerful assault on a cruel religious ritual leaves you feeling
surprisingly elated. 124 min. Senegal, 2004. New Yorker Films.
Copresented with the Human Rights Watch International Film Festival and
the African Film Festival.

Lodge Kerrigan stays close, very close, to William Keane, the eponymous
protagonist of his new film, KEANE. As this troubled young man,
dynamically incarnated by British actor Damian Lewis (Band of Brothers),
stalks his way through Port Authority and the strange industrial
landscapes outside the Lincoln Tunnel, endlessly searching for the
daughter snatched away from him months before, Kerrigan puts us squarely
in Keane's profoundly unsettled universe. We see reality as he sees it-
every sight and sound is potential evidence, and every moment might be
the wrinkle in time from which his lost child will magically re-appear.
When Keane is entrusted with the care of another little girl at his
hotel, the film moves to a whole new level of grief-stricken poignancy-
not to mention hair-raising tension. Kerrigan, whose Clean, Shaven was a
highlight of New Directors/New Films 1994, has made a stunningly vivid
film about the spiritual desperation brought on by loss. 90 min. USA,
2004.

In SARABAND, sequel to 1973's Scenes From a Marriage, using the same
incomparable acting duo of Liv Ullmann and Erland Josephson, Ingmar
Bergman has given us a glorious late masterpiece. Marianne decides to
look in on her ex-husband Johan, to see how the old goat is doing after
all these years. While the two revisit their wounds and rediscover an
irritable, mocking fondness for each other, they are suckered into a
more volatile power struggle between Johan's widowed middle-aged son
Henrik and his beautiful, talented daughter Karin. Both father and
daughter are cellists; and the dance and musical form to which the title
alludes conveys their elegant, risky movements of converging and
parting. Bergman's ability to push scenes beyond civility to explosive
feelings of love and hate remains unsurpassed. The acting of the four
principals is peerless. This is no old man's sentimental valentine,
but a work of shocking vitality and robustness, sublimely poised,
directed by one of the grandmasters of cinema.

107 min. Sweden, 2004. Sony Pictures Classics.

Dyspeptic bard of stunted suburbia Todd Solondz (Welcome to the
Dollhouse, ND/NF 1996, and Happiness, NYFF 1998) once again claws at the
fermented soil of his loved-hated New Jersey with PALINDROMES- and what
he unearths may surprise even those familiar with the filmmaker's taste
for the bracingly bilious. The film represents a startling creative leap
in structural inventiveness (with forward-and-back flexibility applied
to plot, as well as to the casting of the movie's yearning heroine,
Aviva). It also marks a breakthrough in Solondz's handling of moral
complexity as he steps, with characteristic nerve, into the fray of such
hot-button issues as "family values" and evangelical fervor. At the
emotional heart of this challenging film is a lonely, underloved girl's
desire to become a mother. The fired-up cast includes Ellen Barkin,
Debra Monk, and Jennifer Jason Leigh. 100 min. USA, 2004.

A couple makes love in the early hours of the morning. The woman rises
from bed, gets dressed, goes into the street, and calls out to a
neighbor- whom she then assassinates. Thus begins Egyptian director
Yousry Nasrallah's (El Medina, ND/NF 2000) THE GATE OF THE SUN, a
powerful adaptation of Lebanese writer Elias Khoury's epic novel of
fifty years of Palestinian dispossession, exile, and resistance. The
film follows the flight of Younes, his wife Nahila, and those around
them from their village in northern Palestine to a refugee camp in
Lebanon. Some vow to continue the struggle, most simply struggle to
survive. Nasrallah, who co-wrote the screenplay with Khoury and Mohamed
Soueid, unsparingly details the impact of the nakhba (disaster) on
Palestinian life and society, while showing the refugees'
often-contentious relationship with their reluctant Lebanese hosts.
Spanning generations, mixing personal stories with historical events,
The Gate of the Sun will surely provoke intense discussion and
controversy. 278 min. France/Egypt, 2004. 20-minute intermission between
Parts 1 & 2.

CAFE LUMIERE One of the world's great filmmakers, Hou Hsiao-Hsien has
created an elegantly fractured riff on another indisputable master,
Yasujiro Ozu, the centenary of whose birth has been celebrated during
the past year. Where Ozu's Tokyo stories gave us an orderly Japanese
society being eroded by modernity, Hou conjures a present-day Japan in
which family life is a mere shell and romantic passion has given way to
hooking up. Yoko befriends Hajime, who is besotted with her but cannot
express how he feels. Later, Yoko tells her parents she is pregnant but
has no intention of marrying. Hajime is shocked but again cannot reveal
how he feels. Left to their own devices, the characters follow only
their own private paths, like the trains that Hou uses as a recurring
motif. Dazzling to behold, Café Lumiere captures the pathos of
contemporary urban solitude. 104 min. Japan/Taiwan, 2004

SPECIAL EVENTS (all programs in Walter Reade Theater unless noted otherwise)

ELEGANCE, PASSION, AND COLD HARD STEEL: A TRIBUTE TO SHAW BROTHERS STUDIOS

The legendary Shaw Brothers film studios made Hong Kong cinema an
international phenomenon. Best known for extraordinary martial arts
films, they created everything from historical epics to contemporary
comedies, from adaptations of operas to Hollywood-style musicals. This
tribute presents the great films of the 50s, 60s, and 70s- just a taste
of the extraordinary richness of Hong Kong cinema in its crucial,
formative years. Supported in part by the National Endowment for the
Arts, which believes that a great nation deserves great art. Additional
support from the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office. Special thanks to
Celestial Pictures for making this program available to us, and to W.J.
Deutsch & Sons, Ltd.

VIVA PEDRO! An exclusive evening with Pedro Almodóvar, the legendary
Spanish director of Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, All About
My Mother, Talk to Her, and the upcoming Bad Education. Highlights from
the director's rich career will be screened, followed by a conversation
between Mr. Almodóvar and Richard Peña, NYFF selection committee
chairman. We expect onstage appearances by special guests who have
appeared in Mr. Almodóvar's films. Alice Tully Hall.

HBO FILMS DIRECTORS DIALOGUES For the first time, the Festival will
offer close encounters with filmmakers, extended dialogues in which
audience members will get a thorough view of the directors' work and
their thoughts on cinema, and will be able to ask questions and engage
in conversation about all aspects of the filmmaking process. Sponsored
by HBO Films.

Agnès Jaoui: The first of these two discussions features France's Agnès
Jaoui, whose second directorial effort, Look at Me is the Festival's
opening night film; her first feature as a director, The Taste of
Others, was shown in the festival in 2000. Active both in front of and
behind the camera, she has written, with partner Jean-Pierre Bacri,
Alain Resnais' Smoking/No Smoking and Same Old Song, as well as Cedric
Klapisch's Un air de famille, among others. As an actress, she's
appeared on stage and screen for almost 20 years. Hosted by
Entertainment Weekly film critic and NYFF selection committee member
Lisa Schwarzbaum.

Mike Leigh: The second discussion is with Mike Leigh, a New York Film
Festival veteran (his films High Hopes, Naked, Secrets and Lies, and
Topsy-Turvy have all been at the Festival). Leigh turned his sights to
theatrical film after more than twenty years of directing for
television. Leigh is especially known for his close, collaborative
working methods with actors, including Jim Broadbent, Timothy Spall,
Brenda Blethyn and now, Imelda Staunton. Hosted by author, critic, and
NYFF selection committee member, Phillip Lopate. Kaplan Penthouse in
the Rose Building.

Now beautifully restored to its full length and original intoxicating
color, NYFF Retrospective MACUNAIMA broke box office records for the New
Brazilian Cinema with its heady mix of folklore, radical politics, and
irrepressible zaniness. Our hero, Macunaima, travels from the depths of
the jungle to the heights of the big city, along the way meeting con
artists, urban guerillas, and industrialists who like to eat people.
Based on a famous modernist novel, the story was updated by director
Joaquim Pedro de Andrade to reflect a country caught between a harsh
military dictatorship (then in full swing) and the anarchic energy of
its people. What's common to both is the portrait of a Brazil in
continuous re-definition, where one moves from magical spells to modern
industry in a heartbeat, where race, gender, and even one's humanity can
be negotiated. A milestone of Latin American cinema, and a lot of fun.
110 min. Brazil, 1969.

Miles Davis's performance before 600,000 screaming rock fans at the 1970
Isle of Wight Festival was the culmination of a remarkable journey. A
giant of jazz, Davis by the late Sixties started to look in new musical
directions; challenged by what he heard in the streets and on the radio-
and especially by Jimi Hendrix's music- he began to add electric pianos
and guitars to his ensembles, incorporating rock and funk rhythms with
jazz improvisations. This fusion resulted in masterworks such as In a
Silent Way and Bitches Brew; it also resulted in controversy every bit
as fierce as Dylan going electric, as musicians, critics, and fans
argued over the future of jazz. Murray Lerner was there, and in MILES
ELECTRIC: A DIFFERENT KIND OF BLUE he has brilliantly captured this
amazing transitional moment in American music, adding contemporary
reminiscences by musicians who were at Davis's side (Chick Corea, Keith
Jarrett, Dave Holland, Gary Bartz, etc.) as well as others profoundly
affected by his innovations (Carlos Santana, Herbie Hancock, Joni
Mitchell). Immediately following the 7:30 screening, a panel of
musicians and critics will discuss the impact of Miles Davis on American
music. 87 min. USA, 2004. Co-presented with Jazz at Lincoln Center.

The first black world-heavyweight champion, Jack Johnson had a dazzling
smile and an unapologetic manner that provoked white America. He
revolutionized boxing with his stylish footwork, superb balance, and
knockout power. During the seven years (1908-15) he reigned supreme, the
boxing establishment agitated to find a Great White Hope who might
unseat him (the era's openly racist expressions are shocking today).
Ken Burns, celebrated for documentaries on the Civil War and jazz, has
brought his considerable talent and skill to bear on a vital and
irresistible subject in UNFORGIVABLE BLACKNESS: THE RISE AND FALL OF
JACK JOHNSON. Rare archival images and an intricately designed sound
track, featuring a haunting score by Wynton Marsalis, are exquisitely
matched. The fight footage is sensational. A fascinating, complex study
of a magnificently gifted athlete who loved to read, party, and chase
loose women (preferably white), and whose independence and dignity
collided both with a racist society and his own large, self-defeating
appetites. 20 minute intermission between Parts 1 & 2. 210 min. USA,
2004. Co-presented with Jazz at Lincoln Center.

One of the great achievements in recent Asian cinema, the INFERNAL
AFFAIRS trilogy has set new standards for the crime genre with its
exquisite visual design and hall-of-mirrors storytelling. And yes, it's
about to be re-made by Hollywood! Each film is understandable alone, but
see all three for the full impact. The trilogy is co-directed by Andrew
Lau and Alan Mak.

Infernal Affairs Ming (Andy Lau) is a Triad mole in the police's
Criminal Intelligence Bureau. Thrown out of the police academy, Yan
(Tony Leung Chiu-wai) works undercover in the criminal underworld. They
are two double agents on a collision course that will leave only one man
standing. (ND/NF 2003) 98 min. Hong Kong, 2002. Miramax Films

Infernal Affairs 2 Set years earlier, before an impending Triad war and
the return of Hong Kong to China, IA2 details how cops and criminals
plant moles in each other's organizations. 119 min. Hong Kong, 2003

Infernal Affairs 3 The finale moves back and forth in time, as each mole
(again Andy Lau and Tony Leung) fears he is being set up. 117 min. Hong
Kong, 2004

SELLING DEMOCRACY: FILMS OF THE MARSHALL PLAN, 1947-1955. To document
and promote the government's Marshall Plan initiatives, more than 250
films in 18 different countries were made under the auspices of the
Marshall Plan Film Unit from 1948 to1955. These included newsreels,
short fictions, animations, and lyrical documentaries. Some focused on a
particular event or place, while others argued more generally for
economic cooperation or democracy. Few films were ever screened in the
U.S., as American audiences were not supposed to see "propaganda" paid
for by their own tax dollars. These five programs represent the first
major U.S. presentation of this timely body of work. Curated by Sandra
Schulberg and Richard Peña.



Program One: A New Deal For Europe A young German coal miner recounts
the personal impact the Marshall Plan has had on his life in Me and Mr.
Marshall (1949, Office of the Military Government of the US); the film
also features footage of Secretary Marshall talking about Europe. Two
tradesmen argue about the best financial strategy after the war in the
delightful animation The Shoemaker and the Hatter (1950, John Halas &
Joy Batchelor), released across Europe in eleven languages. The Story of
Koula (1950, Vittorio Gallo) follows the friendship between a boy and a
very big mule, one of many shipped to Greece under the European Recovery
Program (ERP). Made at the height of the Cold War, Your Eighty Dollars
(1952, MSA Film Section) details the strategic role of the Marshall Plan
in the European effort to resist Communism. Outright propaganda saved by
wit, Whitsun Holiday contrasts Europeans enjoying a springtime vacation
with their counterparts grimly participating in a "World Youth Congress"
in Communist East Berlin. 91 min. Alice Tully Hall.

Program Two: Spotlight on Germany/Austria The reconstruction of Germany
was vitally important not only because of its economic significance but
also to prove that America's war was against the Nazis, not the German
people. Films include a sketch of the rise of the Nazi Party (It's Up to
You) and reports on the restoration of electric power in Berlin (City
Out of Darkness). 85 min.

Program Three: Spotlight on Italy/France Marshall Plan films geared
toward Italian and French audiences were often ideological in nature,
urging both nations to reject Communism and embrace a close alliance
with the U.S. Films include Aquilo, a post-Marshall Plan remake of The
Bicycle Thief (with a happy ending) as well as a look at unionization of
labor in France (The Other Paris) 105 min.

Program Four: By Land and Sea Some of the most effective Marshall Plan
films couched their messages in simple portraits of people struggling to
re-build their lives and livelihoods. Films include Island of Faith, a
moving celebration of one Dutch island's efforts to reclaim land from
the sea, and award-winning filmmaker Arne Sucksdorff's visual poem on
Scandinavian economic cooperation, The Living Stream. 88 min.

Program Five: Strength for The Free World - From War to European Union
Increasingly, Marshall Plan films became instruments in the Cold War
with the Soviet Union and Communism. Films include The Hour of Choice,
encouraging intra-European cooperation as the best defense against the
Soviets, and Without Fear, a beautiful Technicolor animation that offers
a stark portrait of the choices the continent faces. 93 min.

The 8th annual VIEWS FROM THE AVANT-GARDE will present several programs
of experimental work from the frontiers of cinematic possibility.
Highlights include John Waters in conversation with George and Mike
Kuchar; Austrian master Peter Kubelka presenting the premiere of his
first film in 27 years; new films and videos by Ernie Gehr; the world
premiere of Nina Fonoroff's The Eye in the Mask, her first film in 10
years; Bruce Connor's Luke, shot in 1967, edited in 2004, featuring Paul
Newman and Dennis Hopper; and two new film series by Lewis Klahr.

FESTIVAL SPONSORS

Diet Coke has been associated with entertainment ever since it was
introduced at a star-studded gala at Radio City Music Hall in 1982.
Today, Diet Coke is the number one diet soft drink in the country and
the world, and the third best-selling carbonated drink overall in the
U.S. and the world (where in some countries it is called Coca-Cola Light).

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. with its main office in Delaware, has nearly 400
branches in New York State. It is the principal subsidiary of HSBC USA
Inc, an indirectly held, wholly owned subsidiary of HSBC North America
Holdings Inc., one of the nation's ten largest bank holding companies by
assets. For more information, visit www.us.hsbc.com.

The New York Times covers the world of film up close 365 days a year in
print and online. Box-office results, breaking news, reviews of the
week's new releases on film and DVD. Must-read reports on industry
trends, styles and personalities. Award-winning analysis and profiles.
And the Critic's Picks plus national Showtimes & Tickets by zip code.
The New York Times and NYTimes.com. Every day of the year, twenty-four
hours a day.

ADDITIONAL ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The 42nd New York Film Festival is made possible with public funds from
the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA). Special thanks to Kodak
for hosting the New York Film Festival Closing Night reception.
Transportation for the Festival Selection Committee is provided by Air
France. The Festival trailer is produced by Cineric. Hotel
accommodations provided by Novotel. Thanks to Brad Hohle and Dolby
Laboratories for Dolby equipment donation and technical services.
Special thanks to W.J.Deutsch & Sons, Ltd. for their contribution of
fine wines. Special thanks also to O'Neals' and Josephina Restaurant for
hosting Festival receptions.



FILM FESTIVAL POSTER

The poster for THE 42ND NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL is designed from a
photograph by actor Jeff Bridges. The striking image is of the New York
City skyline in black and white and shows a camera operator on a crane
high above the city. The poster, designed by Jana Anderson at Studio A,
measures 22 x 38 inches with bold red lettering. The poster will be
available from September 1 at www.filmlinc.com. A signed copy costs
$40; unsigned, $25.

FESTIVAL T-SHIRTS

The shirts will be on sale during the festival at Alice Tully Hall and
the Walter Reade Theater. Festival T-shirts are designed by and are
courtesy of DKNY.

FESTIVAL TICKETS: GENERAL INFORMATION

Tickets for all Festival films except for VIEWS FROM THE AVANT-GARDE and
A TRIBUTE TO SHAW BROTHERS STUDIOS will be sold at Alice Tully Hall box
office starting at noon on September 12. Tickets are $15 for regular
screenings; $20 for the Centerpiece; and $30 for Opening and Closing
Nights. Contact the Festival Box Office at 212/875-5050 for information.

FESTIVAL TICKETS: VIEWS FROM THE AVANT-GARDE and A TRIBUTE TO SHAW BROTHERS

Tickets for all these Walter Reade Theater events are available by phone
212/496-3809; online at www.filmlinc.com; or at the WRT box office.
Ticket prices are $9.50 general; $5 members; $7 students; and $4.50
seniors at weekday matinees. For more information, call 212/875-5600.

FESTIVAL TICKETS: VIVA PEDRO!

Ticket prices are $40 for the Alice Tully Hall screening/conversation;
and $125 for the conversation AND the Kaplan Penthouse reception. Please
note that $125 tickets are limited to current Young Friends of Film
members. $40 tickets are on sale to the general public at the Alice
Tully Hall box office, beginning Sunday, September 12. Box office phone
number is 212/875-5050. For YFF membership information, call
212-875-5629 or visit www.filmlinc.com.

MEMBERS OF THE PRESS ONLY

ONLINE PRESS OFFICE - Complete materials and hi-res images for all Film
Society of Lincoln Center events, including the New York Film Festival,
are available for download from our online press office on our website,
www.filmlinc.com. Click on http://209.10.196.104/intro.htm. Password is
xx9c2t.

PRESS SCREENINGS - Press screenings will run weekdays from September 21
through October 14, 2004, at the Walter Reade Theater and Alice Tully
Hall. Only accredited journalists, distributors, and exhibitors will be
admitted.

ACCREDITATION - Journalists, contact Denise Iulo at 212/875-5611 or
press2@f....

Distributors and exhibitors, contact Steve Grenyo at 212/875-5281 or
pressoffice@f....



CONTACTS: Graham Leggat, 212/875-5416 or gleggat@f...

Joanna Ney, 212/875-5403 or jney@f...

Inés Aslan, 212/875-5625 or iaslan@f...
14862


From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:12pm
Subject: Re: Letter Box to different ratios TV screenings
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > I've seen a few TV screenings that begin with letterbox
> > and end up with the usual TV full box ratios. Does any
> > one know what is happening and why? I think I saw one
> > western that started as letterbox, went full screen, and
> > then back to letterbox at the end.
>
> Sometimes the titles fill the whole screen, so cutting them off is
too
> conspicuous. Between the titles, anything goes. - Dan

I think I read somewhere or someone told me long ago that the TV
stations were legally required to show credits titles in full, either
by the film companies or the unions, because cutting off part or all
of names would be detrimental to the interested parties.

I know very well the feeling of frustration described by George --
you think you're going to see a rare letter-box version and you get
pan&scan after the credits. However, after a few such experiences I
was prepared for the worst when the film was showing on a channel
that routinely screens pan&scan versions.Actually I developed a habit
of shouting "pan&scan" after the name of the director faded.... When
the opening credits are superimposed onto a long opening sequence the
TV channel usually has the relative decency to keep the letterbox
format until the sequence, or at least the shot, is ended.Or maybe
it's just easier for them to do it that way...
JPC
14863


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:14pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- Fred Camper wrote:

On the one
> hand we have a president who committed a war crime
> (see the charge
> "crimes against peace" at Nuremberg against the
> Germans for starting
> World War II) by invading a country we were not at
> war with. He has
> mismanaged the war so horribly that even an
> imperialist white racist
> Republican who thinks it is our right to spill blood
> for oil ought to
> oppose Bush now: terrorists have free reign in
> Fallujah; Sadr goes free
> and his army is armed; much of the Islamic world
> hates us; all our "aid"
> to Iraq goes not to Iraqi businesses that might
> contribute to the
> reconstruction but to foreign (as in: US) companies.
> The whole war is a
> mechanism to transfer wealth from ordinary taxpayers
> to the elite, which
> according to one study I heard about years ago is
> how British
> Imperialism worked - to transfer wealth within
> Britain.

And that is the beating heart of the matter, Fred.
it's hard to stay focussed on esthetics when ethics
get tossed in the trash bin.






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
14864


From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:27pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:

Still OT, I would have voted for Ryan, and until recently would have
considered voting for McCain if the Republicans were deprived of Bush by
felony indictments. McCain's current support of the ticket and the war shows I
was wrong about that. Sometimes -- when for example you have Tom
Daschle running ads for his Senate race where he's shown embracing Bush
-- anyone but a Democrat almost seems a wise choice. But not this time.

Stop me if you've read Daniel Guerin's Fascism and Big Business, but it's
relevant if you haven't. Hitler was elected without even a plurality because of
the Comintern's dumb policies, and his first act on taking power was to pass
big tax cuts for the industrialists who had financed his campaign. Shortly after,
he abolished the estate tax. The ruin wreaked by the cuts was the main
motive for building armaments and going into a state of permanent war with
the world, absorbing conquered nations' wealth and resources as spoils of
war, and using Jews and others as slave labor till they died of starvation.

According to a current New Yorker article, among the priorities of a second
Bush term would be elimination of the graduated income tax. The previous
Bush cuts have already stunned the economy; after four more years, the only
way to keep it going will be on a permanent war footing. The word fascist gets
thrown around a lot, but I think it applies fairly rigorously to this administration.

As for having a film buff who seriously supports this administration join our
ranks, why not? Two reasons: These people tend to be short on culture, and
they don't believe in discussion. Their leaders are putting laws and institutions
and para-institutions in place whose purpose is to stifle dissent and
discussion. So they probably wouldn't make the cut, and probably wouldn't
want to anyway.
14865


From: Programming
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:29pm
Subject: Re: OT: Illinois politicians clarification
 
On 8/31/04 4:06 PM, "Fred Camper" wrote:

> Also speaking personally and now OT, I have occasionally voted for
> Republicans in local races (never for President). Most recently about
> six years ago I voted for Jim Ryan for governor of Illinois. I think
> David would have too, if he lived in Illinois; Ryan was running against
> a Democrat who opposed reproductive rights and gay rights; the
> Republican favored both. Just before leaving office, Ryan commuted every
> death sentence in Illinois, and made a statement that he thought the
> whole death penalty system was wrong, making me extra proud that I voted
> for him. Despite a very messy corruption case in which he could have
> been involved, I would have voted for him again if he had been running.

The governor Fred is discussing is GEORGE Ryan, not Jim. Jim Ryan is
another Republican state politician who was forced from the current Illinois
Senate race due to a "sex scandal" (the Chicago Tribune went to court to get
Jim Ryan's divorce records - his wife was Jeri Ryan from Star Trek - which
disclosed her assertion that he took her to sex clubs and wanted to have
public sex with her, which they didn't do as she objected - as the current
Senator said "The only sex scandal where the people involved were married
and there was no sex").

After Jim Ryan was forced from the race, state Republicans replaced him with
Alan Keyes (!).

Needless to say, it's been a field day for the local media the last few
month.

Patrick F.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14866


From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:36pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
one
>

> And on and on and on. How *anyone* who truly understands what's
going on
> in the world could support the Repubicans at this moment is utterly
> beyond me. Many have observed that Bush is Al Qaeda's top recruiter.
>

The really frightening thing is that about half the American
population does support the Republicans and seems to think Bush is
just dandy. They're probably the same who voted for him the first
time around. Nothing he does seems able to change their minds...

I think Kerry should never have disclosed the damning fact that he
can speak French and has French friends and relatives. Not to mention
his wife's supposedly foreign accent...

JPC
14867


From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 11:08pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:

>
> Stop me if you've read Daniel Guerin's Fascism and Big Business, but
it's
> relevant if you haven't. Hitler was elected without even a plurality
because of
> the Comintern's dumb policies,

Hitler would still have become Chancellor, because the National
Socialists had the support of the Nationalists and the Center Party.
All together they had a 2/3rds majority in the Reichstag.

Paul
14868


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 0:57am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
>
> Hitler would still have become Chancellor, because the National
> Socialists had the support of the Nationalists and the Center Party.
> All together they had a 2/3rds majority in the Reichstag.
>
> Paul

I stand corrected. Did all those people vote for him, or is that not how it
worked? I'd always heard -- not from Guerin, by the way -- that the refusal of
the Communists to make common cause with other Left parties led to Hitler's
election. Not true?
14869


From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 1:12am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
>
> And that is the beating heart of the matter, Fred.
> it's hard to stay focussed on esthetics when ethics
> get tossed in the trash bin.
>
>

David, I'm sure that while the National Socialist Party was holding
rallies, there were German cinephiles who didn't want to discuss it,
preferring instead to stay completely focused on talking about the
new Richard Oswald or Gustav Ucicky. And in the year when France
was invaded, I'm sure you good find a Good German or two down at the
local beer hall arguing that Jud Süß was worth checking out for some
nice visual touches.
14870


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 1:26am
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- Damien Bona wrote:


> David, I'm sure that while the National Socialist
> Party was holding
> rallies, there were German cinephiles who didn't
> want to discuss it,
> preferring instead to stay completely focused on
> talking about the
> new Richard Oswald or Gustav Ucicky. And in the
> year when France
> was invaded, I'm sure you good find a Good German or
> two down at the
> local beer hall arguing that Jud Süß was worth
> checking out for some
> nice visual touches.
>
>
Well don't forget that "Les Enfants du Paradis" and
"Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne" were made under the
occupation.

And Hitler's favorite movie was "Broadway Melody of
1940."


And what do have today?

"The Brown Bunny"

(The prosecution rests.)



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14871


From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 1:43am
Subject: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>

> Though I haven't seen it in quite a while, May's HOUSE OF THE SEVEN
> GABLES also quite impressed me (and provided the young Vincent
Price
> with his first real leading man role).


House of the Seven Gables is quite impressive and atmospheric, with a
strikingly strong sense of melancholy permeating it. (Just don't
watch it expecting Hawthorne -- the plot and certain key characters
have only a passing resemblance to the novel. But then again, that's
usually the case with film adaptations of books. Tonight I saw A
Home At The End Of The World, and was amazed how, in adapting his own
novel, Michael Cunningham played around with the characterizations in
such a way that their impact and emotional weight is almost 180
degrees different from the book. Theatre director Michael Mayer has
a strong visual sense in the sense of understanding the varying
impact of one-shots, two-shots, and he's especially adept at blocking
his actors. Unfortunately, despite that the film is dramatically
inert.)

Poor Joey May followed Seven Gables up with two Little Tough Guys
movies (they were a spin-off of the Dead End Kids at Universal),
You're Not So Tough (with Phil Karlson (!) as assistant director) and
Hit The Road. Three years later, in 1944, there was a Simone Simon
vehicle at Monogram, and that was it.

According to Ed Sikov's seminal biography of Billy Wilder, "On Sunset
Boulevard," by 1947, May and his wife (former German movie star, Mia
May) were in such bad shape that the bank was threatening foreclosure
on their house. An old friend, agent Paul Kohner, convinced other
old friends of May, including Wilder, William Wyler and Ernst
Lubitsch to join him in "advancing" them money on a monthly basis.
In 1949, the Mays opened a Hungarian restaurant in Hollywood called
the Blue Danube. Wilder and Joseph L. Mankiewicz were among the
investors. It lasted less than a month.
14872


From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 2:24am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> I stand corrected. Did all those people vote for him, or is that not
how it
> worked? I'd always heard -- not from Guerin, by the way -- that the
refusal of
> the Communists to make common cause with other Left parties led to
Hitler's
> election. Not true?

I'm definitely not an expert on this! But my understanding is that
the combined votes of the Social Democrats and the Communists never
made up a majority. The other large parties, the Nationalists and
the Center Party, far from seeking a coalition with the Social
Democrats or Communists, wanted them destroyed. The Nationalists and
the Center Party became increasingly close to the National Socialists.

For example, even though the National Socialist Party didn't have a
majority, the vote on the Enabling Act, which gave Hitler
dictatorial powers on March 23, 1933, was 441-84. The Nationalists
and the Center Party deputies unanimously supported it.
This was after the Communist Party had been banned, and several
Social Democrats had been arrested, but the Act still would
have passed even if those deputies had been allowed to vote
against it.

So even though it's often stated that Communist opposition to the
SDP led to Hitler's election, I don't see how that would work.
The votes weren't there.

I've also seen it suggested that had there been a Communist-
Social Democratic alliance, it would have frightened some voters
and helped the Nazis during the 1932 election.

Paul
14873


From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 2:55am
Subject: where are the women...
 
Just a note of 'thanks' for allowing me to read / post to this group...
not because I am a woman, but because of my 'rookie' status as a film
student / viewer.

I am curious about you older fellows who mention viewing films in your
apartments, etc. long before vcr and dvd. Were there any women in the
audience (whether the host was hetero- or homosexual)? Are similar
gatherings today uni- or bi-sexual? Most of my viewing is solo,
whether in theaters or at home, except when attending a crowded film
festival.

Elizabeth
14874


From: Noel Vera
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 3:17am
Subject: Re: The Village (visuals vs. narration??)
 
> It is gradually revealed by their actions, and by things uncovered
in
> Ivy's journey. Hurt is particularly scrutinized; sexual repression
> seems to be a widespread symptom, not valorized as cute by the
> filmmaker.

Sexual repression seems to be a normal, unremarkable thing for the
filmmaker; he tiptoes around sex in all his films like a naughty
college boy, making jokes if I recall about the subject in Signs at
one point, but never really coming to grips with it. The Red Riding
Hood imagery of the Village is the most explicit yet, I suppose, but
I don't see any thought behind the images, or any distinct attitude
of fear or obsession to make it really interesting, a la Hitchcock.

> I'm sure the metaphor is there. This particular film seems
> consciously allegorical: a community of false innocence maintained
by
> fake boogeymen who are supposed to live in the woods, just waiting
to
> kill everyone.

Seems to me more like a general fable that would apply to most other
times, no matter what the political conditions (the '70s, for
example, against the Establishment, or the '50s against Communism,
or '80s Reaganites against the dirty liberals). But I'll hear out
attempts to elaborate, if any.

Seems to me Shyamalan could have taken a hint or two from Ballard's
Thirteen for Centaurus, a short story about a spacecraft with
thirteen crewmembers headed out to the nearest star. The twist comes
near the beginning, not towards the end (SPOILER: turns out the trip
is a simulated experiment to study the effects of multigenerational
space voyages on humans), which allowed Ballard to explore the
relationship between the people conducting the experiment and the
people who are the object of the experiment more fully. I'm not
exactly one of those that deem the twist in The Village silly, per
se; I do think just when things started to get interesting, he ended
the story, for the sake of an O. Henry ending.
14875


From: Robert Keser
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 3:26am
Subject: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
>
>
> House of the Seven Gables is quite impressive and atmospheric, with
> a strikingly strong sense of melancholy permeating it. (Just don't
> watch it expecting Hawthorne -- the plot and certain key characters
> have only a passing resemblance to the novel. But then again,
>that's usually the case with film adaptations of books....)
>
> Poor Joey May followed Seven Gables up with two Little Tough Guys
> movies (they were a spin-off of the Dead End Kids at Universal),
> You're Not So Tough (with Phil Karlson (!) as assistant director)
> and Hit The Road. Three years later, in 1944, there was a Simone >
> Simon vehicle at Monogram...

...an early Robert Mitchum appearance in Johnny Doesn't Live Here
Anymore, which has a bit of an underground reputation, as much as a
nearly unavailable movie can muster (Maltin's book calls it an early
prototype of The Apartment, apparently with Simone Simon as Jack
Lemmon).
>
> According to Ed Sikov's seminal biography of Billy Wilder, "On
>Sunset Boulevard," by 1947, May and his wife (former German movie
>star, Mia May) were in such bad shape that the bank was threatening
>foreclosure on their house. An old friend, agent Paul Kohner,
>convinced other old friends of May, including Wilder, William Wyler
>and Lubitsch to join him in "advancing" them money on a monthly
>basis. In 1949, the Mays opened a Hungarian restaurant in Hollywood
>called the Blue Danube. Wilder and Joseph L. Mankiewicz were among
>the investors. It lasted less than a month.

He himself lasted another seven years, though. I'd like to know
whether Fritz Lang threw any money in the kitty to help out the man
who bought his first script and produced his first film? (Tom
Gunning's book about Lang has just a few glancing mentions of May).

It surprised me to learn that May is also credited with the (very
clever) story of Uncertain Glory, my favorite Raoul Walsh film (okay,
after Me and My Gal).

In "The Haunted Screen", Lotte Eisner connects May's Asphalt to avant-
garde filmmakers of the time but otherwise has little use for
him: "In the end, all that May's pretentions to avant-garde artistry
and his skilful imitation lead to is an image which is highly
symbolic of his own insignificance".

Supposedly Music In the Air, his Jerome Kern operetta at Fox about an
operatic diva, gave Gloria Swanson the opportunity to test drive her
Norma Desmond fifteen years before Billy Wilder thought her up.
Richard Barrios's book calls it "uproariously droll" and "too
sophisticated for a mass audience beginning to dote on Shirley
Temple". The movie is also the source of "The SOng Is You", memorably
showcased by Guy Maddin in The Saddest Music In the World. All this
and John Boles too!

--Robert Keser
14876


From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 3:35am
Subject: Re: where are the women...
 
--- Elizabeth Nolan wrote:

Most of my
> viewing is solo,
> whether in theaters or at home, except when
> attending a crowded film
> festival.
>
> Elizabeth
>
>
Is this by choice on your part?



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
14877


From: Matt Teichman
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 3:38am
Subject: Re: Kubelka
 
Fred Camper wrote:

>I strongly recommend seeing Peter Kubelka (which I believe will be
>October 17). His new film is unlike anything else he's done; he's a
>great speaker; he's one of my ten favorite filmmakers.
>
>
One of the ten greatest, indeed. Didn't Hollis Frampton once say that
if he could watch _Unsere Afrikareise_ every two months he'd be a happy
man?

What else can you tell us about this film, Fred?

-Matt
14878


From: Adrian Martin
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 3:52am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
"Seems to me Shyamalan could have taken a hint or two from Ballard's
Thirteen for Centaurus ... "

Noel, this is absolute proof that great minds think alike: the first thing I
said to a fellow film critic as we left the preview screening of THE VILLAGE
was: "It had the potential to be just like Ballard's Thirteen for Centaurus
..." No kidding! I once heard, back in in about 1983, a terrific lecture by
the Australian art critic Ted Colless which used this very story by JGB as
the 'master metaphor' for all film-theoretical activity!

Adrian
14879


From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:10am
Subject: Re: politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
> In hindsight, Reagan, horrible as we was, did I
> think believe in democracy, at least for Americans. I'm not sure that
> Bush or his thugs do at all.

I can't see how Reagan believed in democracy at all. The role of the
state in "democracies" should be to guarantee the conditions for full
citizenship, but a central premise of the laissez-faire capitalist
model promoted by both economic liberals and conservative moralists is
that the state should exist only to protect private property claims
acquired through the market. Reagonomics perpetuated the situation
whereby the benefits of citizenship (rights, liberties and equality
under the law) are extended only to those who have successfully become
economically independent, thus excluding the poor and women, who
conservative moralists say should be economically dependent upon their
husbands. This attack on the welfare state, which began before Reagan
but accelerated with a fury under his administration (and under
Clinton to be sure), imposes substantial obstacles to political
participation, subverting the possibility for democracy in its most
robust sense.
Read more in Timothy Gaffaney, "Freedom for the Poor" (Westview Press)

And let's not forget Reagan's response to the gains of the civil
rights movement: the "war on drugs", another way of denying political
participation to non-white American poor (see e.g., the Florida felons
list and the 2000 election).

> As I wrote a friend yesterday, I think this is Germany in the year
1931.

Absolutely:
http://www.thomhartmann.com/democracyfailed.shtml

-Jason G.

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."
-- Dom Helder Camara (1909-1999)
14880


From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:19am
Subject: Re: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
Paul Gallagher wrote:

>--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>wrote:
>
>
>
>For example, even though the National Socialist Party didn't have a
>majority, the vote on the Enabling Act, which gave Hitler
>dictatorial powers on March 23, 1933, was 441-84.
>
I'm no expert on this either, but I think it's worth mentioning that
less than a month before the passage of the Enabling Act, one of the
largest and most important buildings in Germany's largest city, the
Reichstag, was destroyed by a fire allegedly set by a Dutch communist --
well, he did set it, but it's unknown who put him up to it, and some
think that Nazis did.

This fire persuaded Hindenberg to agree to cancel most civil liberties
early in March, and I think it greatly helped produce the lopsided majority.

The USA Patriot Act (did I mention "lopsided majority"?) is nowhere near
as bad as the Enabling Act, but who knows what will happen in the face
of more, and possibly worse, attacks in the US.

Fred Camper
14881


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:20am
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny, our groiup, and politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> And Hitler's favorite movie was "Broadway Melody of
> 1940."

Really? But Goebbels admired Lang...unless that's another exploded
myth. Stalin was also a big film buff: cf. Konchalovsky's The Inner
Circle.
14882


From: Noel Vera
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:27am
Subject: Re: The Village
 
> "Seems to me Shyamalan could have taken a hint or two from
Ballard's
> Thirteen for Centaurus ... "
>
> Noel, this is absolute proof that great minds think alike

Well, I don't know about 'great minds' but a certain synchronicity
of craniums is sure appreciated.

> I once heard, back in in about 1983, a terrific lecture by
> the Australian art critic Ted Colless which used this very story
by JGB as
> the 'master metaphor' for all film-theoretical activity!

That sounds interesting. You remember any of the lecture?
14883


From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:28am
Subject: Re: Kubelka
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Matt Teichman wrote:
> One of the ten greatest, indeed. Didn't Hollis Frampton once say that
> if he could watch _Unsere Afrikareise_ every two months he'd be a happy
> man?

I had the pleasure of seeing UNSERE AFRIKAREISE and other Kubelkas a
few weeks ago at Anthology. I'd only seen PAUSE! before, and was as
impressed as I was the first time around, but that film, along with
the so-called "metric" films, was much easier to appreciate upon a
single viewing. (At this point, I'd place those metric films --
ADEBAR, SCHWECHATER, ARNULF RAINER -- among my all-time favorite
films.) This is not to say that I wasn't impressed by UNSERE
AFRIKAREISE, but that it's a much more complex work which I don't
think I was able to get my eyes/ears around in a single viewing.

Perhaps the success of the Brakhage DVD can persuade Kubelka to make
his work available in that format. Any insight about Kubelka's
position on this?

-Jason G.
jason@r...

Q: Are you Catholic?
Michael Snow: No.
Q: Are you religious?
Snow: No.
Q: Do you believe in anything?
Snow: Anything? Yes, I believe in anything.
14884


From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:29am
Subject: Re: Re: Kubelka
 
Matt Teichman wrote:

>What else can you tell us about this film, Fred?
>
>
If you're asking about the new film, I've seen it only once, in Hong
Kong, and aside from saying that it's silent, made of "found footage,"
and utterly unlike Kubelka's other films, I'd rather not comment on it
yet. But there's descriptions of all his films, including his of the new
one, at http://www.fredcamper.com/M/Kubelka/ These are image rather than
text files.

I have heard he'll show two of his seven films in New York at the NYFF
on October 17, his first and last, along with a lecture. A few days
later he'll show his complete work at two lecture screenings in Boston
(I can post full info if anyone wants.) Then I've been working on a
larger US tour for him in early 2005. There as many as ten places
interested, though probably all won't work out. It seems likely that the
two lecture-screenings of his complete work will be presented in
Washington, Chicago, Madison Wisconsin, Milwaukee Wisconsin, Los Angeles
and Valencia, and perhaps San Francisco. There will be a single program
of 16mm prints of some of his films in Boulder. I'll post the schedule
in a few months when it's set. The likely start will be in Washington
February 26/7. None of this is completely definite yet.

Fred Camper
14885


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:37am
Subject: Re: politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jason Guthartz" wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
> > In hindsight, Reagan, horrible as we was, did I
> > think believe in democracy, at least for Americans. I'm not sure
that
> > Bush or his thugs do at all.
>
> I can't see how Reagan believed in democracy at all.

"Reagan" and "Bush" are shills. Many of the thugs who are running the
country now were running the country under Reagan. Some helped Bush
Jr. steal Florida; then they all came back to power. Their televised
images might as well be holograms created to distract the gulls while
the interests of the the ruling class are being ruthlessly promoted
at the expense of everyone else -- not only here, but in Central and
South America, in the Middle East, in Central Asia, in Africa. Maybe
Reagan in his heart believed that Donald Duck is God and Bush
secretly believes that he is the reincarnation of Leon Trotsky.
They're foolish men who look good in suits, and anything is possible.
But while what Hitler believed, unfortunately, mattered, what these
fools believe has no importance whatsoever.
14886


From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:38am
Subject: Re: Re: Kubelka
 
Jason Guthartz wrote:

>Perhaps the success of the Brakhage DVD can persuade Kubelka to make
>his work available in that format. Any insight about Kubelka's
>position on this?
>
>
>
Yes His "position on this" is: NEVER. That has always been his position,
and still is as of a few months ago. He thinks his films are made for
film projection and will make no sense on video.

I'm not sure I think "Unsere Afrikareise" is more complex than
"Schwechater," though it is incredibly dense and complex. But so is
"Schwechater," my favorite of all his films.

Fred Camper
14887


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 4:57am
Subject: Politics/TV/OT/Not-OT [was: Brown Bunny, our group, and politics (OT)]
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
I think it's worth mentioning that
> less than a month before the passage of the Enabling Act, one of
the
> largest and most important buildings in Germany's largest city, the
> Reichstag, was destroyed by a fire allegedly set by a Dutch
communist --
> well, he did set it, but it's unknown who put him up to it, and
some
> think that Nazis did.


Indeed it is. And since this information was buried in one of my
previous posts about The Village, with a SPOIEER sign posted ahead of
it to frighten people off, it's perhaps worth repeating. A reputable
poll just published shows that almost 50% of the inhabitants of NY
state think the administration knew 9/11 was coming and let it
happen; 66% want the 9/11 investigation reopened. As far as I know,
that poll hasn't been widely publicized, but I'm in no position to
say, since I turned off the tube almost 8 years ago. At the very
least it shows that there is a mammoth credibility gap between what
the people living around Ground Zero believe and what television has
shown since 9/11 -- a subject that is not entirely OT here, since tv
is the most powerful audiovisual medium ever, and Leni Riefenstahl is
its mother.

Pursuing the On-/Off-Topic Topic of tv, today I edited a newsletter
for Midnight Mission, a Skid Row organization that helps the
homeless, which featured a story about Meri-Louise Harrison, an Army
veteran and single mother who became homeless when her son suffered a
near-fatal reaction to asthma medication and she lost her job
scrambling to care for him. (Gee, I wonder why her veterans benefits
didn't... Oh, that's who GAVE him the medication? Uh-huh.) When they
moved into Midnight Mission's Family Housing -- a sort of halfway
village with nice apartments -- the boy freaked out because there was
no tv in the apartment, only a big-screen tv in the central rec room
that all families share. The reason: Families coming in from the
street -- and there are lots of families out there since "Reagan" --
need to bond again and heal from the stress; tv would distract them.
They're out of Family Housing now and enjoying the closest
relationship they've ever had.

Many of us love tv. I certainly did for years, starting in childhood
(when the medium was a bit different). But we are making perverse (ie
probably healthy) use of what is essentially -- and more and more --
an instrument of subjugation, right out of the hoariest sci-fi
dystopias of the 50s. To me this is not OT at all.
14888


From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:04am
Subject: Politics (OT)
 
> Still OT, I would have voted for Ryan, and until recently would have
> considered voting for McCain if the Republicans were deprived of Bush by
> felony indictments. McCain's current support of the ticket and the war shows I
> was wrong about that.

McCain is just keeping himself alive in a political sense by supporting
Bush, no? That kind of pragmatism isn't very pretty, but without it,
it's hard to have any kind of political career.

> According to a current New Yorker article, among the priorities of a second
> Bush term would be elimination of the graduated income tax. The previous
> Bush cuts have already stunned the economy; after four more years, the only
> way to keep it going will be on a permanent war footing. The word fascist gets
> thrown around a lot, but I think it applies fairly rigorously to this administration.

To my mind, the Bush administration doesn't have the fervent grass-roots
support that characterized fascist regimes, and as a result they seem to
work in a more covert way than fascists did.

> As for having a film buff who seriously supports this administration join our
> ranks, why not? Two reasons: These people tend to be short on culture, and
> they don't believe in discussion. Their leaders are putting laws and institutions
> and para-institutions in place whose purpose is to stifle dissent and
> discussion. So they probably wouldn't make the cut, and probably wouldn't
> want to anyway.

But, as Jean-Pierre pointed out, half of the United States is pro-Bush.
That's a lot of people to dismiss.

My sense is that a lot of normal people support Bush primarily because
they are worried about terrorism and concerned that too much attention
to civil liberties will handicap the fight against terrorism. What is
interesting is that American liberals have difficulty addressing this
issue: American democratic ideology educates us to dismiss the idea of a
conflict between freedom and security. So the two halves of America
aren't communicating all that well. - Dan
14889


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:13am
Subject: Re: Politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > Still OT, I would have voted for Ryan, and until recently would
have
> > considered voting for McCain if the Republicans were deprived of
Bush by
> > felony indictments. McCain's current support of the ticket and
the war shows I
> > was wrong about that.
>
> McCain is just keeping himself alive in a political sense by
supporting
> Bush, no? That kind of pragmatism isn't very pretty, but without
it,
> it's hard to have any kind of political career.
>
> > According to a current New Yorker article, among the priorities
of a second
> > Bush term would be elimination of the graduated income tax. The
previous
> > Bush cuts have already stunned the economy; after four more
years, the only
> > way to keep it going will be on a permanent war footing. The word
fascist gets
> > thrown around a lot, but I think it applies fairly rigorously to
this administration.
>
> To my mind, the Bush administration doesn't have the fervent grass-
roots
> support that characterized fascist regimes, and as a result they
seem to
> work in a more covert way than fascists did.
>
> > As for having a film buff who seriously supports this
administration join our
> > ranks, why not? Two reasons: These people tend to be short on
culture, and
> > they don't believe in discussion. Their leaders are putting laws
and institutions
> > and para-institutions in place whose purpose is to stifle dissent
and
> > discussion. So they probably wouldn't make the cut, and probably
wouldn't
> > want to anyway.
>
> But, as Jean-Pierre pointed out, half of the United States is pro-
Bush.
> That's a lot of people to dismiss.
>
> My sense is that a lot of normal people support Bush primarily
because
> they are worried about terrorism and concerned that too much
attention
> to civil liberties will handicap the fight against terrorism. What
is
> interesting is that American liberals have difficulty addressing
this
> issue: American democratic ideology educates us to dismiss the idea
of a
> conflict between freedom and security. So the two halves of
America
> aren't communicating all that well. - Dan

McCain could switch parties -- but Jeffords became an independent and
handed the Democrats a fighting chance which they blew, so maybe he's
right to stay in the GOP. He was able to carp from inside when Bush
started running the swift boat ads. And maybe someday he can get
elected President and make contributing money to a political campaign
a crime punishable by death. That would be a good start.

You feel that there's not fervent support for Bush, but it's half the
country, and no matter how badly he screws up, they stay with him. I
don't know what Hitler had, but that's a pretty good base. And it
isn't just liberals who are screaming about the Patriot Act -- there
are Republican Congressman who are livid about it, and conservative
Republicans who are considering sitting this election out because of
it.

The War on Terror is a fucking joke, Dan, a ruse. Half the people
living in your state think Bush knew 9/11 was coming and let it
happen. The problem isn't "liberals."
14890


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:17am
Subject: Nat Turner, a Troublesome Property: The Long Version
 
From Charles Burnett in S. Africa:


No, that version doesn't exist anymore. Sorry, Charles.>

Scott better hold onto his copy -- I'd love to see it someday! Was
there more about the WPA oral histories? The scene that's in there is
hilarious, but I wouldn't say no to more.
14891


From: Richard Modiano
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:26am
Subject: Re: Kubelka
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:


"It seems likely that the two lecture-screenings of his complete
work will be presented in Washington, Chicago, Madison Wisconsin,
Milwaukee Wisconsin, Los Angeles and Valencia, and perhaps San
Francisco. There will be a single program of 16mm prints of some of
his films in Boulder. I'll post the schedule in a few months when
it's set. The likely start will be in Washington February 26/7. None
of this is completely definite yet."

I'm looking forward to this since I haven't seen any of Kubelka's
films since the late 1970s. I remember that when he was at NYU he
cooked for the class, and with characteristic precision he checked
the stove top with a level to make sure the souffle would be evenly
heated.

What is the probable venue for Los Angeles?

Richard
14892


From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:40am
Subject: Re: Politics (OT)
 
The problem is losing friends over shit like this.

I had a tennis partner (Republican) at the beginning of the summer. Once I insulted a
couple of his Bush-loving friends and now I haven't heard from him in months, don't
expect to, and yes, he was a very capable tennis player about on par with me.


Am I being too naive in thinking that there are more nuances to the RNC than just
rallying around Bush, nuances that David and Damien would rather not acknowledge?
My dislike of Bush has been made known here and elsewhere, but there are smart
Republicans out there, and many of them attend the RNC to debate and observe, not
to say heil and beat a drum.

I don't expect we'll agree on these matters any time soon, but isn't it funny that all of
this happened because David is biased against Gallo? I can't believe there are actually
people here who are dubious about checking BROWN BUNNY out just because the
director/star has mixed politics. If the film is propagandistic about anything, it's
Gallo's cock.

Gabe

p.s. just came back from the second screening of McBride's BREATHLESS, beautiful
copy, which was a surprise, and scarcely filled cinema, which was not a surprise.
14893


From: Fred Camper
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 5:41am
Subject: Re: Re: Kubelka (plus my narcissism)
 
Richard Modiano wrote:

>
>What is the probable venue for Los Angeles?
>
>
>
One at Redcat and the other show at CalArts, IF it works out.

That cooking lecture-demonstration was great, though the one I attended
was early 70s. It was on the local public TV station. Kubelka's theory
of cooking is similar to his theory of cinema -- you combine elements to
make an "articulation." The result was also delicious, if you don't mind
eating lamb testicles. I was in the audience and Jonas Mekas was there
filming, so a few shots of me in the background, bearded as I was back
then, appears in Mekas's "The Birth of a Nation," one of my four film
"appearances." (I think I've mentioned this before, but the others are a
film of Warren Sonbert's and two of Tim Hunter, a clueless basketball
spectator in "Tex" and a homeless bum in "The Saint of Fort Washington."
Matt Dillon was my "co-star." These are just one shot or two shot
appearances, though.)

Fred Camper
14894


From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:05am
Subject: Re: Re: Politics (OT)
 
> You feel that there's not fervent support for Bush, but it's half the
> country, and no matter how badly he screws up, they stay with him. I
> don't know what Hitler had, but that's a pretty good base.

But having half the country voting for you doesn't seem like a criterion
for fascism. In Fascist countries, people lived through difficult
times, and then a good chunk of them were moved to enthusiasm by a
charismatic leader who seemed to offer spiritual revitalization. I
don't get that from America today. I get the feeling a lot of people
think there's a de facto war between the U.S. and terrorism, and are
behaving as if Bush is a wartime president, cutting him a lot of slack.

> The War on Terror is a fucking joke, Dan, a ruse. Half the people
> living in your state think Bush knew 9/11 was coming and let it
> happen. The problem isn't "liberals."

Boy, these conversations are difficult. Did you get from what I said
that I thought the problem was liberals? - Dan
14895


From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:15am
Subject: Re: Politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Gabe Klinger"
wrote:

> My dislike of Bush has been made known here and elsewhere, but
there are smart
> Republicans out there, and many of them attend the RNC to debate
and observe, not
> to say heil and beat a drum.

Hey Gabe,

Glad you got to see a good print of Breathless -- how'd you like it?

Want to report on your meeting w. Farber?

I grew up in Texas and New Mexico, and I've known lots of people who
are going to vote for Bush in 2 months. I have never -- repeat,
never -- said they were stupid, although frankly, many of the
jobholders within the regime are: The fact that Condee Rice and David
Frum are the hottest intellectual talent that movement can field
shows that the Left still has the monopoly on the big brains. But so
what? This isn't about intelligence, and people who keep railing at
the supposed stupidity of the American people are missing the point.
This is an extreme right-wing political movement, and all it cares
about is geting -- seizing if necessary -- and holding power.

I saw it in its early days, when it was the John Birch Society (and I
was a Goldwater Republican) -- kind of appalling, but quaint,
grassroots. In the better part of a lifetime I've lived since, the
grassroots people have been completely coopted by a very small,
determined, massively-financed group at the top who just need cannon
fodder, not people who attend the NRC to debate and observe. What the
hell would they want that for? I knew a big contributor from Midland,
Bush Jr.'s hometown, where the cops wear uniforms designed by Neiman
Marcus, who was planning to go to the Inauguration of Bush Sr.
wearing a "Choice" button -- Barbara Bush banned her from attending.
This is top-down power politics where the big players sign checks and
collect bigger ones, and ideological uniformity is fanatically
enforced.

That doesn't mean I'd never talk to some terrorist-fearing patriot
who was going to vote for Bush -- I grew up with those folks and have
talked to them all my life; I worked with an office full of them at
Fox, and we were all, in a sense, friends as well as colleagues who
respected each others' differences. But they are all as irrelevant to
what is happening and to what is going to happen as George W. Bush, a
shill. (See my post on "what Reagan believed.") This is no longer
about debate, discussion or democracy in any form -- something else
is replacing all those things, and personally, I put what little hope
I have at the moment in signs that fed-up members of the permanent
government (Armed Services, Intelligence, Federal Reserve) are trying
to put the skids to the Junta (ALL EIGHT REPUBLICANS on the
Intelligence Committee doing an end-run around their Democratic
colleagues and ADVOCATING THE DISSOLUTION OF THE CIA????) than I do
in any free market of ideas right now. Kerry appears to be their
candidate, and given the alternative, that's fine with me.
14896


From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:16am
Subject: Re: Politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Gabe Klinger"
wrote:
> The problem is losing friends over shit like this.
>
> I had a tennis partner (Republican) at the beginning of the summer.
Once I insulted a
> couple of his Bush-loving friends and now I haven't heard from him
in months, don't
> expect to, and yes, he was a very capable tennis player about on
par with me.
>

I'd be more than willing to make the sacrifice of losing a tennis
partner in order not to associate with a Republican. I gave up my
best source for high-quality pot because of his right-wing politics.

>
> Am I being too naive in thinking that there are more nuances to the
RNC than just
> rallying around Bush, nuances that David and Damien would rather
not acknowledge?

Yup. The people at the convention are not the ill-informed naifs in
the hinterlands who vote Republican because they think a Democratic
president will take away their hunting rifles and are convinced --
because administration shills have lied about it so often -- that
Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and was in cahoots with Osama. These
are politically-savvy, socially-and economically powerful influence-
peddlers. They're hard-core right-wing extremists, filled with hate
and proud to stand up for the the most intolerant major party
platform in the history of the US.

So if youre pining for a couple of sets of tennis with the despicable
likes of them, that's something between you and your conscience.

14897


From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:17am
Subject: Re: Politics (OT)
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> My sense is that a lot of normal people support Bush primarily because
> they are worried about terrorism and concerned that too much attention
> to civil liberties will handicap the fight against terrorism.

"Terrorism" is merely the latest proxy for the threat posed by
"foreigners" or "blacks", a way to satisfy the all-American need to
find a group to dehumanize, to feel morally superior to. It opens the
door for Papa to come along and say, "Leave it to me and everything
will be all white, er, right."
One glance at the electoral map and it becomes apparent that the
Confederacy is alive and well. The anti-democratic institutions of
winner-take-all elections and the electoral college give
disproportionate representation to this constituency (propertied white
males). The regressive right knows that they can only maintain power
through fearmongering and thuggery, not by encouraging broader
political pariticipation.
The U.S. is still fighting its Civil War, though the conflict has
become relatively "cold". But things may heat up if Bush is elected
(or re-selected). (If the Bush Reich has changed my mind at all on
any issue, it's the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.)

> But having half the country voting for you doesn't seem like a
criterion
> for fascism.

The qualification should always be made that (less than) half of half
of the country voted for Bush. The half which doesn't vote are
disproportionately poor and lower-middle-class. It's in the interest
of the corporate elite to pretend that "swing" voters -- maybe 10% of
the half who vote, i.e., 5% of the population -- are the ones whom
politicians should be fighting over rather than the 50% who can't
afford the campaign contributions necessary to get politicians to
address their interests.

-Jason G.
14898


From:   Jack Angstreich
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:22am
Subject: Re: Buffalo 66 - (was: Re: Re: Brown Bunny)
 
are there female auteurists?

Jack Angstreich




On Aug 31, 2004, at 1:16 PM, Craig Keller wrote:


> We need more women, not "Republicans." Where are the ladies?

True that.  There are exactly two women on this list that I know of --
Elizabeth Nolan and Michelle Carey.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14899


From: Damien Bona
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:26am
Subject: (OT) Re: Brown Bunny and Brown Shirts
 
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
I'm planning a sign that
> says "Before Bush, how many Americans were beheaded in Saudi Arabia?
> Before Bush, how many Americans were beheaded in Iraq?" (I speak as
> someone who managed to keep my head while visiting Iraq and living
> in Saudi Arabia for two years, the only country on earth that
> forbids movie theaters yet has flourishing video stores).
>

Those are wonderful, Robert -- great bumper sticker stuff. And
another line of attack that the infuriating Democrats seem loathe to
undertake because -- God forbid -- Fox News might call them
unseemly.

By the way, it's fascinating that state of cinema in Saudi Arabia
parallels the porno industry in the States, videos having put adult
theatres out of business years ago.

But lest I offend Gabe's sensibility by talking politics and not
cinema, let me ask, which do you prefer, John Rawlins's Arabian
Nights or Charles Lamont's Bagdad?
14900


From:   Jack Angstreich
Date: Wed Sep 1, 2004 6:30am
Subject: Re: Re: Joe May's ASPHALT
 
Didn't May end up running a restaurant in Los Angeles?

Jack Angstreich




On Aug 31, 2004, at 2:45 PM, Robert Keser wrote:

--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Nick Wrigley
wrote:

> --- has anyone here seen Joe May's
> ASPHALT (1929) lately? I wondered what sort of release/exposure
this
> film has had in the West over the last 50 or so years?
>
> I just saw it the other night, loved it, and wondered why I never
hear
> anything about it....
>

Although he was a formidable producer in Germany, May was never able
to establish himself with comparable power in Hollywood.

--Robert Keser



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

a_film_by Main Page
Home    Film    Art     Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)    Links    About    Contact