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.
16301
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 3:52pm
Subject: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR (WAS: Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics)
> Perspective. Flows. Detours. Reversals. Certainly the film feels like a
> series of detours and reversals from "traditional" (say, classically Hollywood)
> narrative. I mean, unless I'm grossly missing the point (which is 1000% possible
> and thus someone who knows and appreciates the film more than me should pipe
> up), the film is a vision of life that doesn't place humans at its center. It
> tries to imagine life from the donkey's perspective.
Yes yes - I don't disagree with any of you. Nor am I trying to equate Shu Qi
with a donkey...
But my point - which I'm already tired of - if "even" a donkey is adequate
for the 'burden' - religious,narrative, etc of Bresson's cinema, then why
is Club Kid Vicky somehow not ?
(ps I still think she's Alice in Wonderland)
-Sam
16302
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 3:53pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
> Wallace Stevens wrote paens to castor oil torture killer but later
> admitted he was wrong, and deleted those poems from all his future
> collections. He was rightly ashamed of his early support for the
> rest of his life.
And then there's Ezra Pound...
-Sam
16303
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 3:56pm
Subject: Re: OT - Brooklyn Heights Apartment
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
> \
>.
> >
> > $1200 a month for a studio in a rent-controlled building?!
Wow!
> > Things have really changed since I left New York. In 1970 I paid
one
> > hundred dollars a month for a four-room "penthouse" apartment on
> > Claremont Avenue with superb view of sunsets on the Hudson River.
>
>
> Was your rent a typical price back in the day, JPC,
> or did you luck out even then?
Is it OK to continue with this OT discussion? Maybe it will be
helpful to auteurist girls from Ohio who dream of coming to the Big
Apple.
My first apartment in New York I found in exactly ten minutes --
it was the first ad in the Sunday New York Times that I responded to
(it was 1966). I called because the ad was funny -- a thorough
putdown of the apt. The tenant wanted someone to take over the
lease. He was Tony Hendra, the comedian and later Lampoon editor and
much later (this year) the center of a big controversy Re his book
and the accusations of his allegedly abused daughter (he left some
weird stuff behind, including very personal papers and letters).
The apt was a two-bedroom at 107 East 60th Street, the walk up just
round the corner from Park Avenue -- one of the most 'desirable"
adresses in town, and I think the rent was $175 (my salary at CCNY
was ten thousand a year, I think). An old tenant told me Saul
Steinberg lived there for a while just after the war... A few years
later I found a wonderful apartment on 94th St near Central Park
West for my then ex-wife -- this time we took over the lease from a
jazz musician, Herbie Hancock (there were several jazz musicians in
the building and next door too; my ex-wife became bassist's Richard
Davis's girlfriend). The Claremont Avenue apt. we got when wife #2
became affiliated with Columbia in 1970. Twenty years later the rent
was still $325 because by law CU couldn't raise the rent while in
litigation, and the litigation dragged on something like seven
years...
To coin a phrase, those were the days...
JPC
16304
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 3:57pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
> George Bailey and Bedford
> Falls need the supernatural to escape their troubles.
The "Bad" Bedford Falls seems like a much more interesting place to live in :)
-Sam
(It's always seemed to me that if you walk out of "It's A Wonderful Life" before the
end, it's Film Noir........)
16305
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:02pm
Subject: Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics
> I haven't seen a copy in London. Is my Abel Ferrara book reviewed in
> this issue?
Yep.
Although Bryan Frye's review of Kim Jong-Il's "On The Art of Cinema"
gets the first spot.
Bryan pans it. Any dissenting opinions ? :-)
-Sam
16306
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:33pm
Subject: Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics
Is this the Sept/Oct issue, or the Nov/Dec issue? The last one I saw
was July/Aug.
16307
From: jaketwilson
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:33pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> What to conclude from this? I'm not so sure. I might think of them
as
> my "enfants sauvages," but of course they'd been watching and loving
> movies all their lives. I had only skewed their menu a little. But I
> shouldn't act superior. I'm not so sure I should count myself among
> the cinephile Elect. (How can you tell? How are the Elect justified?
> By cinematic faith or by cinema-going works? Or is it
predestination?)
On not acting superior: I recently read THE ANIMATOR'S SURVIVAL KIT
by Richard Williams (the chief animator on WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT,
among other credits). It's a book which goes into fascinating detail
about the technical craft of animation, but one thing that especially
struck me was his citation of Disney's THE JUNGLE BOOK as the late
high point of a "classical" tradition. For me, this was a glimpse of
a completely alien kind of technical connoisseurship, which has
nothing to do with auteurism, and which I can barely begin to grasp
the principles of. Indeed it hardly seems likely that anyone but a
professional animator would appreciate the film in the way Williams
does (in detail). But while I'm in no position to question the
expertise of his judgement on this level, I don't think this in any
way invalidates the point of view of someone who hates the film, as I
did when I saw it many years ago: that hatred too was a response to
real qualities in the film, including Disney's bastardisation of
Kipling.
The point about this is that no movie, no object, is exhausted by
being looked at with just one set of concerns in mind (or described
in just one vocabulary). The more you look at a thing, the better you
can appreciate its qualities, but connoisseurship, i.e. learning to
identify differences, 1) can take many forms, and 2) is always
connected with a specialised kind of attention that can turn into one-
sidedness. The observation that not many commentators on REAR WINDOW
talk in detail about Grace Kelly's outfits is another illustration of
1). And it strikes me that a non-specialist response is always a
useful corrective to 2), since we're all non-specialists most of the
time. For that reason alone, I think that putting up with audience
laughter at a treasured film can be a healthy experience, however
painful. A great film, or a film with great qualities, can defend
itself -– it's not a sensitive plant that needs protecting. Nothing
would be less appropriate to Hawks, say, than an atmosphere of solemn
reverence. And I certainly wouldn't want a group of experts telling
me if I should find something funny or not.
JTW
16308
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:36pm
Subject: Re: Variations in film presentation (was: Cinémathèque & silents)
> I read an interview with a director of TV commercials in the 1970s, at a
> time when they were still all shot on 35mm film, and also edited and
> printed that way. He said he worked for the look of 35mm and didn't like
> video. Showing his commercials on TV would be historically "correct" but
> contrary to his preference.
Most high end commercials are still shot on 35mm.
The difference now is, you go right off the camera negative in telecine
(in a place like Nice Shoes where you supervised the Brakhage DVD
transfers).
I don't know how to address whether TV is "historically correct" for
showing TV commercials - in a sense how could it not be, unless
you were talking about commercials made for cinema exhibition also.
However, in my opinion, if "TV" is the display medium,you can *achieve
the "look" of a print better by transferring from camera negative or
intermediate than you can from transferring from the print itself*
-Sam
16309
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:43pm
Subject: Film Comment (was Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens" wrote:
>
> Is this the Sept/Oct issue, or the Nov/Dec issue? The last one I saw
> was July/Aug.
Sept / Oct. Jude Law / I ^^ Huckabees on the cover. (well I tried..)
Hong Kong; Shaw Bros; Brando tribute from Amy Taubin, and soccer scores
from Arcadia inside...
-Sam (I bought it at Barnes & Noble a week ago)
16310
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:48pm
Subject: Umberto Eco on the Beauty of Movie Stars
http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,4120,1317926,00.html
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
16311
From: samfilms2003
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 4:57pm
Subject: Film Comment (was Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics)
Occurs to me you might want to know this, here's ya blurbs:
"Brad Stevens's [literal transcription] impressively comprehensive study..."
"...a lucid and erudite examination of Ferrara's work."
"Stevens knows the literature, but his interviews with filmmakers,
musicians, artists, and actors who have survived Hurricane Abel
are invaluable..."
etc. You done good by FC's reviewer. (Maitland McDonagh)
-Sam
16312
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 5:15pm
Subject: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> George (Tough as a dollar steak) Robinson
If that steak only cost a dollar, it probably *WAS* Balthasar!
--Robert Keser
16313
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 5:22pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003" wrote
>
> The "Bad" Bedford Falls seems like a much more interesting place
to live in :)
> (It's always seemed to me that if you walk out of "It's A
> Wonderful Life" before the end, it's Film Noir........)
Not to mention that the film asks the sentimental(if metaphysical)
question, "What would the town be like if George had never been
born?" rather than addressing the socially useful question
proposed in the set-up: "What would the town be like if he had
followed his dream and traveled around the world?".
--Robert Keser
16314
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 5:38pm
Subject: Re: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- Robert Keser wrote:
> Not to mention that the film asks the sentimental(if
> metaphysical)
> question, "What would the town be like if George had
> never been
> born?" rather than addressing the socially useful
> question
> proposed in the set-up: "What would the town be like
> if he had
> followed his dream and traveled around the world?".
>
For the answer to that question see "Rear Window" (or
"George Bailey Moves to New York") and "Invasion of
the Body Snatchers" (or "Trouble in Bedford Falls")
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16315
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 5:42pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
"I think that putting up with audience laughter at a treasured film
can be a healthy experience, however painful...And I certainly
wouldn't want a group of experts telling me if I should find
something funny or not."
Re. my earlier comments about an NFT audience laughing at THE COBWEB.
It wasn't a treasured film of mine, since I was seeing it for the
first time. I felt that the experience had effectively been ruined by
a bunch of yuppies determined to prove how hip they were.
If I thought that they were laughing because they really found the
film unintentionally funny, I wouldn't have minded so much. But it
was pretty obvious that they were laughing theatrically, in order to
demonstrate their superiority to Minnelli's melodramatic rhetoric.
Fortunately, a nice letterboxed print of THE COBWEB was shown on
television a few weeks later, thus enabling me to really 'see' this
film for the first time. (Sorry Fred.)
16316
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 5:45pm
Subject: Film Comment (was Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics)
Many thanks. Maitland was actually a lot of help to me when I was
starting to research the book.
16317
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 6:08pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> > All that aside, while I agree that Capra was conservatibve, that
> > doesn't equate to fascism.
>
> Mussolini was popular with many Italian-Americans in the 1930's.
But
> it's vastly more significant how popular fascism was with
> conservatives and the leaders of Europe.
I thought this was an interesting story, and maybe it provides a
little insight into how Italian politics works.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/01/25/italy.mussolini/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3250334.stm
news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=223&id=1309812003
Paul
16318
From:
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 2:15pm
Subject: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR (WAS: Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics)
In a message dated 10/2/04 10:53:51 AM, samw@v... writes:
> But my point - which I'm already tired of - if "even" a donkey is adequate
> for the 'burden' - religious,narrative, etc of Bresson's cinema, then why
> is Club Kid Vicky somehow not ?
>
I am completely lost by this.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
16319
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 6:44pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
> http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/01/25/italy.mussolini/
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3250334.stm
> news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=223&id=1309812003
That should be:
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=223&id=1309812003
Also, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3382151.stm
Paul
16320
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 6:52pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jaketwilson"
wrote:
>
.
>
> The point about this is that no movie, no object, is exhausted by
> being looked at with just one set of concerns in mind (or
described
> in just one vocabulary). The more you look at a thing, the better
you
> can appreciate its qualities, but connoisseurship, i.e. learning
to
> identify differences, 1) can take many forms, and 2) is always
> connected with a specialised kind of attention that can turn into
one-
> sidedness. The observation that not many commentators on REAR
WINDOW
> talk in detail about Grace Kelly's outfits is another illustration
of
> 1). And it strikes me that a non-specialist response is always a
> useful corrective to 2), since we're all non-specialists most of
the
> time.
>
> JTW
I have known moviegoers (women, mostly) who were perfectly happy
with a movie if it had lots of nice dresses and costumes. One can
conceive discussing a film exclusively from the point of view of
wardrobe (or sets, or props or makeup or whatever). Sometime
watching a 1940s or 50s Hollywood film I become so fascinated with
hats (both men's and women's) that I lose track of the plot... I
could review the hats to the exclusion of practically everything
else. There is so much in movies that is never or hardly ever
discussed even when the particular film has been analyzed to death.
And what the 'average' viewer is most interested in is precisely,
generally speaking, what fails to be analyzed.
JPC
16321
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 7:20pm
Subject: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
A film professor of mine said that when Mr. Smith Goes To Washington
was shown in the Soviet Union, the last few minutes were excised so
that Claude Rains's perfidy is never found out and the film ends with
Jefferson Smith in disgrace.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> Raymond Durgnat -- if I recall correctly -- argued that Capra's
> aims were conservative, that the films appear populist and even
> leftist, but that they are in fact against Roosevelt's New Deal.
> Capra's films acknowledged social problems only to show either
> that they could be solved by good-hearted individuals or by small
> concessions to reform.
>
> Paul
16322
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 7:48pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> I have known moviegoers (women, mostly) who were
> perfectly happy
> with a movie if it had lots of nice dresses and
> costumes. One can
> conceive discussing a film exclusively from the
> point of view of
> wardrobe (or sets, or props or makeup or whatever).
Ross Hunter was very much aware of the fact that his
target female audience went to the movies "for the
clothes." he even put th cost of Lana Truner';s
wardrobe in the ads.
> Sometime
> watching a 1940s or 50s Hollywood film I become so
> fascinated with
> hats (both men's and women's) that I lose track of
> the plot... I
> could review the hats to the exclusion of
> practically everything
> else. There is so much in movies that is never or
> hardly ever
> discussed even when the particular film has been
> analyzed to death.
> And what the 'average' viewer is most interested in
> is precisely,
> generally speaking, what fails to be analyzed.
>
And rememebr, Grace Kelly doesn't simply model
clothes. She "sells" a mark Cross overnight case, and
brings "21" to the apartment with a full-course
dinner.
"Rear Window" told moveigeors around the country and
around the world what smart, chic New Yorkers were up
to. And that was as much part of its appeal as the
mystery-thriller plot -- if not more so.
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
16323
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 7:58pm
Subject: OT: Concession Stand (was: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
>
> Needless to say, I don't eat oysters (although Jews do get a special
> dispensation from the dietary laws for Chinese food), but I like a
steak
> occasionally. And chicken and fish.
>
George, I assume you also don't do my other favorite food: pig's feet.
16324
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 8:04pm
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- Robert Keser wrote:
> > Not to mention that the film asks the sentimental(if
> > metaphysical)
> > question, "What would the town be like if George had
> > never been
> > born?" rather than addressing the socially useful
> > question
> > proposed in the set-up: "What would the town be like
> > if he had
> > followed his dream and traveled around the world?".
> >
> For the answer to that question see "Rear Window" (or
> "George Bailey Moves to New York") ...
More likely VERTIGO: George's trip around the world washes him up in
San Francisco. He gets a job as a cop, moves up to detective,
retires after that unfortunate business with the dizziness. One day
his old classmate Gavin Elster calls...
--Robert Keser
16325
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 8:43pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
>
>
> And rememebr, Grace Kelly doesn't simply model
> clothes. She "sells" a mark Cross overnight case, and
> brings "21" to the apartment with a full-course
> dinner.
> "Rear Window" told moveigeors around the country and
> around the world what smart, chic New Yorkers were up
> to. And that was as much part of its appeal as the
> mystery-thriller plot -- if not more so.
> >
> >
> >
> > By the way, a familiar French term for an overnight case
is "baise-en-ville" ("baise" in the sense of to fuck, here). Does
she or doesn't she? Wendell Corey thinks she does and leeringly
alludes to it, but he has a dirty mind (being a cop). Is Jeff's cast
guarantee that sex won't/can't raise its ugly head? Knowing Lisa, we
can be sure she'd find a way to get around that impediment.
JPC
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
16326
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 9:09pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > >
> > > By the way, a familiar French term for an
> overnight case
> is "baise-en-ville" ("baise" in the sense of to
> fuck, here). Does
> she or doesn't she? Wendell Corey thinks she does
> and leeringly
> alludes to it, but he has a dirty mind (being a
> cop). Is Jeff's cast
> guarantee that sex won't/can't raise its ugly head?
> Knowing Lisa, we
> can be sure she'd find a way to get around that
> impediment.
Ah, but you're forgetting J-P! She closes the drapes
saying that the evning's feature has ended and then
holds up a gorgeous piece of lingere and announces
"Preview of Coming Attractions."
>
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16327
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 9:17pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Ah, but you're forgetting J-P! She closes the drapes
> saying that the evning's feature has ended and then
> holds up a gorgeous piece of lingere and announces
> "Preview of Coming Attractions."
> >
>
> Her movie metaphor couldn't fail to take the censors into account,
though, could it?
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
16328
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 10:07pm
Subject: Re: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
Ooooh. Very nice.
Obviously you aren't a New Yorker who remembers Tad's Flame Steaks (the
chain still exists barely), where you could -- many years ago -- buy a steak
with a potato and salad for $1.99. You could go up as high as $6.99 if you
wanted one that you'd need someone else's teeth to eat.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Keser"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 1:15 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
>
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
> wrote:
>
> > George (Tough as a dollar steak) Robinson
>
> If that steak only cost a dollar, it probably *WAS* Balthasar!
>
> --Robert Keser
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
16329
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 10:08pm
Subject: Re: OT: Concession Stand (was: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR)
I find the very IDEA of eating pig's feet pretty frightening.
On the other hand, I have had chicken feet at Chinese restaurants. Too much
work for too little eating.
George (Footloose) Robinson
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Bona"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 3:58 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] OT: Concession Stand (was: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR)
>
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
> wrote:
> >
> > Needless to say, I don't eat oysters (although Jews do get a special
> > dispensation from the dietary laws for Chinese food), but I like a
> steak
> > occasionally. And chicken and fish.
> >
>
> George, I assume you also don't do my other favorite food: pig's feet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
16330
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 10:11pm
Subject: Re: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
Actually, the film hints at the socially useful question:
What would Bedford Falls be like if everyone got together and organized
against Potter?
At any rate, it's one of the only Capra films (along with American Madness
and Lady for a Day) that I can stomach.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Keser"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 1:22 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
>
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003" wrote
> >
> > The "Bad" Bedford Falls seems like a much more interesting place
> to live in :)
>
> > (It's always seemed to me that if you walk out of "It's A
> > Wonderful Life" before the end, it's Film Noir........)
>
> Not to mention that the film asks the sentimental(if metaphysical)
> question, "What would the town be like if George had never been
> born?" rather than addressing the socially useful question
> proposed in the set-up: "What would the town be like if he had
> followed his dream and traveled around the world?".
>
> --Robert Keser
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
16331
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 11:09pm
Subject: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> Ooooh. Very nice.
>
> Obviously you aren't a New Yorker who remembers Tad's Flame Steaks
(the
> chain still exists barely), where you could -- many years ago --
buy a steak
> with a potato and salad for $1.99. You could go up as high as
$6.99 if you
> wanted one that you'd need someone else's teeth to eat.
Oh, we had them in Chicago too: Tad's had red-flocked wallpaper,
flaming grills positioned in the front window, and steaks we
suspected came from beasts that had died a natural death!
--Robert Keser
16332
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004 11:19pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Her movie metaphor couldn't fail to take the
> censors into account,
> though, could it?
> >
> >
Actually it's a pluperfect example of "slippin' one
past the goalie."
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16333
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:12am
Subject: Re: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
Oh, those animals died a very UNnatural death.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
> Oh, we had them in Chicago too: Tad's had red-flocked wallpaper,
> flaming grills positioned in the front window, and steaks we
> suspected came from beasts that had died a natural death!
>
> --Robert Keser
>
>
16334
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:21am
Subject: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
I was wondering if anyone in the group might know which directors have
planned to show up with their films at the New York Film Festival.
There's an embarrassment of riches tomorrow in New York City. Allan
Dwan's "Manhandled," "On the Town," and "El Cid" in Queens, a Méliès
program at the Anthology Film archives, five Shaw Brothers films,
including a Yuen Chor film and two early Han-hsiang Li films, as well
as Godard's "Notre Musique," Rohmer's "Triple Agent," and Almodovar's
"Bad Education" at the NY Film Festival. Also, Jean-Michel Frodon is
giving a talk about "The New Wave, Past and Present" at the French
Institute on Monday.
Paul
16335
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:31am
Subject: Re: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona" wrote:
>
> A film professor of mine said that when Mr. Smith Goes To Washington
> was shown in the Soviet Union, the last few minutes were excised so
> that Claude Rains's perfidy is never found out and the film ends with
> Jefferson Smith in disgrace.
>
That might make a good film. Instead of inspiring of people for
generations to run for office, it would inspire them to stay out of
government. Which might be for the best.
I liked the Simpsons episodes, "Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington," and
another in which Mel Gibson remakes "Mr. Smith" with Homer Simpson's
advice. This inspired A.O. Scott's to comment on Mel Gibson's "The
Passion."
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=QtV_b.386790%24I06.4234808%40attbi_s01&rnum=1
Paul
16336
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:54am
Subject: Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
> wrote:
>
> > George (Tough as a dollar steak) Robinson
>
> If that steak only cost a dollar, it probably *WAS* Balthasar!
>
> --Robert Keser
LOL TISUML (Laughed Out Loud Till I Spit Up My Liver)
16337
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:56am
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> Re. my earlier comments about an NFT audience laughing at THE
COBWEB.
> It wasn't a treasured film of mine, since I was seeing it for the
> first time. I felt that the experience had effectively been ruined
by
> a bunch of yuppies determined to prove how hip they were.
I ruined JPC's first viewing of India Song at Lincoln Center by doing
this -- but that was Nietzschian laughter.
16338
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:00am
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>
>
> More likely VERTIGO: George's trip around the world washes him up
in
> San Francisco. He gets a job as a cop, moves up to detective,
> retires after that unfortunate business with the dizziness. One day
> his old classmate Gavin Elster calls...
...and he's left wondering if he should jump, just as if he never
left Bedford Falls. Destiny will not be mocked.
16339
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:05am
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
>
> There's an embarrassment of riches tomorrow in New York City. Allan
> Dwan's "Manhandled," "On the Town," and "El Cid" in Queens, a Méliès
> program at the Anthology Film archives, five Shaw Brothers films,
> including a Yuen Chor film and two early Han-hsiang Li films, as
well
> as Godard's "Notre Musique," Rohmer's "Triple Agent," and
Almodovar's
> "Bad Education" at the NY Film Festival. Also, Jean-Michel Frodon is
> giving a talk about "The New Wave, Past and Present" at the French
> Institute on Monday.
Go to Lincoln Center, you lucky dog. Manhandled is fun, but not major
Dwan; ditto El Cid re Mann, and I assume you've seen On the Town.
Don't know the Shaw films, but I seriously doubt they outrank new
Godard, Rohmer and Almodovar!
16340
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:06am
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
I shouldn't. I really shouldn't.
But as the bank robber says to Lt. Callahan, I jus' gots to know.
Is that the liver you were eating or the one in your torso?
No answer required.
George (Puke 'til you boogie) Robinson
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 9:54 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: AU HASARD, BALTHASAR
> >
> > LOL TISUML (Laughed Out Loud Till I Spit Up My Liver)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
16341
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:08am
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> I shouldn't. I really shouldn't.
> But as the bank robber says to Lt. Callahan, I jus' gots to know.
>
> Is that the liver you were eating or the one in your torso?
>
> No answer required.
>
> George (Puke 'til you boogie) Robinson
>
Puke Till You Boogie?
I'm going to go rearrange furniture and watch The Invisible Ghost.
16342
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:09am
Subject: Re: Life's embarrassing moments [Was Re: Lang's secret cinema}
I had a worse experience with my first viewing of India Song, which I just
flat out didn't get on a single exhausted Film Festival viewing (I call it
'festival fatigue,' that point midway through the NYFF where I can't figure
out what film I'm watching, let alone whether it's any good). I made a
wisecrack to Richard Roud (of blessed memory) and turned around and there
was . . . Marguerite Duras, looking understandably miffed.
George (Sometimes it's better to keep you mouth shut and surprise your
friends) Robinson
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 9:56 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Lang's secret cinema
>
>>
> I ruined JPC's first viewing of India Song at Lincoln Center by doing
> this -- but that was Nietzschian laughter.
>
>
>
16343
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:11am
Subject: Re: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
Neither Godard nor Rohmer are coming to the Festival. The Godard opens at
Film Forum in November and is a must-see film, I think his best in maybe a
decade. Almodovar is coming.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:05 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
>
> There's an embarrassment of riches tomorrow in New York City. Allan
> Dwan's "Manhandled," "On the Town," and "El Cid" in Queens, a Méliès
> program at the Anthology Film archives, five Shaw Brothers films,
> including a Yuen Chor film and two early Han-hsiang Li films, as
well
> as Godard's "Notre Musique," Rohmer's "Triple Agent," and
Almodovar's
> "Bad Education" at the NY Film Festival. Also, Jean-Michel Frodon is
> giving a talk about "The New Wave, Past and Present" at the French
> Institute on Monday.
16344
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:11am
Subject: Re: Blier, editing
(Sorry for the late response; I've been out of commission for the past
few days)
cairnsdavid1967 wrote:
>Something I'd like to praise Blier for is his "direct cutting" -
>David Lean's phrase for the Nouvelle Vague's habit of simply jumping
>into new scenes without bothering with dissolves etc. Blier gives his
>films tremendous jolts of energy, often by cutting from cause to
>effect:
>
>
This style of editing is one of Blier's hallmarks, probably developed
most fully in _Les Valseuses_, but which (as you pointed out) percolates
its way through the rest of his oeuvre, up to and including _Les
Cotelettes_ (i.e. the knock on the door, followed by the cut to Noiret
opening it). The cut to Depardieu and Dewaere throwing Miou-Miou in the
river is a great example. _Les Valseuses_ also uses a kind of
self-parodying cause/effect montage between scenes, as when Depardieu
shouts, "Jacqueline!" and we cut to Dewaere waking up suddenly, as if
the shout from the previous scene was what startled him.
I think Blier's editing in general is centered around giving these kinds
of "boosts" to the gestures of his actors. The opening of _Tenue de
soiree_ (or the opening of _Preparez vos mouchoirs_, which is very
similar), where the editing and camera placement amplify Miou-Miou's
physical restlessness, might be another example.
>4) In LES ACTEURS someone says something like "Come into the bedroom"
>and - CUT, we're there, with the actor just entering, another cut
>that takes out a matter of just a couple seconds but adds such a kick
>to the narrative pace.
>
>
I'm not placing the cut, though I'm sure you're right. Are you thinking
of the scene in Piccoli's apartment?
>Of course many filmmakers do this, but for my money Blier is the most
>distinctive and FUNNIEST.
>
>
One of the things I value most in a film (or in any art, for that
matter) is wit, and Blier is one of the very wittiest. Many films have
clever dialogue, but it is difficult to think of anyone so adept at
harnessing performance, language, rhythm, sound, music, composition,
montage, and mise-en-scene together into an orchestrated whole, so that
every witticism becomes papable at the very level of film-enunciation.
-Matt
16345
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:33am
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> The review may
> have put it differently or put it better, but I think the argument
> was that both films exposed irresolvable contradictions in society,
> but since Capra and Eastwood are obviously not militant filmmakers
> and cannot make militant films, they are compelled to make these
> fantastical resolutions –- resolutions, in which they may
> sincerely believe, but the falsity of which merely points out that
> there exists no individualist or reformist solution to the problems
> presented.
Funny, but I've always thought It's a Wonderful Life's ending was the
grimmest possible. Bailey's not only stuck in Bedford Falls, he's
stopped trying to leave, and is completely brainwashed by the
Hallmark Holiday postcard happiness surrounding him. Talk about a
gilded cage. And yes, it's one of the few Capras I really like.
16346
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:43am
Subject: Re: New Bollywood website
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> I'll admit to not being the biggest fan of Bollywood, but its
interest and
> importance is certainly undeniable. This new-ish website might be of
> interest to some of you.
>
> Bollywood Dreams [QuickTime]
> http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0306/jt_intro.html
Nice looking website.
There's another one here that I think's pretty useful--some of you
may already know of it, or know of better ones--but I thought it
might be worthwhile to link it here:
http://www.upperstall.com/
I don't know about Indian cinema being the greatest, today or ever (I
think a stronger case may be made for it in the '50s and '60s), but
it's definitely one of the greate ones, for the sheer variety at the
very least.
16347
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 4:03am
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> I'm going to go rearrange furniture and watch The Invisible Ghost.
I just watched that! Tracked down a DVD copy, thanks to Dan's
recommendation, and for less money than it would take to buy George
a steak that did not die of old age. Absolutely fascinating picture
and yet more proof of Joseph H. Lewis as crazy genius.
--Robert Keser
16348
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 4:26am
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" wrote:
> Go to Lincoln Center, you lucky dog. Manhandled is fun, but not major
> Dwan; ditto El Cid re Mann, and I assume you've seen On the Town.
> Don't know the Shaw films, but I seriously doubt they outrank new
> Godard, Rohmer and Almodovar!
I was wrong about Almodovar. That's next Sunday. That makes the
choices easier. But you're right. Godard and Rohmer are the first choices.
Paul
16349
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 5:36am
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> Neither Godard nor Rohmer are coming to the Festival.
My friend Mitch McCabe's HIGHWAY 403, MILE 39 is the short film
preceding the Rohmer, and she'll be speaking after the screening.
I think she's on her way to becoming a major director (her terrific
2003 feature THIS CORROSION will be screened at Anthology Film
Archives on October 20).
16350
From:
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 1:44am
Subject: Re: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
Noel Vera wrote:
>And yes, it's one of the few Capras I really like.
I'll echo the sentiments being expressed about "Wonderful Life" being Capra's
masterpiece - as Dave Kehr argues in his Reader capsule, I've always found it
unusually eloquent in a visual sense for Capra. In truth, though, I haven't
revisited his other films in some years and the talk here (both positive and
negative) makes me curious to do so.
Peter
16351
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:28am
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
>
> > I'm going to go rearrange furniture and watch The Invisible Ghost.
>
> I just watched that! Tracked down a DVD copy, thanks to Dan's
> recommendation, and for less money than it would take to buy George
> a steak that did not die of old age. Absolutely fascinating picture
> and yet more proof of Joseph H. Lewis as crazy genius.
>
> --Robert Keser
And how! Despite all the goofball shooting, it is also something of a
triumph for Lugosi, who gets to be as stylized as the camera. The
twist of the bf coming back as his twin seemed to be leading to a
revelation at the end, but I guess that really was the bf we saw
shambling to his death. The body falling from behind the curtain may
have inspired a similar effect in Clampett's great Duck Twacy
cartoon, although it's taken to the max there.
16352
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:33am
Subject: Re: Fw: Film Forum Noirs
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Noel Vera wrote:
>
> >And yes, it's one of the few Capras I really like.
>
> I'll echo the sentiments being expressed about "Wonderful Life"
being Capra's
> masterpiece - as Dave Kehr argues in his Reader capsule, I've
always found it
> unusually eloquent in a visual sense for Capra. In truth, though,
I haven't
> revisited his other films in some years and the talk here (both
positive and
> negative) makes me curious to do so.
>
> Peter
He's a great director. Check out Bitter Tea of General Yen if you
want to see Capra being weird, but I also love It Happened One Night,
Meet John Doe, Deeds, Smith, Lady, American Madness, Lost Horizon,
Arsenic and Old Lace, etc. etc. despite the grousing that has been
heard in some quarters.
16353
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 11:29am
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
> > > I'm going to go rearrange furniture and watch The Invisible
Ghost.
Nowthat's what I call a good evening in.
>The body falling from behind the curtain may
> have inspired a similar effect in Clampett's great Duck Twacy
> cartoon, although it's taken to the max there.
I thought of the butler in the closet in Tex Avery's WHO KILLED WHO? -
who falls from the closet in an unending stream, one version pausing
in mid-plummet to wink "Ah, quite a bunch of us, isn't there?"
My fave bit of Lugosi's is his casual "It was horrible" after seeing
the man come back to life, then die (for no narrative reason) in the
morgue. That's what I meant when I said Lugosi in this film discovers
underplaying at the worst possible moment.
Love the gentle music on the radio in the background of the first
killing - rare to find music used as emotional counterpoint in any
film of this period.
16354
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 11:37am
Subject: Re: Blier, editing
> >4) In LES ACTEURS someone says something like "Come into the
bedroom"
> >and - CUT, we're there, with the actor just entering, another cut
> >that takes out a matter of just a couple seconds but adds such a
kick
> >to the narrative pace.
> >
> >
> I'm not placing the cut, though I'm sure you're right. Are you
thinking
> of the scene in Piccoli's apartment?
Think it might be - there's an actress involved and I think Jacques
Villeret is the guy we see going thru the door. And I think there's
another guy present. a little near-jump cut in the midst of what
would nromally be a continuous sequence.
> >Of course many filmmakers do this, but for my money Blier is the
most
> >distinctive and FUNNIEST.
> One of the things I value most in a film (or in any art, for that
> matter) is wit, and Blier is one of the very wittiest.
Got to credit the nouvelle vague for making this kind of
juxtaposition possible. Before direct cutting, this was a kind of
joke that was rarely as sharp as it wanted to be. There's a cause-
effect cut where one character starts by saying he won't do
something, and we cut to him doing it, which is christened "The
Gilligan Cut" by screenwriter Terry Rossio. He adds, "Comedy ain't
pretty." It is when Blier does it.
I tend to think LAWRENCE OF ARABIA might have been kinda turgid if
Lean hadn't just been inspired by the nouvelle vague's direct
cutting. Most of my favourite moments in it are scene changes.
16355
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 11:42am
Subject: Re: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
> > A film professor of mine said that when Mr. Smith Goes To
Washington
> > was shown in the Soviet Union, the last few minutes were excised
so
> > that Claude Rains's perfidy is never found out and the film ends
with
> > Jefferson Smith in disgrace.
Screenwriter sidney Buchman would watch the film on TV and turn off
just before the ending, as he hated Claude Rains' suicide attempt,
which pitches the whole thing from melodrama to outright bathos.
Capra apparently was very proud of that touch, but he missed out on
real emotion by ending the film with the hero still unconscious,
unaware of his triumph, a bizarre narrative decision. The ending is
almost as abrupt and startling as VERTIGO's - and not in a good way!
Actually, maybe after Stewart falls uncoscious, the rest is his
dream? That might turn it into an OK film! The soviet's missed out on
a trick by not adding a scene of a Stewart lookalike waking up in a
padded cell.
16356
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:05pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Re. my earlier comments about an NFT audience laughing at THE
> COBWEB.
> > It wasn't a treasured film of mine, since I was seeing it for
the
> > first time. I felt that the experience had effectively been
ruined
> by
> > a bunch of yuppies determined to prove how hip they were.
>
> I ruined JPC's first viewing of India Song at Lincoln Center by
doing
> this -- but that was Nietzschian laughter.
You didn't ruin it, you were not a yuppy (as far as i know) and
India Song was (is) hipper than anything you can imagine.
Guess it's easy to feel Nitetzschian under the influence.
16357
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 2:44pm
Subject: Hitchcock/Truffaut
I've been listening to the tapes of the Hitch/Truffaut interviews
and am struck by how much cleaning up and editing must have gone
into the putting together of the final printed version, either in
French or English. A lot has been dropped, a lot has been altered in
the transcription. Maybe it was inevitable... The non-stop -- often
simultaneous -- translation by the interpreter makes it difficult to
follow Hitchcock's statements sometimes. At the beginning of the
very first tape I listened to the translator stumbled over the
word "specificity' and gave up after three unsuccessful attempts, so
we don't get AH's views on specificity... Still, an interesting
document.
JPC
16358
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 4:14pm
Subject: Re: Hitchcock/Truffaut
> I've been listening to the tapes of the Hitch/Truffaut interviews
> and am struck by how much cleaning up and editing must have gone
> into the putting together of the final printed version, either in
> French or English. A lot has been dropped, a lot has been altered in
> the transcription. Maybe it was inevitable... The non-stop -- often
> simultaneous -- translation by the interpreter makes it difficult to
> follow Hitchcock's statements sometimes. At the beginning of the
> very first tape I listened to the translator stumbled over the
> word "specificity' and gave up after three unsuccessful attempts, so
> we don't get AH's views on specificity... Still, an interesting
> document.
The translator, Helen Scott, seems to be very quick on her feet for the
most part -- although the two or three times that Truffaut has said
"c'est formidable" (I'm up to episode 14 or 15), she's translated:
"It's formidable."
One of the sequences I've found most fascinating so far (among many)
comes during Hitch's demonstration of a rather blasé (blasé out of
necessity?) attitude toward the subject of aspect ratios. Truffaut
stays on target trying to get Hitchcock to agree that 1.85 makes for "a
less rigorous frame" than Academy, but Hitch's responses give the
impression that he can't be bothered -- "98% of the cinemas in the
world are in 1.85 -- why would I want to make something in Academy? It
wouldn't be exhibited."
craig.
16359
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 4:21pm
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
> > > > I'm going to go rearrange furniture and watch The Invisible
> Ghost.
>
> Now that's what I call a good evening in...
>
> Love the gentle music on the radio in the background of the first
> killing - rare to find music used as emotional counterpoint in any
> film of this period.
When the murder is discovered the next morning, there's an exercise
program playing on the radio, keeping the lifeless body company!
Any twenty minutes of this amazing film -- which includes a living
corpse, the unexpected existence of a twin, murder while
sleepwalking, the crazy spouse hidden away, a walk down the "last
mile" on death row, and a face appearing at the window during a
thunderstorm --packs more incident than A PLACE IN THE SUN in its
entirety.
Thinking of Mike's comment that Lewis's films look like no other, I
was struck that in the very opening shot of a portrait on the wall,
the camera proceeds to swing back some 90 degrees in an arc movement
that seems quite unusual to me. Later, there's a scene of Lugosi
seated at a desk, his back to the camera; when the daughter enters
and approaches the desk, the camera starts a baffling tracking shot
behind Lugosi, so that she appears to Lugosi's left at the beginning
of the shot but to his right at the end, neatly suggesting his
character's dual nature. This looks like an example of the Lewis
style as calligraphy, maybe early camera-stylo?
--Robert Keser
16360
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 4:51pm
Subject: Re: Hitchcock/Truffaut
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>>
> The translator, Helen Scott, seems to be very quick on her feet
for the
> most part -- although the two or three times that Truffaut has
said
> "c'est formidable" (I'm up to episode 14 or 15), she's translated:
> "It's formidable."
>
Reminds me of the English subtitle "It's terrible" to translate
the French "terrible" (in TIREZ SUR LE PIANISTE) which in context
obviously meant "awsome, fantastic" or words to that effect (guys in
a car discussing girls who wear socks).
I didn't mean to imply that Helen Scott didnt do a pretty good job...
> One of the sequences I've found most fascinating so far (among
many)
> comes during Hitch's demonstration of a rather blasé (blasé out of
> necessity?) attitude toward the subject of aspect ratios.
Truffaut
> stays on target trying to get Hitchcock to agree that 1.85 makes
for "a
> less rigorous frame" than Academy, but Hitch's responses give the
> impression that he can't be bothered -- "98% of the cinemas in the
> world are in 1.85 -- why would I want to make something in
Academy? It
> wouldn't be exhibited."
>
> craig.
16361
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 5:17pm
Subject: Re: Rivette / secret, law & danger (Was: Lang's secret cinema)
Interesting interview of Rivette in "La Lettre du Cinema" (Issues
#10#11,1999). Mostly thoughts on what makes a movie a movie. Where
are "re-invented all clichés of thought on cinema."
A film is here approached as the expression of the relation between
the secret – a secret unknown by the cineaste himself, which says
something about him, and thus, through him, about humanity – and the
law – which relates to something more universal, to ethics, but also
to the "rules of games". The richness of this relation being the
richness of the film.
Further, any film deserving to be called with that name, should have
faced some danger – the risk being either in the subject (classic
cinema) or in the means of expression (modern cinema). "There is
maybe no great film, if there isn't the feeling that it could have
been a disaster".
I liked this idea of danger. I believe that films have also to be
judged in relation with the risks taken. One can't put his guts on
the screen absolutely innocently and safely. Incidentally, this is
one the strong ideas of Vecchiali's thought and work, which he later
expressed in another interview of La Lettre: "For me, film writing
is inseparable from risks taken".
Maxime
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 9/30/04 6:36:23 PM, jpcoursodon@y... writes:
>
>
> >
> > Rivette wrote brilliant articles but I don't see the necessity
of
> > always quoting his notoriously tautological and meaningless
remark
> > about Hawks's genius.
> >
>
> Comme d'habitude, a ray of light from the hurricanes-hopefully-
behind-him M.
> Coursodon. Thank you!
>
> Kevin John
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
16362
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 5:20pm
Subject: Re: little secret
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Rector"
> I still agree with Maxime in her orginal email when she echoed
> Rivette statement:
Actually, Maxime is a he. And (s)he tries to live with it.
16363
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 5:38pm
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" .
> Manhandled is fun, but not major Dwan
I wouldn't qualify it as minor. This kind of modesty is precisely
the prize here. Something surprisingly fresh and spontaneous in the
situations, which was not that frequent in those days. I shall admit
I prefer Swanson's clumsiness to Fairbanks' acrobatics. "Stage
Struck" is even better. Unfortunately, Manhandled prints are ugly.
16364
From: George Robinson
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 7:47pm
Subject: Re: Re: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
Reminds me of something Hitch once said about Vertigo. Someone asked him
what the next shot after the ending would be and he said that Scotty jumps.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: "cairnsdavid1967"
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2004 7:42 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
>>
> Screenwriter sidney Buchman would watch the film on TV and turn off
> just before the ending, as he hated Claude Rains' suicide attempt,
> which pitches the whole thing from melodrama to outright bathos.
> Capra apparently was very proud of that touch, but he missed out on
> real emotion by ending the film with the hero still unconscious,
> unaware of his triumph, a bizarre narrative decision. The ending is
> almost as abrupt and startling as VERTIGO's - and not in a good way!
>
> Actually, maybe after Stewart falls uncoscious, the rest is his
> dream? That might turn it into an OK film! The soviet's missed out on
> a trick by not adding a scene of a Stewart lookalike waking up in a
> padded cell.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
16365
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:13pm
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist [Was AU HASARD, BALTHASAR]
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
> >The body falling from behind the curtain may
> > have inspired a similar effect in Clampett's great Duck Twacy
> > cartoon, although it's taken to the max there.
>
> I thought of the butler in the closet in Tex Avery's WHO KILLED
WHO? -
> who falls from the closet in an unending stream, one version
pausing
> in mid-plummet to wink "Ah, quite a bunch of us, isn't there?"
I thought of it too. That's such a beautiful cartoon. I guess I
dragged in Clampett because his totally undisciplined genius is more
akin to Lewis's than Avery's esthetic perfection is.
> Love the gentle music on the radio in the background of the first
> killing - rare to find music used as emotional counterpoint in any
> film of this period.
Yes, it's a bit surprising.
Clarence Muse, playing Evans, the dignified major domo, seems cast
and directed against a role that could have been written for Mantan
Moreland (who was probably too expensive for Monogram, or just too
busy -- he made 20 movies in 1941!) -- especially the line "Do I look
pale?" after meeting the dead fiance's twin brother. (Is it an
accident that Muse at that moment has ostentatiously picked up a pair
of spoons -- as in "As alike as two spoons"?)
Imdb is great, but I'm inclined to disbelieve its attribution of co-
screenwriter credit to Helen Martin, a black activist like Muse, who
debuted on B'way in 1941 in Welles' Native Son production. It seems
improbable that this actress (to whom the Wayans brothers dedicated
Scary Movie) is the Helen Martin who cowrote Invisible Ghost with her
presumed husband Al, who went on to write Mad Doctor of Market Street
(solo) for Lewis and 20 years later, the amazing Invasion of the
Saucer Men. But if it IS the same Helen Martin (she only gets two
script credits on imdb, which would jibe with her long acting
career), there's a story there!
16366
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:15pm
Subject: Re: Capra (was Fw: Film Forum Noirs)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
> Actually, maybe after Stewart falls uncoscious, the rest is his
> dream? That might turn it into an OK film! The soviet's missed out
on
> a trick by not adding a scene of a Stewart lookalike waking up in a
> padded cell.
Fear of going crazy is the underlying theme of a lot of Capra films.
16367
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:18pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
> > wrote:
determined to prove how hip they were.
> >
> > I ruined JPC's first viewing of India Song at Lincoln Center by
> doing
> > this -- but that was Nietzschian laughter.
>
> You didn't ruin it, you were not a yuppy (as far as i know) and
> India Song was (is) hipper than anything you can imagine.
> Guess it's easy to feel Nitetzschian under the influence.
Hey, I watched in respectful silence the first night, and I was
stoned then too. India Song is high camp -- that means both reactions
are (were) possible.
16368
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:31pm
Subject: Invisible Ghost (Was: Some Questions are better left unasked)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
>
> Thinking of Mike's comment that Lewis's films look like no other, I
> was struck that in the very opening shot of a portrait on the wall,
> the camera proceeds to swing back some 90 degrees in an arc
movement
> that seems quite unusual to me. Later, there's a scene of Lugosi
> seated at a desk, his back to the camera; when the daughter enters
> and approaches the desk, the camera starts a baffling tracking shot
> behind Lugosi, so that she appears to Lugosi's left at the
beginning
> of the shot but to his right at the end, neatly suggesting his
> character's dual nature. This looks like an example of the Lewis
> style as calligraphy, maybe early camera-stylo?
"Calligrapher" is Tavernier's word -- I have always read it as a
synonym for "formalist." JPC wrote (of The Big Combo) "Formal
achievment, when it reaches a certain level, becomes its own
justification." Is The Invisible Ghost style applied in a vacuum, or
is it more? Your example suggests "more."
The shots through windows of or from the pov of the "dead" wife also
seem pretty coherent -- particularly as lead-up to the amazing shot
of Lugosi's hands in the now empty frame reaching out for the figure
that isn't there, miming despair and then anger (elegantly taking
advantage of the black background to make Lugosi's white hands "pop"
visually). But what are all those Santa Claus shots, which are formal
rhymes of the views through rain and foggy windows from the wife's
pov of the home she yearns to return to?
16369
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:35pm
Subject: Re: Rivette / secret, law & danger (Was: Lang's secret cinema)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
"There is
> maybe no great film, if there isn't the feeling that it could have
> been a disaster".
That describes I Heart Huckabee's better than any recent Rivettes
I've seen, except maybe Secret Defense. I haven't seen the long
version of Va Savoir, but the release version is pretty "sage."
16370
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 9:37pm
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" .
> > Manhandled is fun, but not major Dwan
>
> I wouldn't qualify it as minor. This kind of modesty is precisely
> the prize here. Something surprisingly fresh and spontaneous in the
> situations, which was not that frequent in those days. I shall
admit
> I prefer Swanson's clumsiness to Fairbanks' acrobatics. "Stage
> Struck" is even better. Unfortunately, Manhandled prints are ugly.
Stage Struck is better. There's no question that thei mprovisational
spoirit of the Swanson films -- which she writes about at great
length in her memoirs -- is enchanting, but the films lack the formal
qualities I look for in Dwan -- except for the amazing foreshadowing
of Rear Window in Manhandled, of course!
16371
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 10:32pm
Subject: Re: little secret
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Rector"
> > I still agree with Maxime in her orginal email when she echoed
> > Rivette statement:
>
> Actually, Maxime is a he. And (s)he tries to live with it.
I wanted to make the correction myself a few days back, but then
thought Maxime might like to preserve the gender ambiguity. After
all, there are so few women in this group (only one who posts,
actually).
JPC
16372
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 10:39pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
> > > wrote:
> determined to prove how hip they were.
> > >
> > > I ruined JPC's first viewing of India Song at Lincoln Center
by
> > doing
> > > this -- but that was Nietzschian laughter.
> >
> > You didn't ruin it, you were not a yuppy (as far as i know)
and
> > India Song was (is) hipper than anything you can imagine.
>
> > Guess it's easy to feel Nitetzschian under the influence.
>
> Hey, I watched in respectful silence the first night, and I was
> stoned then too. India Song is high camp -- that means both
reactions
> are (were) possible.
I doubt that Duras considered it high camp (assuming she was
familiar with the concept of high camp, which I also doubt). Can
high camp be unintentional? Seems to be a contradiction in terms,
high camp being supposedly deliberate and self-conscious.
Both reactions are indeed possible, but not equally justifiable
(IMHO).
JPC
16373
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 10:51pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> I doubt that Duras considered it high camp (assuming
> she was
> familiar with the concept of high camp, which I also
> doubt).
True.
Can
> high camp be unintentional? Seems to be a
> contradiction in terms,
> high camp being supposedly deliberate and
> self-conscious.
>
An interesting question. Much of Duras is camp.
"You saw nothing at Hiroshima" is the height of camp
-- but the film itself is not. "India Song" is as camp
as Sternberg at his most delerious. Yet Duras is no
more aware of this than Maria Montez was aware that
"Give me the cobra jewel!" wasn't written by Racine.
Maybe Duras is closest to Jack Smith -- who was camp
to the tits yet HAD to be taken seriously at some
level in order to work at all.
Duras' relationship with Yann Andrea was VERY camp,
but I doubt we'll see anything about that while he's
still alive. (The film with Moreau as Duras was just awful.)
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16374
From:
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 7:21pm
Subject: Re: High Camp (was: Lang's secret cinema)
Years ago saw an episode of the TV show Hunter, if memory serves. The plot
takes us to a remote California mountain town, Campo Alto.
I am not making this up, as Anna Russell used to say.
Mike Grost
16375
From:
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 7:27pm
Subject: Judex (Feuillade) starts on TCM tonight
Judex (Feuillade) will show its first two hours on TCM at Midnight Eastern
tonight.
It will be shown at that time over the next three weeks.
At 2 AM it is followed by a classic Fritz Lang: "The Blue Gardenia".
Apparently Judex is the hero and he fights an evil banker.
My late father spent his life in the Credit Union movement. He hated banks.
Somehow, I do not suspect that Judex will teach people how to form credit
unions, however. Although it would do a lot of good.
My Mother and I watched Les Vampires together - she loved it. She especially
liked the hero's gutsy mother.
Mike Grost
16376
From:
Date: Sun Oct 3, 2004 7:49pm
Subject: Re: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist...
Clarence Muse has a major role in "That Gang of Mine", the racetrack film
that is the middle one of the three East Side Kids films directed by Joseph H.
Lewis (and the best, IMHO). He is very good as the horse's trainer. This film is
remarkably progressive on racial matters for Hollywood 1940.
On falling bodies in whodunits: for sheer Low Camp, one cannot forget what
happens when the St Louis Cardinals baseball locker is opened in "Death On the
Diamond" (Edward Sedgwick, 1934). This serial killer is going after the
baseball team, see... Hope Bill Krohn can get a frame enlargement of this for his
book.
Mike Grost
16377
From: samfilms2003
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 1:20am
Subject: Re: Hou Hsiao-hsien, Or: Doing Bad Politics
> But I don't know if this is the same as saying
> that Hou has abandoned a historical approach to filmmaking -- it's
> this historical perspective that Shu Qi's character has cultivated
> over the course of MILLENIUM MAMBO, which one might even describe as
> her saving grace.
This is, I think, my surface read on MILLENNIUM MAMBO also, and to an extent
on GOOD MEN, GOOD WOMEN.
I do suppose Hou has a sense of some transcendent potential power of what
we might call, "ordinary people" - and that sense can alternatively be termed
naive or democratic.
Is the Annie Inoh character in GM,GW both "not up to the task" of carrying
the burden of history - as exemplified by the role in the film-within-the-film
she is asked to play - and - at the same time, inevitably the inheritor of that
history and whatever burdens it may entail ?
Anyway, I read the discussion in "New Left Review" - Hou seemed quite articulate,
although I have no way to really asses his statements, thus no way to judge
the""Taiwan News" response.....
-Sam
16378
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 1:48am
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> > I doubt that Duras considered it high camp (assuming
> > she was
> > familiar with the concept of high camp, which I also
> > doubt).
>
> True.
>
> Can
> > high camp be unintentional? Seems to be a
> > contradiction in terms,
> > high camp being supposedly deliberate and
> > self-conscious.
> >
>
> An interesting question.
Interesting it may be, but you don't answer it.
Much of Duras is camp.
Well, "camp" (for which there is no real French equivalent) is in
the eye of the beholder. Duras didn't think of what she was doing as
anything resembling what you and I call "camp".
>
> "You saw nothing at Hiroshima" is the height of camp
> -- but the film itself is not.
Sorry. If the line is the height of camp (which it may or may not
be, I won't get into that), then the film has to be. Don't try to
rescue Resnais from Duras's alleged campiness. Both are guilty as
charged.
"India Song" is as camp
> as Sternberg at his most delerious. Yet Duras is no
> more aware of this than Maria Montez was aware that
> "Give me the cobra jewel!" wasn't written by Racine.
Agreed. But there must be some difference between Duras and Montez.
And from a certain perspective, Racine IS the height of camp (and
it's also sublime in spite of and because of its "campiness") -- and
by the way I don't think Sternberg thought of his films as camp.
> Maybe Duras is closest to Jack Smith -- who was camp
> to the tits yet HAD to be taken seriously at some
> level in order to work at all.
>
Jack Smith was camp to the tits and was 100% aware of it. Duras may
have been camp to her tits but had no idea what camp was. I think
you should write a little piece on that, David. Also perhaps some
not gay guy should deal with the matter at some point. If I weren't
so old and tired I would.
> Duras' relationship with Yann Andrea was VERY camp,
> but I doubt we'll see anything about that while he's
> still alive. (The film with Moreau as Duras was just awful.)
>
Viewed in a certain way, from a certain angle -- especially your
angle -- lots and lots of relationships are very camp. Actually most
relationships that are at all interesting are very camp, or at least
somewhat so. That would probably include your relationships and mine
(at least some of them).
Maybe, just maybe, there is/was something more to Duras than just
being camp without knowing it.
>
> ____JPC___________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
16379
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 2:06am
Subject: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> That makes the Godard and Rohmer the first choices.
Despite the photo essay by Godard in the June 2004 Cahiers, indicating
his preference for 1:33 : 1, and despite the efforts of Craig Keller
and Ed Grant, "Notre Musique" was projected widescreen, 1.66 : 1, if
I'm not mistaken.
"Triple Agent" was projected 1.85 : 1. That also surprised me, since
according to IMDb it was filmed on 35mm film, and Rohmer indicated he
prefers his 35mm films to be shown full frame, 1:33 : 1.
Paul
16380
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 2:27am
Subject: Re: Triple Agent AR, was: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
> "Triple Agent" was projected 1.85 : 1. That also surprised me, since
> according to IMDb it was filmed on 35mm film, and Rohmer indicated he
> prefers his 35mm films to be shown full frame, 1:33 : 1.
The French DVD is 1.33:1.
-Nick>-
16381
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 2:47am
Subject: Re: Judex (Feuillade) starts on TCM tonight
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> My late father spent his life in the Credit Union movement. He
hated banks.
My late maternal grandfather ran a savings and loan (the kind of bank
George Bailey runs). In those days S&L's were designed to help people
own their own homes, not to defraud them of their life's savings a la
Neil Bush. Grandad was wiped out by a run on the bank after the Crash
and later shot himself -- no Clarence came to the rescue.
16382
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 2:54am
Subject: OT: SKs (Was: Some Questions are better left unasked but I can't resist)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> On falling bodies in whodunits: for sheer Low Camp, one cannot
forget what
> happens when the St Louis Cardinals baseball locker is opened
in "Death On the
> Diamond" (Edward Sedgwick, 1934). This serial killer is going after
the
> baseball team, see... Hope Bill Krohn can get a frame enlargement
of this for his
> book.
>
> Mike Grost
Frame enlargement hell! First I need to see the FILM!
BTW Mike, have you noticed the similarities between SK plots and
classical detective stories? I'd bet the killer in Death on the
Diamond has a motive -- gain or vengeance -- and isn't really an SK
by FBI definition. But he kills serially, as many fictional murderers
did in the Golden Age. (Ellery Queen and Agatha Christie outdid each
other in clever variations on this formula, although Queen did
finally take it into SK territory with his brilliant Cat of Many
Tails.) There has been a transfer of certain features from the Golden
Age genre to the new one. Of course, the results are almost never as
good. (I except the "Michael Slade" novels, and a few others.)
16383
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:05am
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> Maybe, just maybe, there is/was something more to Duras than just
> being camp without knowing it.
Of course there was. My God, I read the CdC in those days, and she
was part of the Trinity, with Godard and the Straubs. But being camp
was part of what she was up to. Don't forget, India Song was an all-
out attack on the Retro Mode, which took itself very seriously.
Oudart also cited a retro-styled commercial for Gold Tea as a point
of reference, but I never saw it. Perhaps you did, JP?
India Song is one of my favorites by her, but there are others that
send me more, and they are much less campy than India Song: La femme
du Gange and Navire Night. I would never dream of laughing at those
two, no matter how blotto I was. But those overdressed aristocrats
languidly sidling through one retro decor after another are FUNNY!
16384
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:25am
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> Well, "camp" (for which there is no real French
> equivalent) is in
> the eye of the beholder.
Not quite. There are rules. Isherwood wrote them all
down in "The World in the Evening."
Duras didn't think of what
> she was doing as
> anything resembling what you and I call "camp".
> >
True.
> Sorry. If the line is the height of camp (which it
> may or may not
> be, I won't get into that), then the film has to be.
Not necessarily. Its campiness is its over-the-top
"drama queen" nature. But just for that line. The rest
of "Hiroshima Mon Amour" is quite sober.
> Don't try to
> rescue Resnais from Duras's alleged campiness. Both
> are guilty as
> charged.
>
Resnais is quite campy. Obviously so in "Marienbad"
Very seriously so in "Providence." Avoiding camp is
impossible with a film starring Dirk Bogarde,John
Gieulgud and Elaine Stritch. But as camp/mannerist as
it gets it comes down to earth at the end.
But there must be some difference between
> Duras and Montez.
I could very easily see Maria Montez playing Duras'
part in "Le Camion" or either o the leads of "Nathalie
Granger."
> And from a certain perspective, Racine IS the height
> of camp (and
> it's also sublime in spite of and because of its
> "campiness")
Definitely. But not in Rivette's "L'Amour Fou." Chreau
did a Racine play recently with Marie Blanc and
Pascale Greggory. I'm sure it was WAY camp.
-- and
> by the way I don't think Sternberg thought of his
> films as camp.
>
Know, but he knew they were funny.
> >
> Jack Smith was camp to the tits and was 100% aware
> of it. Duras may
> have been camp to her tits but had no idea what camp
> was. I think
> you should write a little piece on that, David.
A tempting notion.
Also
> perhaps some
> not gay guy should deal with the matter at some
> point.
Nope. Sorry. That's like having a Gentile to preside
over a Passover service.
> >
> Viewed in a certain way, from a certain angle --
> especially your
> angle -- lots and lots of relationships are very
> camp. Actually most
> relationships that are at all interesting are very
> camp, or at least
> somewhat so. That would probably include your
> relationships and mine
> (at least some of them).
>
Oh I don;t know. Wong Kar Wai avoids camp in both
"Happy Together" and "In the Mood for Love" - and in
the latter it's especially tempting.
> Maybe, just maybe, there is/was something more to
> Duras than just
> being camp without knowing it.
> >
Possibly.
I used to like her a lot more than I do today. The
relentless absorbtion of her narcisssism creeped me
out towards the end. That plus the notion that the
ideal romantic relationship was between a self-hating
lesbian and self-hating gay man.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16385
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 4:13am
Subject: Re: Blier, editing
cairnsdavid1967 wrote:
>Got to credit the nouvelle vague for making this kind of
>juxtaposition possible.
>
Why not Godard, rather than the nouvelle vague as a whole? _A bout de
souffle_ makes heavy use of this technique, but I'm not sure I really
see it in _Paris nous appartient_, or _Les bonnes femmes_, or _Les 400
coups_, or _Ma nuit chez Maud_, or _Hiroshima mon amour_.
One reason for this distinction: Blier's cinema has always been inspired
by Godard's work (he even bothered to include an homage to _Weekend_ in
_Preparez vos mouchoirs_), but also in distinct opposition to the
nouvelle vague. This isn't necessarily contradictory; in many ways
Godard's aesthetic project is at a great remove from that of the n-v,
particularly with respect to its Brechtian inclinations (which, in the
end, are what I think had a particular hold on Blier--and what motivated
the "direct cuts" that abound in _A bout_).
>I tend to think LAWRENCE OF ARABIA might have been kinda turgid if
>Lean hadn't just been inspired by the nouvelle vague's direct
>cutting. Most of my favourite moments in it are scene changes.
>
>
Now you've got me itching to watch it again...
-Matt
16386
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 4:20am
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> I could very easily see Maria Montez playing Duras'
> part in "Le Camion" or either o the leads of "Nathalie
> Granger."
>
Now that's you camping it up, David. You're
incorrigible.Maybe "Hiroshima" would have been greater with Rhonda
Fleming and Turhan Bey in the leads.
>
>
>
> > >
> > Jack Smith was camp to the tits and was 100% aware
> > of it. Duras may
> > have been camp to her tits but had no idea what camp
> > was. I think
> > you should write a little piece on that, David.
>
> A tempting notion.
>
> Also
> > perhaps some
> > not gay guy should deal with the matter at some
> > point.
>
> Nope. Sorry. That's like having a Gentile to preside
> over a Passover service.
>
> You are such a racist, David. Now you're telling me I can't get
anything right about camp because I ain't gay (plus, I ain't even
Jewish either). It's a bit like me telling you you can't get Chereau
because you're not French.
>
> > Maybe, just maybe, there is/was something more to
> > Duras than just
> > being camp without knowing it.
> > >
>
> Possibly.
>
> I used to like her a lot more than I do today. The
> relentless absorbtion of her narcisssism creeped me
> out towards the end. That plus the notion that the
> ideal romantic relationship was between a self-hating
> lesbian and self-hating gay man.
>
> You're confusing the person and her work. Both deteriorated in the
end, true (don't we all? -- well, except "auteurs" of course...was
Duras a auteur? ) Maybe a taste for Duras is one of those fey
fashions that are bound to wilt and vanish. "La mode, c'est ce qui
se demode," as Cocteau put it.
> JPC
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
16387
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 7:19am
Subject: Re: Judex (Feuillade) starts on TCM tonight
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Judex (Feuillade) will show its first two hours on TCM at Midnight
Eastern
> tonight.
Wonderful stuff. I need to see Les Vampires again--the first time I
found it unremarkable (on the big screen, yet!)--but Judex caught me
right off. Feuillade's visual style looks deceptively plain, but he
has a way with multiple characters and situations and storytelling
pace that reminds me of Victor Hugo (and isn't that Licorice Kid one
of Hugo's gamins?). Very old-fashioned, utterly invigorating.
16388
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 7:24am
Subject: How the hell do we search for Judex posts?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> > My late father spent his life in the Credit Union movement. He
> hated banks.
>
>
> My late maternal grandfather ran a savings and loan (the kind of
bank
> George Bailey runs).
I worked for ten years in a bank. Not a pretty sight.
I remember mention of Judex upthread, but the search function on
these here egroups seem pretty much worthless. Anyone found a way
around that yet?
16389
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 8:52am
Subject: Re: Rivette's evidence
Bravo, Jean-Pierre, for your skewering of Rivette's infamous praise of
Hawks! I think you left out only one other gloss on the statement 'the proof
of Hawks' genius is the evidence' etc - it also means - ' ... and if you
can't see it like I do, you're an idiot!' - which tends to be how many
auteurists yesterday as today use statements like this.
The other things that has always struck me about this quintessentially
youthful statement by Rivette: if all we had to do was point at a screen and
say 'the proof of genius is the evidence on screen', then there would
absolutely nothing more for any of us critics to do! - except point, of
course, and I guess a lot writing on film is just an elaborate way of
pointing!! Rivette's evidential claim is one that tends to do away with the
need for any analytical demonstration or critical discussion whatsoever.
That said, there HAS been some very extremely interesting commentary
spinning out from Rivette's crazy statement. Bill mentioned Daney; there's
also the BFI book on RED RIVER by Suzanne Liandrat-Guigues; several
retrospective pieces by Jean Douchet written around the late 80s/early '90s
in CAHIERS; Jean-Luc Nancy's fascinating essay on Kiarostami, THE EVIDENCE
OF FILM; and best of all, in my opinion, a brilliant essay by the Australian
writer Bill Routt called "L'Evidence" (the title is in French but the essay
is in English) that I urge all A FILM BY-ers to read, as it relates to many
things we talk about here. It's on-line at:
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/5.2/Routt.html
I published this piece in an enormous 1992 special issue (FILM - MATTERS OF
STYLE) of the media/cultural studies journal CONTINUUM. It's hard to come by
these days, but most of the issue is on-line.
Adrian
16390
From:
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 5:44am
Subject: Re: Rivette's evidence
Rivette's statement certainly is wrong.
Yet have always suspected there was perhaps this point lurking in it.
Many critics have strong aesthetic principles, that are perhaps keeping them
from appreciating lots of kinds of art that fall outside of their ideas.
Take the episodes Gerd Oswald directed of the TV show, "The Outer Limits".
Without even watching them, many critics would say: "They're science fiction!
They were made for television! Their targeted audience was composed of children!
They MUST Be bad. We can automatically dismiss thenm as worthless, sight
unseen."
Faced with such certainty, one is tempted to reply: "Well, at least watch the
shows, with an open mind. Maybe you will see something interesting in them,
just as I do."
Am not sure if this is what Rivette meant, or not.
Mike Grost
16391
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 11:48am
Subject: Re: Rivette's evidence
"Bravo, Jean-Pierre, for your skewering of Rivette's infamous praise
of Hawks! I think you left out only one other gloss on the
statement 'the proof of Hawks' genius is the evidence' etc - it also
means - ' ... and if you can't see it like I do, you're an idiot!' -
which tends to be how many auteurists yesterday as today use
statements like this."
I guess I started all this when I quoted Rivette (approvingly) in
response to a claim made by one of this group's members that the
auterist's job was to discover that 'secret' film the auteur had
somehow hidden within the obvious text. I found this baffling, since
I had always believed that everything in the work of the great
auteurs was, as Rivette has indicated, there on the screen, visible
for all to see. And it is clear that millions of cinemagoers had no
trouble 'understanding' mise en scene, or at least the ways mise en
scene shaped viewer response: anyone who has ever felt emotionally
involved with a character in a film has responded to mise en scene.
It was the critics who took a long time to catch up with audiences
and 'see' the films that were so clearly there, if one simply watched
without inappropriate expectations.
Take the rocking chair in THE SEARCHERS. It is absolutely central to
what the film is doing, to its exploration of wandering and settling,
wilderness and garden, savagery and civilization. Yet nobody could
accuse Ford of hiding the chair: it is clearly there on the screen,
sometimes in the forefront of the frame. I agree we need not 'notice'
the chair, but this will be out fault, not Ford's, since he does
everything he possibly can to bring it to our attention. Its presence
is about as 'hidden' or 'disguised' as John Wayne's (though I guess
that if we spent the entire screening staring at our shoes, we need
not even notice Wayne).
Surely this is the kind of thing Rivette had in mind. Because the
proof of Ford's genius IS on the screen. And some people do refuse to
admit this. They refuse to be satisfied by proof. There really can't
be any other reason why they don't recognize this.
16392
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 1:40pm
Subject: Re: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> >
>
> Now that's you camping it up, David. You're
> incorrigible.Maybe "Hiroshima" would have been
> greater with Rhonda
> Fleming and Turhan Bey in the leads.
Turhan Bey and Janet Leigh -- whose passing was
announced just this morning.
> >
> > You are such a racist, David. Now you're telling
> me I can't get
> anything right about camp because I ain't gay (plus,
> I ain't even
> Jewish either). It's a bit like me telling you you
> can't get Chereau
> because you're not French.
> >
Ah you cut me to the quick!
> >
> > You're confusing the person and her work.
Well that was HER problem. Towards the end she clearly
saw herself as a work of art.
Both
> deteriorated in the
> end, true (don't we all? -- well, except "auteurs"
> of course...was
> Duras a auteur? ) Maybe a taste for Duras is one of
> those fey
> fashions that are bound to wilt and vanish. "La
> mode, c'est ce qui
> se demode," as Cocteau put it.
Possibly. Like Francoise Sagan. But these days I feel
a lot more affection for Sagan.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
16393
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 2:26pm
Subject: Re: Rivette's Evidence
Mike and Brad have both raised good points in favour of Rivette's statement
from the '50s: respectively, that it's a stance that can be used to
rehabilitate or draw attention to discredited low-culture forms (this is one
of the themes of the Routt essay I provided the link to); and that it serves
as a corrective against stressing too much the 'hidden/secret/deep' film
that is somehow NOT in 'evidence'. I basically agree with both ideas.
But, Brad, I think there is a logical flaw in something else that you are
arguing here. To say that 'ordinary' filmgoers get involved in a movie, and
that it is the mise en scene (and so on) which creates this involvement - I
have no argument with you up to here. But then to say that therefore the
ordinary moviegoer can recognise/appreciate/analyse mise en scene, or has
some more natural affinity to it than some other phantom hyper-sophisticate,
is almost as sophistic as Rivette in the 50s! The fact is that ordinary
filmgoers - and many more 'cultivated' ones as well - don't see the 'work'
of style at all. That's why they need us, the critics, to point it out,
break it down, and teach them about it!!
There's an analogy in music. As I used to prove via a classroom experiment
(!), some 'ordinary' folk who buy records with a vast passion, but have no
technical knowledge of either music making or record production, can listen
to a song every day, in some sense 'memorise' it (ie, they can sing along to
it perfectly!), but if you ask them 'what instruments are played on this
track?', they may have absolutely no clue. They don't hear the parts, the
components in any conscious way; they simply experience the 'gestalt' of the
music - just like they experience the gestalt of a film as an amorphous
amalgam of images, performances, emotions, music, etc ...
When I was a teacher of film studies, I was always struck - and befuddled -
by those students who get never 'get the hang' of film analysis at even the
most basic level: these were students who could not grasp even what 'picture
editing' was (despite my hilariously simple attempts to explain it by
holding up cards with images on them, etc, a little like Godard does in
NOTRE MUSIQUE!), and whose most frequent and often sole analytical remark on
any film was: 'The scenery was good'! And that about sums up the gestalt
idea at that 'ordinary filmgoer' level: they got as far as thinking that a
choice of location was great, not at all about how it was framed, cut,
juxtaposed, etc. The 'proof of Hawks' genius' (or anyone else's, for that
matter) may have been well and truly 'on the screen', but that doesn't mean
they could see it! Seeing - in many senses - is something you have to be
trained to do (another theme of Routt's essay), it is not natural or innate
in this sense. We still have our work cut out for us as critics! And what
does it mean (as Jean-Pierre asked) to assert, after Rivette, that people
'refuse to see the proof', as you defiantly repeat, Brad? Sure - to recall
Mike's point - they might refuse to look properly, to take something
seriously, which is a lamentable business. But they don't SEE the marks of
genius at a glance and then see: 'I refuse that proof', surely? That doesn't
make any logical, real-world sense to me.
Adrian
16394
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:42pm
Subject: Re: Lang's secret cinema
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > Now that's you camping it up, David. You're
> > incorrigible.Maybe "Hiroshima" would have been
> > greater with Rhonda
> > Fleming and Turhan Bey in the leads.
>
> Turhan Bey and Janet Leigh -- whose passing was
> announced just this morning.
>
>
> Nothing camp about Janet, in my opinion. She whom we called "The
Goddess of cinephiles" in a little book I wrote with Boisset and
Tavernier in 1960 (!) always remained my idol, and she aged so
beautifully too. I grieve.
> JPC
>>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
16395
From: Michael Lieberman
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:42pm
Subject: Re: Triple Agent AR, was: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
Notre Musique was projected as 1.85 as well...I found the 2 hour drive to a rather lazy error like this to be rather annoying. Also, the subtitles were underdone as well (though not the fault of the
NYFF).
----- Original Message -----
From: Nick Wrigley
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 03:27:43 +0100
To: a_film_by@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [a_film_by] Triple Agent AR, was: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
> "Triple Agent" was projected 1.85 : 1. That also surprised me, since
> according to IMDb it was filmed on 35mm film, and Rohmer indicated he
> prefers his 35mm films to be shown full frame, 1:33 : 1.
The French DVD is 1.33:1.
-Nick>-
16396
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:47pm
Subject: Re: Invisible Ghost (Was: Some Questions are better left unasked)
All I know is:
There's a line of somebody's about Bing Crosby singing the way we all
like to think we do in the shower...
Joseph H Lewis directs the way I like to think I do.
Have done some goofy camerawork in my day and would love to work on
something again where it would be appropriate - and there's NO WAY it
ain't appropriate in INVISGHOST!
16397
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 3:51pm
Subject: Re: Blier, editing
> >Got to credit the nouvelle vague for making this kind of
> >juxtaposition possible.
> >
> Why not Godard, rather than the nouvelle vague as a whole?
You're probably right, and certainly I've seen Blier crediting Godard
as his prime influence. I think there may be a few examples of cuts
between scenes in 400 BLOWS where previously dissolves might have
been used, softening the impact - but I'd have to check.
> >I tend to think LAWRENCE OF ARABIA might have been kinda turgid if
> >Lean hadn't just been inspired by the nouvelle vague's direct
> >cutting. Most of my favourite moments in it are scene changes.
> >
> Now you've got me itching to watch it again...
The greatest cut of all time, just about, is from O'Toole blowing out
a match to the sun rising in the desert. And there's a nice one where
he holds up his new arab robes to blow in the wind and we then cut to
him wearing them as he gallops along on a camel. The epic sensibility
gets a welcome shot in the arm from this briskness.
16398
From:
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 4:02pm
Subject: Re: Triple Agent AR, was: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
Notre Musique was shown 1:85 in Toronto as well. At least one shot
seemed to be explicitly framed for that ratio. Towards the end, at
the airport, when Godard's character walks directly into the upper
right corner, and the lower right corner is anchored by an
information-kiosk sign in the shape of a question mark. Perhaps JLG
is doing the Scorsese thing and simultaneously framing for two
different aspect ratios.
Sam
16399
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 4:41pm
Subject: Triple Agent AR, was: Re: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
Just wondering, could it have anything to do with where the subtitles are positioned on the print they received? If shown at 1.37, the subtitles would be too high and would seem to obtrude upon the image.
I haven't seen the Godard yet; I saw the Rohmer yesterday and would have called it more 1.66 than 1.85, but sitting way to the side probably skewed my perception. Anyway, it didn't surprise me since they showed Autumn Tale wide, too. The question, though, is did anyone detect obvious effects of cropping (other than, as usual, in the newsreel sequences)? I wasn't really watching for it, but things like Arsinoe's paintings and the prints on the walls all seemed intact, for example.
Back in message #13311 I offered some speculation found on a DVD message board: "I suspect (without having asked anyone) that Rohmer moved to 1.66:1 as a compromise, as even in France I suspect the places which can show Academy are limited. And maybe he's another director - Stanley Kubrick being the most famous example - who uses widescreen ratios in the cinema but prefers full-frame where possible for home viewing."
16400
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Oct 4, 2004 4:42pm
Subject: El Cid (Was: NYFF: Scheduled appearances by directors?
> Go to Lincoln Center, you lucky dog. Manhandled is fun, but not major
> Dwan; ditto El Cid re Mann
I have to dissent on this one: I'm more in awe of EL CID every time I see
it. After MEN IN WAR, it's my favorite Mann. - Dan
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact