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.
17301
From: filipefurtado
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:23pm
Subject: Re: Re: LOVE STREAMS
> I just saw Altman's 'Fool for Love'
on DVD -- a Cannon film
> (Menahem-Globus production),
released by MGM. So they might be the
> ones with the Cannon library...
You're right. MGM released many of the
Chuck Norris/Charles Bronson carp that
Cannon produiced in the 80's.
Filipe
>
> craig.
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo!
Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!.
Register anything.
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/b5IolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/
>
>
a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
17302
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:33pm
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Travis Miles wrote:
> This has been a week of extraordinary repertory viewing in New
York, but
> three films shine out above the rest:
>
> Straub/Huillet's Death of Empedocles: After struggling for years to
see more
> of their work, I finally got a taste with the little selection we
had at
> Anthology. Although there were some truly execrable prints, this is
> virtually the only way to see this work in the US, and I got myself
through
> by pretending to see in the palimpsestic scratches the traces of my
betters,
> from Roud on, who had no doubt viewed the very same prints as me.
> The Death of Empedocles, however, was a fine 35mm, and it was a
glorious
> film. Anyone have something special to say about it?
I'm so glad people are sharing their screening impressions. This is
my favorite Straub-Huillet of recent years, and it is indeed a
summing-up of the "toga period," although there was also Noir peche
after -- a sort of fragment and variant of the complete play. What
struck me the one time I saw Empedocles, courtesy of Thom Andersen at
Cal Arts, was that the cutting was ALMOST "normal," but not quite --
kind of assymptotically approaching classical cutting, but never
quite getting there in a way that I found invigorating. Every shot,
as Travis says, is to die for, and for once I didn't need to fret too
much about the inaccessible German text, because Holderlin's drama is
so close in its themes to lyric poems in the parallel tradition of
English Romanticism that I cut my teeth on: "Dejection: An Ode" by
Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Wordsworth's "Ode on Intimations of
Immortality Founded on Recollections of Early Childhood." (And
Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind," which predicts the poet's own
ambiguous death, possibly a suicide.) I strongly recommend these
poems to anyone who has seen or is going to see The Death of
Empedocles. My unmentionable mentor Harold Bloom's early book The
Visionary Compny is still the best introduction to the tradition in
English, and Geoffrey Hartman's first book on Wordsworth, referenced
by Bloom in TVC, is the most profound.
17303
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:33pm
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Travis Miles wrote:
> This has been a week of extraordinary repertory viewing in New
York, but
> three films shine out above the rest:
>
> Straub/Huillet's Death of Empedocles: After struggling for years to
see more
> of their work, I finally got a taste with the little selection we
had at
> Anthology. Although there were some truly execrable prints, this is
> virtually the only way to see this work in the US, and I got myself
through
> by pretending to see in the palimpsestic scratches the traces of my
betters,
> from Roud on, who had no doubt viewed the very same prints as me.
> The Death of Empedocles, however, was a fine 35mm, and it was a
glorious
> film. Anyone have something special to say about it?
I'm so glad people are sharing their screening impressions. This is
my favorite Straub-Huillet of recent years, and it is indeed a
summing-up of the "toga period," although there was also Noir peche
after -- a sort of fragment and variant of the complete play. What
struck me the one time I saw Empedocles, courtesy of Thom Andersen at
Cal Arts, was that the cutting was ALMOST "normal," but not quite --
kind of assymptotically approaching classical cutting, but never
quite getting there in a way that I found invigorating. Every shot,
as Travis says, is to die for, and for once I didn't need to fret too
much about the inaccessible German text, because Holderlin's drama is
so close in its themes to lyric poems in the parallel tradition of
English Romanticism that I cut my teeth on: "Dejection: An Ode" by
Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Wordsworth's "Ode on Intimations of
Immortality Founded on Recollections of Early Childhood." (And
Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind," which predicts the poet's own
ambiguous death, possibly a suicide.) I strongly recommend these
poems to anyone who has seen or is going to see The Death of
Empedocles. My unmentionable mentor Harold Bloom's early book The
Visionary Compny is still the best introduction to the tradition in
English, and Geoffrey Hartman's first book on Wordsworth, referenced
by Bloom in TVC, is the most profound.
17304
From: Travis Miles
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:35pm
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
But Empedocles is from 86, although I can imagine that the Rozier would be
tough competition. Everything I've seen of his has been impressive.
On 10/22/04 1:21 PM, "David Ehrenstein" wrote:
>
>
> --- Travis Miles wrote:
>
> Truly a
>> revelation.
>> Within the very limited arena of Straub criticism,
>> this film seems to have
>> been caught in limbo somewhat, poised as it is
>> between the two "halves" of
>> the Straub/Huillet canon. Anyone have something
>> special to say about it?
>>
>
> Wish I could agree with you but I can't. I saw it in
> Paris in 1983. That same week I also saw Chereau's
> "L'Homme Blesse" and Rozier's amazing "Main Ocean."
> I've seen the former countless times but the latter
> only that once and it's still fresh in my mind --
> unlike the Straub.
>
> I'd rank "The Death of Empedokles" with "The Courtship
> of Eddie's Father." It's a nicely furnished empty room
>
> "Time and Tide" is pretty good pulp.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
17305
From: Fred Camper
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:42pm
Subject: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
Yes, it's true, I've decided the sublime physical beauty of actresses
and actors is far more interesting than all my past mumbo jumbo about
abstract cinematic spaces.
Well, not quite. But I'm writing a few words on a Japanese experimental
video that uses a Frank Sinatra movie that I won't be able to identify
intercut with an Elizabeth Taylor movie that I perhaps can get right.
(They are intercut to the "score" of Kubelka's flicker film "Arnulf
Rainer," with one movie used for white sections and the other for black,
apparently. The video, for anyone interested, is "A flick film in which
there appear Liz and Franky, is composed under the score of ARNULF
RAINER by P. Kubelka on NTSC" by Ichiro Sueoka, though the full title
might not make it into print.)
Anyway, Liz seems young in this movie, and the main scene that's used
involves some elephants entering a rather large room, perhaps of a
wealthy home, and wreaking havoc. To add to the fun, a fire starts, and
Liz is stuck on an upper level awaiting a man to rescue her.
Perhaps, a glance at imdb suggests, this is "Elephant Walk"? If anyone
has seen that film, does this scene ring a bell?
(For Chicagoans, there are five programs in this series, and there are
things worth seeing on each program. I couldn't find a Web site with the
Chicago schedule but it starts October 29; check the Reader Web site, I
guess, or email me if you're interested and I'll email you a schedule.)
Thanks
Fred Camper
Thanks
Fred Camper
17306
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:49pm
Subject: Re: LOVE STREAMS
"a Cannon film (Menahem-Globus production),released by MGM. So they
might be the ones with the Cannon library..."
But don't Warner Bros. now own MGM?
17307
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:57pm
Subject: Re: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
--- Fred Camper wrote:
>
> Perhaps, a glance at imdb suggests, this is
> "Elephant Walk"? If anyone
> has seen that film, does this scene ring a bell?
>
Yes it's "Elephant Walk" alright.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
17308
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:58pm
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
--- Travis Miles wrote:
> But Empedocles is from 86, although I can imagine
> that the Rozier would be
> tough competition. Everything I've seen of his has
> been impressive.
>
Sorry, then it must have been from my second trip to
Paris in '88.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17309
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:58pm
Subject: Re: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
"Anyway, Liz seems young in this movie, and the main scene that's
used involves some elephants entering a rather large room, perhaps of
a wealthy home, and wreaking havoc. To add to the fun, a fire starts,
and Liz is stuck on an upper level awaiting a man to rescue her."
Yes, definitely ELEPHANT WALK. It's the film's climax. The elephants
enter the plantation, rampage through the main house, and even manage
to start a fire by smashing a chandelier (with what appears to be
deliberate malice).
A great film, by the way, with some fascinating structural echoes of
UNDER CAPRICORN.
17310
From:
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:00pm
Subject: Re: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
This is DEFINITELY "Elephant Walk". It is the big climax of the movie. The elephants represent nature triumphing over machismo & pride (the hero's ultra-macho father built his mansion right over the elelphant's ancestral pathway.)
There are some brief notes on this film on my web site:
http://members.aol.com/MG4273/dieterle.htm
"Elephant Walk" is a lavishly produced melodrama on a grand scale. It might not be personal art, but it sure has craftsmanship applied with a lavish hand. It can be great fun, if you are in the right mood for spectacle.
Dare I suggest that Elizabeth Taylor, Dana Andrews and Peter Finch are a bit more magnetic than Tom Cruise and Nichole Kidman, too?
Mike Grost
17311
From: Robert Keser
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:43pm
Subject: Re: way back when...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Hadrian" wrote:
> "Someone a ways back referred to having read somewhere (how's that
for vague) that people lost interest in new music after the age of
42, and either focus more narrowly on the music they're already
interested in, or begin learning about the roots to the music their
interested in (go further back). I am presently trying to write a
kind of mission statement for our new label, and this idea is
relevant --but i'd like to cite it specifically, and make sure it's
true, and not just an urban legend...so if you're out there...shoot
me a line!"
That was me, Hadrian. I was referring to an article by Maclolm
Gladwell in the New Yorker three or four years ago. Unless I'm
totally addled, I believe it's reprinted in his book called "The
Tipping Point". My increasingly vague memory of it is that the age
of narrowing was 39 but don't hold me to that!
--Robert Keser
17312
From: George Robinson
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:29pm
Subject: Fw: Upcoming Screenings
Upcoming ScreeningsFor all you New Yorkers, a rare opportunity to see Franju's Judex.
g
Take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim. Silence encourages the
tormentor, never the tormented.
--Elie Wiesel
----- Original Message -----
From: Ocularis
To: grcomm@c...
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 7:44 AM
Subject: Upcoming Screenings
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ocularis October 24th and 31th
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- 10/24 - 7pm - Passage du Désir
-- 10/31 - 7pm - Judex
-- Contact/Directions
Visit Ocularis for a full listing of current screenings.
10/24 - 7pm - Passage du Désir
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Passage du Désir - France/USA - Baba Hillman - 2003 - 16mm, S8, video, colour, b&w, 93". French. English subtitles
**Q&A after screening with director**
An exploration of desire, transience and memory through the experience of an exile - one whose relationship to country, language and history is continually in question.
In returning to the city of her past, a traveler imagines looking for lost friends. She finds instead a delirious metropolis of mental and physical detours where a room threads together hallucination and remembrance, where the city leads her towards a thousand gardens within itself; gardens of bridges, rivers, doorways, factories, where her body is drawn ever further into the body of the city itself. She traces a map made of breath, light, of the spinning of heat in the skin and flesh, of the air and colour of one moment.
Baba Hillman grew up in Japan, Venezuela and Panama. Her films and videos have screened at the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art, Rencontres Paris/Berlin, MIX, Osnabruck, Anthology Film Archives and Cinéma Jeune Collectif, among others.
10/31 - 7pm - Judex
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judex - France - 1963 - 100 mins - B& W - Georges Franju With Channing Pollack, Edith Scob, Francine Bergé Franju's superbly elegant tribute to the adventure fantasies of Louis Feuillade sees the eponymous righters-of-wrongs abduct a wicked banker in order to prevent villainess Diana (Bergé in glorious in black cat suit) laying her hands on a fortune the banker's daughter is due to inherit. Cue for a magical surrealists clash between good and evil, with the Franju revelling in poetic symbolism through black and white photography that thrills with its evocation of a lost, more innocent era. (from a review by Geoff Andrew)
Preceded by
Daumé - USA - 2000 - 7mins - Ben Russell (S- 8 to 16mm, B/W/Color, sound)
"One of the strangest films I have seen ever: its characters come and go as if they are 'primitives' posing for the camera, either obeying or fighting an ethnographer's controlling eve." Fred Camper, Chicago Reader Film Critic
Contact/Directions
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O C U L A R I S
Admission $6
At Galapagos Art & Performance Space
70 North 6th Street (between Wythe and Kent Avenues)
Williamsburg, Brooklyn
Directions:
a.. Take the L train to Bedford Ave.
b.. 1 block South to N. 6th Street, and 2 1/2 West.
c.. Galapagos is located between Wythe Avenue and
Contact Information
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
email: calendar@o...
phone: 718-388-8713
web: http://www.ocularis.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forward email
This email was sent to grcomm@c..., by calendar@o...
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribeT | Privacy Policy. Powered by
Ocularis - Cinema Williamsburg | 70 N. 6th St. | Brooklyn | NY | 11211
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17313
From: Fred Camper
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:48pm
Subject: Re: Re: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
Thanks a lot! I knew I could count on you guys for something like this.
As for nature taking revenge, that definitely makes me want to see it.
MG4273@a... wrote:
> Dare I suggest that Elizabeth Taylor, Dana Andrews and Peter Finch are a bit more magnetic than Tom Cruise and Nichole Kidman, too?
Even thougho I purport to hve little interest in performers, I'd suggest
your "dare I suggest" is way too hedged.
Though who knows, maybe in some future (perhaps genetically damaged?)
generation Tom C***** will be viewed with the same veneration that Liz
and Dana and Cary and Bette are afforded today
Fred Camper
17314
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:02pm
Subject: Re: LOVE STREAMS
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> "a Cannon film (Menahem-Globus production),released by MGM. So
they
> might be the ones with the Cannon library..."
>
> But don't Warner Bros. now own MGM?
They own a big chunk of the library that Turner bought, which they
release on DVD, I think, using the MGM label. They don't own
the "studio," which is still producing and releasing theatrical
features out of some office buildings in Santa Monica. This ghostly
remainder of slimy Vegas tycoon Kirk Kerkorian's many deals is now on
the block again. Sony currently occupies the old MGM lot in Culver
City, having traded the Columbia lot to Warners to get Guber and
Peters after they were so successful with Batman. Neither is at Sony
today, unless Peters still has a producing deal with them. Guber left
and formed Dreamworks w. Katzenberg and Spielberg, which is
successfully producing movies (such as Shark Tale) out of a bunch of
office buildings somewhere in the wilds of Burbank. Sony, who also
hired Mark Canton to run things and watched helplessly while he threw
more money than all of us put together will ever hear of down a
rathole, got their asses handed to them on that one, but are still in
business, making Spiderman etc. The above-mentuioned Kerkorian, who
looks just like one of the "old greaseballs back home" in Casino, is
suing another billionaire for impregnating his trophy wife, and has
stoopede to stealing the guy's garbage (shades of The Stupids!) to
get DNA samples. People say Hollywood never changes, but I think it's
going downhill.
17315
From: Robert Keser
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:04pm
Subject: Re: Elizabeth Taylor query (Elephant Walk?)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
> Thanks a lot! I knew I could count on you guys for something like
this.
Just to keep the record straight, bear in mind that Elizabeth Taylor
was only brought in as an eleventh hour substitute after filming had
begun, to replace Vivien Leigh, who had gone round the bend once
more (possibly from her long and notorious affair with co-star Peter
Finch). Leigh can still be spotted in some of the long shots.
Incidentally, in light of the discussions about THE LETTER, it's
interesting to note that when casting the role of Taylor's major
domo, Paramount and Dieterle opted for the Asian actor to play Asian
(and he gives a most dignified and distinctive performance).
--Robert Keser
17316
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:08pm
Subject: Big Red One Dupey-ness
I'm seeing it tonight at Melnitz. Tony Bozanich, who spoke to one of
the tech people, says it probably was a Hi-Def-to-film transfer, but
stresses that the handful of scenes that LOOK dupe-y are scenes for
which they had only a positive copy -- a product reel cut before the
film was mutilated, which was one of the first things Richard found.
Apparently those scenes and all other materials (ie the new negative
sections) were transferred to Pal for editing (something that's
becoming a common money-saver in films made for international sales),
which made it impossible for them to digitally correct the colors in
those scenes (the grain being a lost cause anyway), for technical
reasons having to do with the number of "frames" in Pal -- one of
those things I never have really understood.
17317
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:09pm
Subject: Re: Love Streams
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>>
> I taped it off the same place, but I think Cannon did put it out
on
> cassette at least. And I agree that it's the best one, the best
film
> of the 80s, and magical from end to end once they get together in
it.
I'm late catching up with this LOVE STREAMS thread and I'm
delighted to find such unanimity in rating it JC's best film and one
of the best ever. I completely agree with David, Bill, Adrian and
others here. The last time I saw the film was three years ago in
Paris in a very battered print that broke a couple of times. I'll
have to check if it has indeed been re-released theatrically in
France.
17318
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:59pm
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Travis Miles wrote:
> This has been a week of extraordinary repertory viewing in New York, but
> three films shine out above the rest:
>
> Straub/Huillet's Death of Empedocles.
The book, "Landscapes of Resistance," is available online:
http://texts.cdlib.org/dynaxml/servlet/dynaXML?docId=ft4m3nb2jk&chunk.id=d0e5110
This chapter contains an interesting account of how Hölderlin's has
been interpreted politically.
The first chapter is useful as well:
http://texts.cdlib.org/dynaxml/servlet/dynaXML?docId=ft4m3nb2jk&chunk.id=d0e225&toc.id=d0e225&query=0
"The Straubs are no avant-gardists. They have only opened up a few old
lines under the rubble of the cinema and carried them a bit further."
They use "machinery and techniques not so different from Howard Hawks
or Raoul Walsh."
> Tsui Hark's Time and Tide: Finally being able to see this projected
(and at
> the Walter Reade) was a huge treat. I remember Bill mentioning this in a
> post a while ago and indicating that it made him want to revisit
Tsui, who I
> find, film for film, one of the most exciting directors alive.
I particularly like "Green Snake" and "Swordsman II," which he
produced, but which Stanley Tong and Siu-Tung Ching directed. I also
like "Double Team" and "Knock Off" much more than most people...
I have some doubts about Tsui Hark's films for a number of reasons,
including some of the praise he receives, such as this article:
http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/directors/03/tsui.html
Paul
17319
From:
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:39pm
Subject: New York screenings - shameless self-promotion department
For those of you who have previously expressed some interest (and I
guess also for those of you interested in films made by other
critics) my feature film NEW GUY will be screening at the Pioneer
Theatre in the East Village from November 10th to November 17th. And
maybe even longer if I can get some decent-sized crowds out there.
It's 85 minutes long and it'll be screening nightly at 9 pm.
NEW GUY is a modest little comedy-thriller that takes some
interesting twists and turns, and it's been getting good response at
festivals for the past year and a half or so. I'd toss out some
influences and names but I fear that would just sound hopelessly
pretentiou...Oh, okay, what the hell: It's OFFICE SPACE meets THE
SHINING. Or at least that's what I'm told. (I prefer the TENANT-
WICKER MAN comparisons myself.)
Expect another self-serving reminder as the date nears. Until then,
as you were...
-Bilge
17320
From: Hadrian
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 10:14pm
Subject: Re: way back when...
> That was me, Hadrian. I was referring to an article by Maclolm
> Gladwell in the New Yorker three or four years ago. Unless I'm
> totally addled, I believe it's reprinted in his book called "The
> Tipping Point". My increasingly vague memory of it is that the age
> of narrowing was 39 but don't hold me to that!
>
> --Robert Keser
Thanks Robert!
What a coincidence that I just bought the Tipping Point hours before
sending that post! So far it's great, but i haven't gotten to that
factoid yet.
Hadrian
17321
From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 10:18pm
Subject: Re: Love Streams
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Hart" wrote:
> Does anybody know where to find prints of Love Streams in America
> (i.e. for theatrical distribution)? Do they exist?
My two theatrical viewings may suggest a couple of leads: at NY's
MoMA in January 2001 & at Chicago's Gene Siskel Film Center in July 2001
and add my vote to "masterpiece"
-Jason
17322
From:
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:19pm
Subject: Re: Upcoming Screenings
Will those of us in the hinterlands ever get to see Franju's "Judex"?
Have been greatly enjoying the Feuillade original. Am 1/3 through. The white
pigeons are great.
Mike Grost
17323
From:
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:58pm
Subject: Re: Re: way back when...
Hadrian -
So what exactly are you going to do with this information? Are you going to
encourage exploration in the fortysomething and above set?
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17324
From:
Date: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:11pm
Subject: Re: way back when...
Hey, I'm 51, and I just saw my first films by Margarethe von Trotta -
Rosenstrasse - and David O. Russell - I (Heart) Huckabees. Maybe all this proves is
that I'm an ignorant idiot who should have seen works by these famous directors
long ago! But at least I'm in there trying. You have to see a mix of the old
and the new.
Both films are well worth catching.
Mike Grost
17325
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:01am
Subject: Stipe and Chéreau
For David, from a recent Rolling Stone Q&A with Michael Stipe --
What piece of art best represents R.E.M.'s music?
Maybe certain scenes from The Elephant Man [laughs ]. There's a
subtitled French film -- it's on DVD -- called Those Who Love Me Can
Take the Train . That film is like an R.E.M. song.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17326
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 4:29am
Subject: Re: Stipe and Chéreau
I'd heard about this. Which issue is it in?
No surprise, in that being the producer of "Being John
Malkovich," the excecutive producer of "Velvet
Goldmine" and the star of "Color of a Brisk and
Leaping Day," Stipe has exquisite taste.
Now if I could just get Sondheim to turn "Those Who
Love Me" into a musical.
--- Craig Keller wrote:
>
> For David, from a recent Rolling Stone Q&A with
> Michael Stipe --
>
> What piece of art best represents R.E.M.'s music?
>
> Maybe certain scenes from The Elephant Man [laughs
> ]. There's a
> subtitled French film -- it's on DVD -- called Those
> Who Love Me Can
> Take the Train . That film is like an R.E.M. song.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17327
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 6:05am
Subject: Re: Stipe and Chéreau
>
> I'd heard about this. Which issue is it in?
Not sure -- I found the link to it on R.E.M.'s website. Here's the
link to the full article (says posted October 6th) --
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/6539431/
rem?pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1097110327372&has-
player=unknown
On-topic but off-topic, I've heard the new album is a borderline
adult-oriented-rock affair, so it's the only one I haven't bought on
day of release, out of dread. A friend said he hates it so much he's
going to give me his, which is good, I suppose. Hopefully after three
less-than-classic records (although 'Up' and 'Reveal' have their
moments, particularly the former) they'll ditch this Pat McCarthy
clown, and go back to taking a couple weeks to make an album, rather
than a couple years of terminal gloss-polish. I blame Mike Mills.
(Reading-tip to any pop music fans on-list: If you haven't already,
check out Marcus Gray's 'It Crawled from the South: An R.E.M.
Companion' for one of the best band-mythos-evocations ever put to print
-- besides 'The Beatles' by Hunter Davies. [Or, duh, 'Look! Listen!
Vibrate! Smile!' by Dominic Priore.] Best straight-on
rock-bio-I've-ever-read laurels go out to Johnny Rogan's 'Morrissey &
Marr: The Severed Alliance.')
===
In film-viewing news, very briefly (must get back to watching the
recent Criterion 'A Woman Is a Woman' at long last -- splended print
and transfer, like watching a whole different movie compared to what I
was used to), today I saw 'Lured' by Douglas Sirk, which I thought was
lovely -- Lucille Ball, how I never knew thee -- and what an approach
to story-telling a thriller! Also, 'I Heart Huckabees': not quite sure
how I feel about this yet. The picture kept getting better and better
up to the family supper scene, where it became wildly great -- but from
then on, it became... medicated..
craig.
17328
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 6:33am
Subject: Tsui, was: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Travis Miles
wrote:
> Tsui, who I
> > find, film for film, one of the most exciting directors alive.
>
He's definitely one of the most influential in Hong Kong '80s
cinema, producing that look in common with Once Upon A Time in China
Movies to A Chinese Ghost Story to the Swordsman stories and even
Time and Tide. I know Hong Kong critics who either hate him (for
bending most of Hong Kong cinema to that look) or love him (for the
same reason), he rarely gets a lukewarm response.
I do like some of his work--Once Upon a Time 2 would be my favorite.
Peking Opera Blues is a gem. Aces Go Places 6 or 4 or whatever (Our
Man in Bond Street), his 007 parody, is underrated. The Blade is a
fascinating mess of a take on Chang Cheh.
He does suprisingly well amongst the Hong Kong talent that went
Hollywood--I'm also a fan of Double Team (with its The Prisoner
parody and spectacula Coke plug--"drink in front of our vending
machines and you too can survive a huge explosion!"); Knock Off felt
problematical. Always thought he'd make a useful hired gun to revive
the Bond franchise.
17329
From:
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:28am
Subject: Re: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
In a message dated 10/22/04 11:51:19 AM, afatravis@m... writes:
> And of all the hours of images I saw this week, there are a few seconds in
> Hart of London that will permanently shake me.
>
Which few seconds?
Glad to hear of your reaction. My first viewing of it made me tremble.
Everything outside of the theatre afterwards felt ephemeral, impermanent,
threatening to evaoprate if I didn't fix my eyes on it. And this is one of the reasons
why I too find the film a study in "splits," if you will. Images abrade against
not only subsequent images but themselves as well. Nothing seems to fit or
follow smoothly and thus it becomes difficult to suss out any sort of
counterpoint. But eventually, one evolves. Or rather, a concatenation of counterpoints
explodes across the film. Or not. I mean, it's hard if not impossible to
connect every image and sound in this film. But ultimately, that's its power - it
teases you with connections that may not even be there. (What would Eisenstein
have made of this?) Basically, I think Chambers has achieved with THE HART OF
LONDON what Brakhage achieved with, say, PANELS FOR THE WALLS OF HEAVEN. Only
with HART, he achieved it with, to borrow a phrase from Camper, images from the
world we know. And I find that more powerful. After PANELS FOR THE WALLS OF
HEAVEN, I feel cleansed, a blank slate, ready to face the world again. But
after THE HART OF LONDON, the world feels full of possibility, of perpetual
transformation, of potential elimination. Even the very title of the film fails to
sit still, at least when you say it out loud. You must divide 'heart' from
'hart' and 'London, England' from 'London, Ontario.' Or then again, you don't have
to.
To my eyes, the second greatest film of all-time.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17330
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:53am
Subject: Re: Tsui, was: Straub/Huillet/Tsui/Chambers
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
> He does suprisingly well amongst the Hong Kong talent that went
> Hollywood--I'm also a fan of Double Team (with its The Prisoner
> parody and spectacula Coke plug--"drink in front of our vending
> machines and you too can survive a huge explosion!"); Knock Off
felt
> problematical. Always thought he'd make a useful hired gun to
revive
> the Bond franchise.
What I especially liked about Knock Off was its disorienting, mannered
camerawork and editing, which I found very impressive. In fact I
liked that the stylistic excess was put to such frivolous ends. I
think this playfulness, artifice, and formal excess can be appreciated
for its beauty even when it serves no dramatic function and does not
produce meaning. And I like Rob Schneider...
There's a slippery slope here -- you don't want to end up with Michael
Bay films, but I think mannerism in films, however it might be
defined, is a topic worth investigating, even if you want to take a
stand against Tsui Hark or, to choose a US mannerist, Tarantino.
Paul
17331
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:37pm
Subject: Re: Stipe and Chéreau
--- Craig Keller wrote:
>
> (Reading-tip to any pop music fans on-list: If you
> haven't already,
> check out Marcus Gray's 'It Crawled from the South:
> An R.E.M.
> Companion' for one of the best
> band-mythos-evocations ever put to print
> -- besides 'The Beatles' by Hunter Davies. [Or,
> duh, 'Look! Listen!
> Vibrate! Smile!' by Dominic Priore.]
And in that category I reccomend "Songs They Never
Play on the Radio" by James Young
today I saw 'Lured' by Douglas Sirk,
> which I thought was
> lovely -- Lucille Ball, how I never knew thee -- and
> what an approach
> to story-telling a thriller!
Do you know the Siodmak original, "Pieges" ?
Also, 'I Heart
> Huckabees': not quite sure
> how I feel about this yet. The picture kept getting
> better and better
> up to the family supper scene, where it became
> wildly great -- but from
> then on, it became... medicated..
>
Not sure what you mean by that. Russell specializes in
"embarassing" family scenes. This one was a bit like
the one in "Flirting with Disaster"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17332
From:
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:26am
Subject: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
> check out Marcus Gray's 'It Crawled from the South:
> An R.E.M.
> Companion' for one of the best
> band-mythos-evocations ever put to print
> -- besides 'The Beatles' by Hunter Davies. [Or,
> duh, 'Look! Listen!
> Vibrate! Smile!' by Dominic Priore.]
And in that category I reccomend "Songs They Never
Play on the Radio" by James Young >>
And let me recommend Like Punk Never Happened - Culture Club and The New Pop
by David Rimmer.
HUCKABEES was a mess a la Magnolia but I love both fine. Neil Postman says
that we never see the act of thinking on television and that may be true. But
not of cinema. HUCKABEES is ABOUT the act of thinking. It LOOKS LIKE the act of
thinking or, rather, several different kinds of acts of thinking. My only
serious qualm is how Oedipal it is. This is largely Jason and Marky's dilemma. But
one of my favorite things about the film is how Watts' dilemma peers through
the trad trajectory. And the scene where Tomlin and Hoffman fail to avoid the
sprinklers is pure Jerry Lewis.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17333
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 4:13pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
HUCKABEES is ABOUT the act of
> thinking. It LOOKS LIKE the act of
> thinking or, rather, several different kinds of acts
> of thinking. My only
> serious qualm is how Oedipal it is. This is largely
> Jason and Marky's dilemma.
Hunh?
But
> one of my favorite things about the film is how
> Watts' dilemma peers through
> the trad trajectory. And the scene where Tomlin and
> Hoffman fail to avoid the
> sprinklers is pure Jerry Lewis.
>
Tomlin, Hoffman and Russell were on Charlie Rose the
other night. She said that originally there was just
one sprinkler and she suggested adding another. She
and Hofman also talked about the fact that Russell had
the cmaera running constantly and wouldyell out new
instructions and lines to them during takes. They're
both over the moon about him.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
17334
From:
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:06pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
In a message dated 10/23/04 11:13:57 AM, cellar47@y... writes:
> Hunh?
>
HUCKABEES is Oedipal in the sense that it is largely about a male quest for
mastery. Sure, Watts has her quest. But the film CANNOT end until Marky and
Jason attain their spiritual enlightenment. Imagine how truly outré the film
would come off if it ended with Watts' enlightenment, with Watts out in nature
summing it all up for us.
As Hollywood films move farther and farther away from impinging upon the
formation of a heterosexual couple, other, potentially even more menacing,
ideologies replace it - certainly male quests for enlightenment but also the
formation (or the fortification) of the nuclear family (SIGNS, EIGHT LEGGED FREAKS,
ORANGE COUNTY, etc.). If I wanted to be persnickety (and I don't because, again,
I really liked the film), I'd say HUCKABEES is very much in the tradition of
the venal male buddy film Haskell railed against, and rightfully so methinks,
in the 1970s.
When I mentioned all of this to one of my companions after seeing HUCKABEES,
I said "So when do we get a film where, say, two gay men (and PLEASE - two gay
men who aren't fucking each other) ponder for the world?" to which she
replied "But then it would be about two gay men...whereas HUCKABEES is simply about
pondering the interconnnectedness of all things." And sadly, she's right
because it's two white heterosexual males are pondering it. Who would ever describe
HUCKABEES as two white heterosexual males pondering the interconnnectedness
of all things (who besides Ehrenstein, that is)? It's simply about pondering
the interconnnectedness of all things (and I imagine many would even do away
with the "pondering" here). You don't "have" to identify the ponderers. And, of
course, if two gay men were indeed pondering the interconnectedness of all
things, how universal would it feel to know you could be connected to
homosexuality in any way?
This is an ancient problem, natch and no doubt it partially accounts for why
so much gay and lesbian cinema, for instance, is worthless. But I think we
should always be pondering when, if ever, we need to identify the source of a
film's universality or philosophical ponderings or whatever makes it a
masterpiece. I mean, would PLAYTIME come out even remotely the same had Tati been a
woman? The city is a very different creature for women which is why all these
theories of the flaneur and the dérive stink slightly of bullshit (although
check out Anne Friedberg's alternative take from Window Shopping).
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17335
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:06pm
Subject: Re: Stipe and Chéreau
> And in that category I reccomend "Songs They Never
> Play on the Radio" by James Young
Sits on my shelf next to 'Edie: American Girl' -- although I haven't
read it yet.
> Do you know the Siodmak original, "Pieges" ?
I don't. Is it good?
> Also, 'I Heart
>> Huckabees': not quite sure
>> how I feel about this yet. The picture kept getting
>> better and better
>> up to the family supper scene, where it became
>> wildly great -- but from
>> then on, it became... medicated..
>>
>
> Not sure what you mean by that. Russell specializes in
> "embarassing" family scenes. This one was a bit like
> the one in "Flirting with Disaster"
I liked the family supper scene -- it was the climax of the half of the
film that seemed almost to do no wrong, and I laughed out loud about
four or five times at the dinner-table sequence alone. Following that
scene, until the end, the picture entered this "foregone conclusion"
mode that lasted about forty-five minutes; with the desired
breakthrough already attained (Schwartzman digests his ouster from the
coalition, and becomes acquainted personally with his Coincidental
African), the narrative as it's been laid out has nowhere else to go
aside from the Open Spaces / Huckabees resolution, to which it doesn't
systematically build any longer -- instead, the "plot" becomes a
protracted "working-out" of dysfunctional and/or malnourished libidos.
I mean, nothing much happens dramatically in this part of the film
except an orgasm and two breakdowns -- the narrative becomes more
confessional, "therapeutic." (That's what I meant by "medicated," in
addition to the effect on me as a viewer being something like languor.
Which I don't mean as a value-judgment.)
craig.
17336
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:15pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
the scene where Tomlin and Hoffman fail to avoid the
> sprinklers is pure Jerry Lewis.
Specifically, The Big Mouth, which is also about thinking.
17337
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:22pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> HUCKABEES is Oedipal in the sense that it is largely
> about a male quest for
> mastery. Sure, Watts has her quest. But the film
> CANNOT end until Marky and
> Jason attain their spiritual enlightenment. Imagine
> how truly outré the film
> would come off if it ended with Watts'
> enlightenment, with Watts out in nature
> summing it all up for us.
>
True.But it's a mark of Russell's sophistication that
the film DOESN'T come off as a re-instatement of the
status quo.
> As Hollywood films move farther and farther away
> from impinging upon the
> formation of a heterosexual couple, other,
> potentially even more menacing,
> ideologies replace it - certainly male quests for
> enlightenment but also the
> formation (or the fortification) of the nuclear
> family (SIGNS, EIGHT LEGGED FREAKS,
> ORANGE COUNTY, etc.)
Interesting as ORANGE COUNTY was written by Mike
White.
If I wanted to be persnickety
> (and I don't because, again,
> I really liked the film), I'd say HUCKABEES is very
> much in the tradition of
> the venal male buddy film Haskell railed against,
> and rightfully so methinks,
> in the 1970s.
>
And Ifind nothing venal about it. It's not a man and a
woman, it's about a man and a rock.
> When I mentioned all of this to one of my companions
> after seeing HUCKABEES,
> I said "So when do we get a film where, say, two gay
> men (and PLEASE - two gay
> men who aren't fucking each other) ponder for the
> world?"
If they're not fucking then there's no pondering.
to which she
> replied "But then it would be about two gay
> men...whereas HUCKABEES is simply about
> pondering the interconnnectedness of all things."
> And sadly, she's right
> because it's two white heterosexual males are
> pondering it.
That's force of heterosexula habit.
Who would ever describe
> HUCKABEES as two white heterosexual males pondering
> the interconnnectedness
> of all things (who besides Ehrenstein, that is)?
> It's simply about pondering
> the interconnnectedness of all things (and I imagine
> many would even do away
> with the "pondering" here). You don't "have" to
> identify the ponderers. And, of
> course, if two gay men were indeed pondering the
> interconnectedness of all
> things, how universal would it feel to know you
> could be connected to
> homosexuality in any way?
>
This is my cue to declare"My Own Private Idaho" to be
"universal."
I mean, would PLAYTIME come out even
> remotely the same had Tati been a
> woman?
Hulot is pretty damned close!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
17338
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:24pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 10/23/04 11:13:57 AM, cellar47@y... writes:
>
>
> > Hunh?
> >
>
> HUCKABEES is Oedipal in the sense that it is largely about a male
quest for
> mastery.
Or castration, as was Flirting with Disaster, which is literally
about a Gen X male looking for his name, or Spanking the Monkey,
where the hero, after almost killing himself to escape his Oedipal
dead end, gets a lift from a truck-driver -- i.e. re-parents himself
with the working class.
The other issue you raise -- which is the gender-enclosure of
classical cinema and all its offshoots -- would be an interesting one
to put to Russell, who seems to be, among other things, crazier than
all three Marx brothers "put together."
17339
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:28pm
Subject: Re: Stipe and Chéreau
--- Craig Keller wrote:
>
> Sits on my shelf next to 'Edie: American Girl' --
> although I haven't
> read it yet.
>
The passage in "Edie" in which Joel Schumacher
describes the effect of the mixture of speed and
vitamins in the shots he and Edie and a whole mess of
other people were getting from "Dr. Robert" is a
must-read. It also explains a lot about why he's such
a piss poor director.
> > Do you know the Siodmak original, "Pieges" ?
>
> I don't. Is it good?
>
Yes.
> I mean, nothing much happens dramatically in this
> part of the film
> except an orgasm and two breakdowns -- the narrative
> becomes more
> confessional, "therapeutic." (That's what I meant
> by "medicated," in
> addition to the effect on me as a viewer being
> something like languor.
> Which I don't mean as a value-judgment.)
>
Well maybe "nothing happens" dramatically, but I don't
see it as being exclusively a drama. In some ways it's
a dance film. In others it's like a Mondrian painting.
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
17340
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:28pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
> --- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
>
> I mean, would PLAYTIME come out even
> > remotely the same had Tati been a
> > woman?
Blake Edwards has been thinking for years, off and on, about a female
Clouseau as an escape from his own enclosure.
17341
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:40pm
Subject: Big Red One
To finish the thread on why it sometimes looks dupe-y, Warner didn't
give them access to the printing neg for the release version -- they
had to work from a print. But I thought that overall it looked pretty
good. The film -- which I know too well -- snuck up on me when I
finally saw it last night at UCLA. I think the reconstruction is 90%
great (no v.o. and less of the score would be better). I noticed as
we passed the 2-hr mark that I was sitting waiting for the other shoe
to drop -- a sentimental note, a bit of melodrama, and ass-covering
statement -- and it never came. There isn't one false note in the
whole movie. Visually it is richer than ever -- he was "on" when he
shot it just as much as when he shot Shock Corrider, inventing a
different visual angle of attack for almost every sequence, and Adam
Greeneberg earned his place in the Hall of Fame just by what he did
on this one early assignment. Sam's philosophy as embodied in the
film, which I knew only from talking to him, since Bretherton cut
most of it out of the release version, is finally there in all its
complexity. The jarring collisions of tone are now carried out
systematically throughout, with no let-up -- I cracked up this time
at a moment near the end that was always in there, but which I don't
think I had never heard, when Marvin hands Hamill the extra clip and
whispers "I think you got him!" As a_film_by'ers, this is an
important part of our heritage restored. Remember, it came out the
same year as Apocalypse, Now. Which film looks fresher today? No
contest.
17342
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 5:41pm
Subject: Huckabees
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
I don't
> see it as being exclusively a drama. In some ways it's
> a dance film. In others it's like a Mondrian painting.
Great desctiption, David.
17343
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 7:51pm
Subject: Re: Big Red One
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
"As a_film_by'ers, this is an important part of our heritage
restored. Remember, it came out the same year as Apocalypse, Now.
Which film looks fresher today? No contest."
After finally seeing MERRILL'S MARAUDERS on the big screen I was
susrprised that Fuller had anticipated APOCALYPSE NOW with the night
time firefight on the river. Will there be another chance to see THE
BIG RED ONE? I missed it last night because of a previous commitment.
Richard
17344
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 9:51pm
Subject: Re: Big Red One
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
Will there be another chance to see THE
> BIG RED ONE? I missed it last night because of a previous
commitment.
>
> Richard
I'll let you know if I hear of one. The big differencebetween the
night scnes in AN and MM, of course, is that the soldiers in AN
are grooving on the "show" just like we are.
17345
From: Matthew Clayfield
Date: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:55pm
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Tomlin, Hoffman and Russell were on Charlie Rose the
> other night. She said that originally there was just
> one sprinkler and she suggested adding another. She
> and Hofman also talked about the fact that Russell had
> the cmaera running constantly and wouldyell out new
> instructions and lines to them during takes. They're
> both over the moon about him.
The whole production of I HEART HUCKABEE'S (and Russell in general)
sounds sort of insane.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/19/movies/19WAXM.html?
ex=1098676800&en=1450b484c20d154d&ei=5070
It's great!
17346
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 0:05am
Subject: Re: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- Matthew Clayfield
wrote:
>
> The whole production of I HEART HUCKABEE'S (and
> Russell in general)
> sounds sort of insane.
>
>
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/19/movies/19WAXM.html?
> ex=1098676800&en=1450b484c20d154d&ei=5070
>
> It's great!
>
That NYT story was WAY over-the-top in portraying
Russell as a crazy man.
The technique he used for shooting is in some ways
comparable to what Renoir did with "Le Testament du
Dr. Cordelier"
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17347
From: Matthew Clayfield
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 0:35am
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> That NYT story was WAY over-the-top in portraying
> Russell as a crazy man.
I know. But it's still great. When the legend becomes fact, print
the legend.
17348
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 1:22am
Subject: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Clayfield"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> wrote:
> >
> > That NYT story was WAY over-the-top in portraying
> > Russell as a crazy man.
>
> I know. But it's still great. When the legend becomes fact, print
> the legend.
But the legend only becomes fact after it has been printed --
so "print" must have some responsibility.
17349
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:27am
Subject: Re: Re: Music books/Huckabees/OT/Not OT (WAS: Stipe and Chéreau)
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> But the legend only becomes fact after it has
> been printed --
> so "print" must have some responsibility.
>
>
>
>
JACQUES DERRIDA LIVES!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
17350
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:47am
Subject: Re: Re: Coen/McCarey (WAS: Total piece of shit)
>>There's a huge difference between laughing AT a
>>character and laughing WITH them.
>
> But isn't it possible for a filmmaker to be laughing AT a character
> without hating them or being condescending, and for an audience to do
> the same? In the Coen Brothers films (as well as the films of Todd
> Solodnz, to bring up another director often described as mean towards
> his characters, or towards humanity), I find myself laughing AT
> characters that I also relate to. Is it necesarily mean to point out
> that we're all idiots sometimes?
I think Dave's point is good. Making a character ridiculous is largely
a question of emotional distance, which, once established, can be played
with. - Dan
17351
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 0:55pm
Subject: Re: Re: Coen/McCarey (WAS: Total piece of shit)
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> I think Dave's point is good. Making a character
> ridiculous is largely
> a question of emotional distance, which, once
> established, can be played
> with.
But establishing emotional distance is a relatively
easy matter in films.You might say it's almost built
into the structure. The "people" we're looking at are
;argely abstracted body parts magnified to enormoud
proportions and splayed across a screen. The whole
process of emotional "empathy" in moviegoeing requires
our translation of these images into simalcrums of
people. If we'recued to find them risible to start
with half our work is done. The REAl challenge is
breaking through this ridiculousness into something
else.
A large part of why "Some Like It Hot" is so powerful
is that Wilder takes us past the ridiculusness of the
premise towarss things that actuallymatter. Curtis
seduces Monroe in a parody of Cary Grant.But
Monroetakes romance seriously,thereby twisting the
joke in another direction. Running parallel to this is
the demented Joe E. Brown'swooing of Jack Lemmon, who
takes the sexual politics of the situation seriously
and comesto revel in the socio-political advantage of
being a girl.
This is a LONG way from feeling reflexive superiority
to the characters as is common with Coens.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17352
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 1:21pm
Subject: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
>> I think Dave's point is good. Making a character
>> ridiculous is largely
>> a question of emotional distance, which, once
>> established, can be played
>> with.
>
> But establishing emotional distance is a relatively
> easy matter in films.You might say it's almost built
> into the structure. The "people" we're looking at are
> ;argely abstracted body parts magnified to enormoud
> proportions and splayed across a screen. The whole
> process of emotional "empathy" in moviegoeing requires
> our translation of these images into simalcrums of
> people.
The closeness and the distance are both built in, I'd say, and filmmakers
play with them. As you say, it's easy to make people feel like characters
are other; and then, thanks to the miracle of identification (we've been
putting off dealing with Jean-Pierre's very cogent objections to the loose
usage of that word - maybe someday soon), it's also easy to make people
feel that characters are basically like them. That line can be crossed
and recrossed creatively.
> If we're cued to find them risible to start
> with half our work is done. The REAl challenge is
> breaking through this ridiculousness into something
> else.
I think Dave Heaton was observing that laughing at people isn't the same
as rejecting them or having scorn for them. People feel comfortable with
the comic relief, they like to have them around. There's distance, but
there's also the giving of pleasure, which is nothing to sneeze at, as
Felix Bressart said in TO BE OR NOT TO BE.
Obviously, making a character ridiculous can feel like contempt. But I
think some other factors need to enter in to make that happen.
With the Coens, every composition and every line of dialogue feels
like a quote from some previous movie tradition. It's interesting, and
it's also tricky business. At least part of the mockery charge can be
attributed to the Coens' particular way of evoking old-fashioned Hollywood
typage.
> A large part of why "Some Like It Hot" is so powerful
> is that Wilder takes us past the ridiculusness of the
> premise towarss things that actuallymatter. Curtis
> seduces Monroe in a parody of Cary Grant.But
> Monroetakes romance seriously,thereby twisting the
> joke in another direction. Running parallel to this is
> the demented Joe E. Brown'swooing of Jack Lemmon, who
> takes the sexual politics of the situation seriously
> and comesto revel in the socio-political advantage of
> being a girl.
I don't want to start an argument about something where I'm in such an
embarrassing minority, but I watch SOME LIKE IT HOT and find the humor so
crude and primitive that I would never have believed that anyone would
take it for a good movie. Wilder's observational barbs, which admittedly
have an edge to them, just don't register on me amid the general
grotesquerie. - Dan
17353
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:23pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> Obviously, making a character ridiculous can feel
> like contempt. But I
> think some other factors need to enter in to make
> that happen.
>
> With the Coens, every composition and every line of
> dialogue feels
> like a quote from some previous movie tradition.
> It's interesting, and
> it's also tricky business. At least part of the
> mockery charge can be
> attributed to the Coens' particular way of evoking
> old-fashioned Hollywood
> typage.
>
And this is why I find the Coens to be intellectualcon
artists. They flatter the sensibilities of moviegoers
who can get the refeences, while putting down their
characters as rubes and niafs. The viewer is always in
the position of knowing more about what's goign on
than the characters do.
The greatness of a Hitchcock stems from his
consistently audience aussumptions of superiority. The
plots twist and turn in ways we DON'T expect. And he
adamantly refuses to treat his characters as stupid.
Think of what the Coens would have done with Theresa
Wright in "Shadow of a Doubt." By their rules she HAS
to be stupid and/or deluded.
A fortiori "Psycho." Coen characters are petty in
their venality. No room for the likes of Marion Crane.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17354
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:04pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
> And this is why I find the Coens to be intellectualcon
> artists. They flatter the sensibilities of moviegoers
> who can get the refeences, while putting down their
> characters as rubes and niafs.
Well, I have felt this at times in Coen films. Not always. But, to
clarify: the interesting thing about the Coens' meta-ness is that it
generally doesn't boil down to specific movie references. They tend to
evoke movie conventions in a generic sense, even down to compositions and
emphases at the detailed, hard-to-articulate level. - Dan
17355
From:
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:41am
Subject: Judex (Feuillade) and Fritz Lang
Judex (Louis Feuillade, 1916) anticipates the films of Fritz Lang, in a
number of ways. Traditionally, many critics have speculated that Feuillade
influenced Lang. But there was no actual proof, in the form of Lang interviews
mentioning that he liked or had even seen Feuillade's work. Lang did tell Peter
Bogdanovich that he saw Rocambole (1913), a French crime thriller directed by
Georges Denola. Lang lived in Paris in 1914, and saw a lot of French movies,
according to his interview in Bogdanovich's Who the Devil Made It?. He could easily
have seen Feuillade then.
In any case, Judex has features that suggest Lang's work:
· The mirror surveillance mechanism used by Judex anticipates the one used in
Lang's The Spiders (1919).
· The mother's room rented by her while teaching has a cut-off corner: such
polygonal rooms would become a Lang trademark.
· Characters with disguises and multiple identities.
· The major villains are rich and powerful, with social respectability.
· Minor henchmen bad guys reform in Judex, and support the hero instead: a
Lang tradition.
· The comic private eye in Judex anticipates the one in Lang's Ministry of
Fear (1943).
· The spiral scroll work on the doctor's gates (Chapter 3) and mother's gates
(Chapter 4) anticipates spiral imagery in Lang.
· The villains use cars in Judex, while the good guys often walk or use
boats; cars tend to be sinister in Lang.
· The double doors that run through Judex and other Feuillade films also show
up in Lang.
By contrast, Feuillade's use of natural locations throughout Judex would NOT
be followed by Lang, who preferred to shoot even his "exteriors" on studio
sets.
Mike Grost
17356
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:05pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Think of what the Coens would have done with Theresa
> Wright in "Shadow of a Doubt." By their rules she HAS
> to be stupid and/or deluded.
>
> A fortiori "Psycho." Coen characters are petty in
> their venality. No room for the likes of Marion Crane.
The Coens are satirists, and as Northrop Frye (among others) has
noted, critics always confuse satirists with their persona, the
Satirist, who is by definition someone who mocks and criticizes
people, portrays them as grotesque, stupid and so on. This is a mask
which you can actually see in museums -- the Greeks and romans both
made physical masks you could put on and be the Satirist. Later it
became a literary persona: Swift and Pope are not their personae,
their professional masks as satirists. The persona is part of the
genre, even though a propensity to satire can go with a certain
temperament, whose traits are exaggerated grotesquely in the persona.
Another point Frye makes is that we are in an era where satire is the
dominant genre. It's everywhere. And the only way people can
understand this without hating all modern artists is by ignoring it,
or calling it something else: irony, postmodernism. We all grew up on
Mad Magazine. Joe Dante grew up on Mad, and is currently making live
action Mad movies: The Second Civil War, Back In Action. John Landis
is a satirist: Susan's Plan isn't the work of someone who "ghates
humanity" or "has contempt for his characters." It's a satire on
present-day LA, as Into the Night was (among other things) a satire
on LA in the 80s.
The Frye remark about the Age of Satire can be confirmed by looking
at the omnipresence of satire in the work of filmmakers one doesn't
think of that way: Hitchcock, Ford, Sirk, McCarey, who is attached to
this thread. The main "couple" in Shadow aren't subject to satire,
and neither is the mother. (Hitchcock's mother was dying in England
while he was making it.) But all the other family members and small-
town characters are sharply-etched satiric tintypes -- something AH
brought in a New Yorker writer, Sally Benson, during production to
sharpen. The New Yorker in those days was the American Punch, and he
suv=bscribed to both. Sirk's powerful melodramas are full of satiric
portrayals -- everyone but the two leads in All That Heaven Allows,
for instance. Byron was a Romantic's Romantic, but he revered Pope
above all poets and wrote Don Juan.
Is it better ethically to preserve two characters from the scorn
heaped on all the rest in the same picture, or is this a kind of
racism? I just see it as a way for artists who aren't intrinsically
satirists to make their kind of film while bowing to the Zeitgeist. I
know that "lit crit" is a suspect approach for a visual art, but
knowing literary satire and what was written about it in the 60s and
70s in the Old Academy helps in this kind of discussion.
It has always helped me re Welles and Fellini, for example, to know
that they are basically satirists, not in the sense of writers who
send up contemporary mores, but in the precise sense Frye and other
students of classical satire have defined -- as practitioners of a
genre that has its own rules, just like romace or tragedy, and even
its own LOOK. Fellini Satyricon is the pure modern re-imagining of
the founding work of the genre, and both Fellini and Welles (in a
more dabbling way) were cartoonists. Margaret Rutherford in Chimes
and Glenn Anders in Shanghai are fabulous grotesques, satiric
portraits traced with a line as sure as Daumier's. Tashlin was a
cartoonist, and even Sarris gets Tashlin -- a very sweet man -- wrong
on the issue of contempt. Jerry Lewis is a satirist. Kubrick is a
satirist. And so are the Coens.
17357
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:08pm
Subject: Ydessa, the bears and etc... , Agnès Varda
This little movie filled me with enthusiasm above all expectations.
Happy connection between a firmly concrete thread and a multiple
angled look at the world. Varda gleans, as she says. Her approach,
particularly in her last films, strikes me in both ways, trough its
exemplary documentary technique – simplicity, precision, honesty –
and through the intelligence of the questioning it arouses for
viewers. I don't know so many films where the presence of the real –
in its more concrete foundations as well as in its mysterious
intimacy - is called with such acuity. Varda films objects and
people; no distortion, no embellishment, but, trough her attentive,
generous, amused and respectful gaze, it's the secret universe of
every one or every thing that is offered to the viewer, with its own
ability to question and interpret this reality ("etc...")
Maxime
17358
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:08pm
Subject: Satire
In my post on this topic I forgot David O. Russell. Satirist.
17359
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:17pm
Subject: Re: Ydessa, the bears and etc... , Agnès Varda
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
>
> This little movie filled me with enthusiasm above all expectations.
> Happy connection between a firmly concrete thread and a multiple
When I saw Mieville's last film in Paris in 99, I happened to be
having dinner afterward in the same cafeas Varda and her group, who
had attended. Godard left the theatre, came to the cafe and made a
beeline to Varda's table to pay his respects.
There is a great series of short films I saw at Amiens that year --
my last trip to France -- about recycling, by an African
documentarian. I'm going to see if I can grab copies when I'm there
in November.
17360
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:21pm
Subject: Re: Satire
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
I haven't seen Team America: World Police yet, but I assume that
pitting the H'wd liberals against the fascist puppets is a satiric
move on the makers' part. Misunderstood, if that's the case, per the
reviews I've read. (Satirists are often perceived as "right wing"
or "conservative," because espousing the past is a good stance for
the "plague on all your houses" strategy satirists favor.) South
Park. The Simpsons. Harry Shearer -- whom I am going to go listen to
now.
17361
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:25pm
Subject: Re: Love Streams
From Lurking Marvin:
"Read some of the a_film_by stream on this and MGM/UA indeed does own
the
Cannon library which they acquired when the Italian gangster Paretti
bought them. The bulk of that library had been sub-licensed before the
Paretti takeover to Warners for television distribution for a period
that may now have expired. If Warners does retain those rights then
TCM, which is owned by Time/Warner, should have access to LOVE STREAMS
and a few letters to their programmers urging TCM to schedule it might
be to good effect. MGM also licenses UA films to TCM and other sources
-- especially STARZ! which might be interested in it for its STARZ!
CINEMA
"art film" channel. If MGM/UA retains the other ancillary rights to
CANNON goods (VIDEO/DVD) they may even have it now in a future
release schedule. And all this distribution rights muddle will soon
become moot when the Warner's acquisition of po' Olde MGM is
finalized.
(Unless of course, the original deal with CANNON as now also expired
and
not been renewed, which sends the whole thing back to square one.)
The problem, however, could be the negative material which CANNON did
not usually take great care of and it may be 'unprintable" in its
present state and require "restoration" utilizing the "prints" mostly
residing at TV broadcasters all over the ex-US globe."
Marvin at MGM was always unearthing goodies from the Cannon vaults --
like Le soulier de satin! -- hl666
17362
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:47pm
Subject: Re: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- hotlove666 wrote:
Margaret
> Rutherford in Chimes
> and Glenn Anders in Shanghai are fabulous
> grotesques, satiric
> portraits traced with a line as sure as Daumier's.
> Tashlin was a
> cartoonist, and even Sarris gets Tashlin -- a very
> sweet man -- wrong
> on the issue of contempt. Jerry Lewis is a satirist.
> Kubrick is a
> satirist. And so are the Coens.
>
>
>
>
Just not very good ones.
Another Hitchcoc analogy --"Family Plot."
Now here's a situation and a set of character one
could easily see in terms of the Coens.
Except for the fact that Hitchcock doesn't see Harris
and Dern asstupid or venal, and while the viewer knows
more than any of the characters at any given moment
this knowledge doesn't put him in position of power.
The coens are always plumping up the cushions for
their audiences tosit down and sneer at the rubes.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17363
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:49pm
Subject: Re: Satire
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> In my post on this topic I forgot David O. Russell.
> Satirist.
>
Yes. A satirist who doesn't have contempt for people.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17364
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:51pm
Subject: Re: Re: Satire
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>
> wrote:
> >
> I haven't seen Team America: World Police yet, but I
> assume that
> pitting the H'wd liberals against the fascist
> puppets is a satiric
> move on the makers' part. Misunderstood, if that's
> the case, per the
> reviews I've read. (Satirists are often perceived as
> "right wing"
> or "conservative," because espousing the past is a
> good stance for
> the "plague on all your houses" strategy satirists
> favor.)
Not on ALL houses. Neither George W. Bush nor anyone
else in his administration appears in "Team America."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
17365
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:20pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
"Another point Frye makes is that we are in an era where satire is
the dominant genre."
And this becomes truer every year. Filmmakers with no interest in
postmodern satire, such as Michael Cimino, Abel Ferrara and Zalman
King, are routinely exposed to ridicule, as if they must be
particularly stupid not to have realized that unironic emotional
engagement is no longer fashionable.
John Cassavetes is, of course, generally regarded with awe, but
that's mainly because he's dead, and thus can't be expected to know
any better (he was hardly regarded with awe when he was alive).
There really is something deeply wrong with a production system that,
in the last decade, has given us 7 films by Joel Coen and no films by
Monte Hellman. I tend to believe that the Coens are laughing at
everyone except those hipsters who are on their wavelength - which is
to say that they are superior to everyone except YOU, the unique and
clued-in viewer who can join them in feeling superior to both those
dumb schmucks on the screen and the dumb schmucks sitting all around
you in the cinema (who are probably all responding in exactly the
same way as you...but hey, this is a democracy).
17366
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:21pm
Subject: Re: Satire
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
"(Satirists are often perceived as "right wing" or "conservative,"
because espousing the past is a good stance for the "plague on all
your houses" strategy satirists favor.) South Park. The Simpsons."
Depends on the target of the satire. It seems more admireable to go
after the people in power (whether of the right or left) than to
ridicule official enemies or the powerless, i.e., the people who
can't hit back. The South Park boys go after soft targets like
Saddam Hussein (in SOUTH PARK) and Hollywood liberals, and in TEAM
AMERICA they pass up the oppetrunity to take down Colin Powell, who
as a "respectable" member of the Bush Administration is ripe for
satire. A real plague on all your houses approach would have had the
team made up of Bush & co. versus F.A.G.
Richard
17367
From: Dave Kehr
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:38pm
Subject: Love Streams
Mike Schlesinger, who's one of the people in charge of the
library holdings at Sony, tells me that the Cannon films have now come under
Sony's ownership, acquired by Sony when they bought the MGM library. He
isn't sure yet whether "Love Streams" automatically comes along with them,
or if it had a more complicated production deal that would return the rights
to someone else. But he's aware that it may be in his hands, and says he's
doing his best to run it down. He's a good guy - and probably belongs on
this list - so I'm sure we'll get some news about it soon.
Mike has also acquired rights to the Harold Lloyd films from
Lloyd's granddaughter, including a silent version of "Welcome Danger" that
Lloyd shelved when he decided to re-do it in sound. Those who've seen it
say it's a major film, far better than the talkie version. Film Forum will
probably be showing it in February, with a national tour and video release
thereafter.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17368
From:
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:48pm
Subject: Re: Ydessa, the bears and etc... , Agnès Varda
Want to thank a_film_by-ers who pointed out that Varda's sequel to "The
Gleaners and I", is available on the same DVD as the original. I did not even know
there was a sequel! The sequel is called "Two Years Later", and revisits many
of the people in the original, as well as some completely new sites. It too is
a rich helping of Varda.
Varda's sense of color and visual style is extraordinary.
Mike Grost
17369
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:09pm
Subject: Re: Love Streams
"the Cannon films have now come under Sony's ownership"
That's great news. It's a remarkable series of films. Aside from LOVE
STREAMS, there's Godard's KING LEAR, Ruiz's TREASURE ISLAND,
Makavejev's MANIFESTO, Mailer's TOUGH GUYS DON'T DANCE, Cammell's
WHITE OF THE EYE, Roeg's CASTAWAY, Altman's FOOL FOR LOVE, etc.
17370
From: Patrick Ciccone
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:04am
Subject: Jackson, academia (and auteurism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/weekinreview/24word.html?oref=login
This account of a Michael Jackson symposium at Yale is yet another
view of beyond-satire academia, at least in the humanities. For our
purposes, I thought the analysis of Mr. Jackson's "Bad" was
interesting, since we have no mention of the video's director (not in
auteur mode in this outing): Martin Scorsese.
Sexuality also interests Alisha Gaines, a Duke graduate student in
English, whose " 'I'm Not Like Other Guys': Black Masculinity and
Michael Jackson's 'Bad,' " analyzes the video of "Bad," in which Mr.
Jackson, as the ghetto youth Darryl, attends Duxston, a white prep
school, where he meets a pal from the 'hood, played by Wesley Snipes.
The neighborhood functions as a space of contested masculinities and
false phallic power. For example, while asking Darryl about Duxston,
Snipes' character is seen playing with a screwdriver. Either as a tool
or possible weapon, the screwdriver, completely irrelevant to anything
going on in the scene, functions obviously as a very small and thin
euphemistic phallus. Since Snipes is devoid of any subjectivity, and
subsequently any real agency, the screwdriver is seemingly the only
phallic power the character has to hold onto. This screwdriver not
only demonstrates the absence of Snipes' phallic authority, but, as it
is stroked throughout the conversation between Snipes and Darryl,
contributes to the overall homeoerotics of this notably male-only
neighborhood.
17371
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:16am
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
As you say, it's easy to make people feel like characters
> are other; and then, thanks to the miracle of identification (we've
been
> putting off dealing with Jean-Pierre's very cogent objections to the
loose
> usage of that word - maybe someday soon), it's also easy to make
people
> feel that characters are basically like them.
This may be neither here nor there, but I think the experience of a
work of an art often involves a kind of absorption into the work,
losing oneself into the work, that is, a kind of loss of the self:
perhaps in this state the boundaries of the self become blurry and
permeable, leading to increasing empathy with the fiction and the
characters?
Maybe not -- I don't know psychology -- but I did a quick search on
the web, and found one essay written by someone I worked with for a
short period; so I can endorse the author, though I don't quite
understand the text.
http://human-nature.com/mental/chap8.html
Paul
17372
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:35am
Subject: Napoleon Dynamite was pathetically funny for me
Napoleon Dynamite was pathetically funny for me... and I suspect in
some future years such an attitude will be akin to a racism or sexism.
>> There's a huge difference between laughing AT a
>> character and laughing WITH them.
>
> But isn't it possible for a filmmaker to be laughing AT a character
> without hating them or being condescending, and for an audience to do
> the same? In the Coen Brothers films (as well as the films of Todd
> Solodnz, to bring up another director often described as mean towards
> his characters, or towards humanity), I find myself laughing AT
> characters that I also relate to. Is it necesarily mean to point out
> that we're all idiots sometimes?
I think Dave's point is good. Making a character ridiculous is largely
a question of emotional distance, which, once established, can be played
with. - Dan
17373
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:39am
Subject: Re: Re: Satire
--- Richard Modiano wrote:
The South Park boys go after soft
> targets like
> Saddam Hussein (in SOUTH PARK) and Hollywood
> liberals, and in TEAM
> AMERICA they pass up the oppetrunity to take down
> Colin Powell, who
> as a "respectable" member of the Bush Administration
> is ripe for
> satire.
And was ripped to shreds by Tim Burton in the grossly
neglected "Mars Attacks!"
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
17374
From: Matthew Clayfield
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:50am
Subject: Re: Satire
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- Richard Modiano wrote:
>
> The South Park boys go after soft
> > targets like
> > Saddam Hussein (in SOUTH PARK) and Hollywood
> > liberals, and in TEAM
> > AMERICA they pass up the oppetrunity to take down
> > Colin Powell, who
> > as a "respectable" member of the Bush Administration
> > is ripe for
> > satire.
>
> And was ripped to shreds by Tim Burton in the grossly
> neglected "Mars Attacks!"
Dick Cheney, meanwhile, was taken to satirical task in, of all
things, Roland Emmerich's THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW, and, what's more,
to surprisingly good effect.
17375
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:16am
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Another Hitchcoc analogy --"Family Plot."
>
> Now here's a situation and a set of character one
> could easily see in terms of the Coens.
>
> Except for the fact that Hitchcock doesn't see Harris
> and Dern asstupid or venal, and while the viewer knows
> more than any of the characters at any given moment
> this knowledge doesn't put him in position of power.
Frye's definition of the mythos of satire: the characters are less
free than the audience. Comedy: as free as. Romance: more free than.
Tragedy: freer than, then less free, as a result of a bad choice.
17376
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:20am
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> "Another point Frye makes is that we are in an era where satire is
> the dominant genre."
>
> And this becomes truer every year. Filmmakers with no interest in
> postmodern satire, such as Michael Cimino, Abel Ferrara and Zalman
> King, are routinely exposed to ridicule, as if they must be
> particularly stupid not to have realized that unironic emotional
> engagement is no longer fashionable.
You echo my thoughts after posting on satire today: By only making
films about exceptional people (romance or tragic heroes), without a
milligram of mockery, Cimino is way out of fashion. I'm less sure re:
Ferrara, or Cassavetes -- Faces is a satire, really. So is Husbands,
althouygh that's my least favorite Cassavetes. Satyr plays.
17377
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:24am
Subject: Re: Satire
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> Depends on the target of the satire. It seems more admireable to
go
> after the people in power (whether of the right or left) than to
> ridicule official enemies or the powerless, i.e., the people who
> can't hit back. The South Park boys go after soft targets like
> Saddam Hussein (in SOUTH PARK) and Hollywood liberals, and in TEAM
> AMERICA they pass up the oppetrunity to take down Colin Powell, who
> as a "respectable" member of the Bush Administration is ripe for
> satire. A real plague on all your houses approach would have had
the
> team made up of Bush & co. versus F.A.G.
I haven't seen the film, but just for the sake of argument, they live
in H'wd, and in H'wd Alec Baldwin is less an acceptable object of
ridicule than Bush. Repeat: I haven't seen it.
Although I'm not wild about Mars Attacks!, it sure doesn't stint on
satire -- Colin Powell (Bernie Casey) gets it right between the
eyes. "Mom always said I'd get to this point some day," he muses as
he leads the caravan out to meet the Martians, "if I just did what I
was told and never opened my mouth." Five minutes later, he's a pile
of red radioactive bones.
17378
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:27am
Subject: Re: Jackson, academia (and auteurism)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ciccone" wrote:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/weekinreview/24word.html?
oref=login
>
> This account of a Michael Jackson symposium at Yale is yet another
> view of beyond-satire academia, at least in the humanities. For our
> purposes, I thought the analysis of Mr. Jackson's "Bad" was
> interesting, since we have no mention of the video's director (not
in
> auteur mode in this outing): Martin Scorsese.
>
>
> Sexuality also interests Alisha Gaines, a Duke graduate student in
> English, whose " 'I'm Not Like Other Guys': Black Masculinity and
> Michael Jackson's 'Bad,' " analyzes the video of "Bad,"
I assume she knows the line comes from the "Thriller" video?
17379
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:33am
Subject: Re: Satire
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Clayfield"
wrote:
>
> Dick Cheney, meanwhile, was taken to satirical task in, of all
> things, Roland Emmerich's THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW, and, what's more,
> to surprisingly good effect.
But he's redeemed. Bush, who is shown as taking orders from Cheney,
is redeemed by death, which he incurs more courageously than the real
Bush would. Cheney is chastened and lives on to lead the survivors
(in Mexico -- an odd echo of Mars Atacks! with its mariachi band
playing on the Capitol steps). As someone who prefers Cheney to Bush
(like the Kon-Tiki sailors, who root for the whale over the shark --
it's not human, but at least it's a mammal...), I don't necessarily
begrudge him a learning experience, even if half the country has to
die to deliver it.
17380
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:47am
Subject: Dreyer Interview by Carl Lerner
I believe someone asked where this came from a few weeks ago. (Hope
I'm remembering the interviewer right.) Lurking Marvin, who's moving
to Berkeley, gave me all his old film mags, and among them I found
Film Comment Vol. IV, No. 1, Fall 1966, where it appeared. This was
pre-Corliss Film Comment -- a radical film and politics publication
with a blurry still from Blood, Tears and Graves on the cover and a
little auteur stuff inside (eg two defenses of Gertrud). An amazing
find, Gordon Hitchens was the editori-in-chief. It was emphatically
not a Film Society of Lincoln Center organ at that time. Did they
take it over?
17381
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:10am
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
"By only making films about exceptional people (romance or tragic
heroes), without a milligram of mockery, Cimino is way out of
fashion. I'm less sure re: Ferrara, or Cassavetes -- Faces is a
satire, really. So is Husbands"
Cassavetes can often be extremely critical of his characters (as can
Cimino and Ferrara), but never from that position of lofty
superiority favored by Coen. And I really don't see how FACES or or
HUSBANDS can be described as satires.
I should add that I often enjoy Joel Coen's films. Like similar
directors such as Tom DiCillo, Wes Anderson and Paul Thomas Anderson,
he's clearly very 'talented' - he has a masterful grasp of the
cinematic apparatus, and achieves exactly the effects he wishes to
achieve. What disturbs me is that so few people seem willing to ask
whether or not those effects were worth achieving in the first place.
The films of these directors are obviously 'brilliant', but I
wouldn't describe any of them as intelligent. I find far more
intelligence at work in a superficially 'unambitious' commercial film
such as GOTHIKA: Matthieu Kassovitz doesn't have to keep reminding us
that the corridors of his film's central location are a symbolic
space (the nightmare of masculinity from which the female protagonist
must awaken), the way Coen keeps reminding us of this in BARTON FINK,
but his mise en scene seems to me far more effective and purposeful
than Coen's.
17382
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 0:01pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
Hey, I'm back.
David E, that line about how the Coens would have ended MIRACLE OF
MORGAN'S CREEK is amusing but it just isn't true. The rpeponderance
of happy/hopeful endings in the Coens' work either means they have a
cynical regard for their audiences' desire for happiness, or a
genuine affection for their characters. Either way, they don't just
throw them away. William Goldman was right when he said the audience
immediately senses they're on safe ground with Marge in FARGO -
nothing bad can happen to Marge.
Agree that the callous disposal of William H Macey's wife in that
film is problematical, but *I* didn't feel I was supposed to laugh
along with her killers. And I always assumed the leg in the
woodchipper was Buscemi's, who kinda deserves it. (If the object of
the corpse-shredding is to protect the killer's identity, then it's
his partner he needs to make unrecogniseable.)
> The coens are always plumping up the cushions for
> their audiences to sit down and sneer at the rubes.
I can see how you'd feel that, but I find I chuckle rather than
sneer. It's a bit like Laurel and Hardy with me. Ollie once suggested
that audiences liked their characters "because they feel superior to
us" which struck me as wrong. Stan and Ollie are totally idiotic but
endearing - I identify closely with their stupidity. The Coens don't
have quite as much warmth, I admit, but I had the warmest feelings
towards Marge, HI, Norville, Ulysses - idiots all.
17383
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 0:10pm
Subject: Pieges (was Stipe and Chereau)
> Do you know the Siodmak original, "Pieges" ?
Just saw it - love Siodmak and have been busy trying to find his
early and late Euro-work. I think LURED might be slightly better than
it's original, but they're so close (even the titles are the same)
one has to give the bulk of the credit to the original.
Chevalier as cad is a more interesting bit of casting than Sanders -
but with Sanders you don't need to cast him interestingly, he's just
a joy.
Lucille Ball is fabulous in LURED - but I fancy the gal in PIEGES.
17384
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 0:27pm
Subject: Re: The Letter
> "But one has to accept that this was standard practice at the time."
>
> As for yellow face being standard practice, there are some notable
> exceptions, for example, Anna May Wong, Victor Sen Young, Philip
Ahn
> and Keye Luke among others.
Sessue Hayakawa!
Indeed. But Anna May Wong left US screens because they didn't know
how to cast her. Since romance was a near-prerequisite for cinema at
the time, and there very few oriental leading men to choose from, her
films often revolve around a fear of miscegenation - tragedy has to
intervene before she can get her man. This was a problem for any
minority group at the time.
> I don't know of any modern white viewers or reviewers who voiced
> criticism of the casting of Joel Grey in yellow face playing a
> Chinese in REMO WILLIAMS released in 1985 or '86, but certainly
> modern viewers of color have a problem with that.
There were protests when Peter Ustinov played Charlie Chan in 1981.
Great stuff on Oland and Luke!
17385
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 0:38pm
Subject: Re: Race and Casting (was:The Letter)
The ability to cast against racial type is a privelege of theatre
that film, by and large, hasn't chosen to explore. In the past when
race was treated more loosely, it always ended up benefitting white
actors, who got to play roles that should have gone to Asian or
Indian or even black actors. Occasionally you would have an oddity
like the Mexican Chinaman in THE BLACK ROSE.
> No one has suggested that Wyler was being a racist, and therefore
no
> one is basing an appreciation of the film on such considerations;
> however, race is central to THE LETTER and the treatment of inter-
> racial sexuality in the movie is worth considering in order to
really
> appreciate its strengths and weaknesses.
I'm really not sure how central it is. It's certainly a factor but if
I thought the film had failed to do justice to this theme it wouldn't
make me feel the film was a failure overall.
Maybe worth noting that Wyler wanted Sodergaard to get away with
killing Davis at the end. "I wish when they showed it on TV they
would just cut off the last few seconds" he lamented.
17386
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 0:41pm
Subject: Chereau
Someone was asking about FLESH OF THE ORCHID? I've seen it.
Remarkable hallucinatory scene at the end, in a forties lap-dissolve
style. And the plot is the same as LA REINE MARGOT (beautiful woman
held captive by psychotic gangsters).
17387
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:08pm
Subject: Re: Re: Satire
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> I haven't seen the film, but just for the sake of
> argument, they live
> in H'wd, and in H'wd Alec Baldwin is less an
> acceptable object of
> ridicule than Bush.
That's not at all true, IMO. Moreover Baldwin rarely
misses an opportunity tosend himself upin his frequent
appeaances on Letterman and SNL. The South parkies
seem to think everyone in Hollywood is a pompous
know-it-all.
Everyone except themselves, of course-- and frankly
they've turned into the most pompous know-it-alls of
them all.
>
> Although I'm not wild about Mars Attacks!, it sure
> doesn't stint on
> satire -- Colin Powell (Bernie Casey) gets it right
> between the
> eyes. "Mom always said I'd get to this point some
> day," he muses as
> he leads the caravan out to meet the Martians, "if I
> just did what I
> was told and never opened my mouth." Five minutes
> later, he's a pile
> of red radioactive bones.
>
Not Bernie Casey, but the late, great and much-missed
Paul Winfield.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17388
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:14pm
Subject: Re: Dreyer Interview by Carl Lerner
--- hotlove666 wrote:
This was
> pre-Corliss Film Comment -- a radical film and
> politics publication
> with a blurry still from Blood, Tears and Graves on
> the cover and a
> little auteur stuff inside (eg two defenses of
> Gertrud). An amazing
> find, Gordon Hitchens was the editori-in-chief. It
> was emphatically
> not a Film Society of Lincoln Center organ at that
> time. Did they
> take it over?
>
Correct.
It was a very, very different (and to my lights
superior) publication back then.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17389
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:17pm
Subject: Re: Chereau
--- cairnsdavid1967 wrote:
>
> Someone was asking about FLESH OF THE ORCHID? I've
> seen it.
> Remarkable hallucinatory scene at the end, in a
> forties lap-dissolve
> style. And the plot is the same as LA REINE MARGOT
> (beautiful woman
> held captive by psychotic gangsters).
>
>
Yes, except the psychotic gangsters in the latter are
the Medici family.
Chereau says his big mistake in "Flesh of the Orchid"
was having so much of it shot in the rain. it was an
atmospheric touch that threw everything off in his
view.
But he was so funny about it being a "mistake" that I
sense he may have been pulling my leg. He's quite a
joker.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17390
From: Kristian Andersen
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:31pm
Subject: Jean Eustache films translated to English
Hello.
Does anyone know if any of Jean Eustache’s work has been translated with
English subtitles, besides La Maman et la Putain? And if so, is it available
on any medium where I don’t need a projector to see it? If not, I intend on
learning French.
Thanks.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.781 / Virus Database: 527 - Release Date: 21/10/2004
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17391
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:35pm
Subject: Re: Jean Eustache films translated to English
Gala distributed an English-subtitled print of MES PETITES AMOUREUSES
in the UK around July 1976 (Jonathan Rosenbaum reviewed it in MONTHLY
FILM BULLETIN 510).
17392
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:22pm
Subject: Fipresci site alert
Not sure if this has been mentioned here yet, but at present three prolific
A FILM BY members - Andy, Charles, and Gabe - are writing their youthful
hearts out daily from the Viennale on the FIPRESCI site (www.fipresci.org).
The description of the Straub-Huillet panel on Ford is particularly lively.
Other contributors to the 'Criticism' pages of the FIPRESCI site include
more A FILM BY-ers: Jonathan, Chris, myself.
Get reading, everyone!
Adrian
17393
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:05pm
Subject: Re: Distance/Nearness, Coen, Wilder (Was: Coen/McCarey)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
> Cassavetes can often be extremely critical of his characters (as
can
> Cimino and Ferrara), but never from that position of lofty
> superiority favored by Coen. And I rally don't see how FACES or or
> HUSBANDS can be described as satires.
Only in the technical sense -- satire as a historical genre doesn't
just mean poking fun at things you don't like in society.
> I should add that I often enjoy Joel Coen's films.
For the record, credits to the contrary notwithstanding, they have
always co-directed. I believe that with Ladykillers they have started
co-signing, too. Probably the influence of all those other brothers
they have spawned.
I find far more
> intelligence at work in a superficially 'unambitious' commercial
film
> such as GOTHIKA: Matthieu Kassovitz doesn't have to keep reminding
us
> that the corridors of his film's central location are a symbolic
> space (the nightmare of masculinity from which the female
protagonist
> must awaken), the way Coen keeps reminding us of this in BARTON
FINK,
> but his mise en scene seems to me far more effective and purposeful
> than Coen's.
Didn't see it, but I'll check it out. I like La Haine, was very
disappointed with Les rivieres pourpres.
17394
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:13pm
Subject: Re: Jean Eustache films translated to English
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> Gala distributed an English-subtitled print of MES PETITES
AMOUREUSES
> in the UK around July 1976 (Jonathan Rosenbaum reviewed it in
MONTHLY
> FILM BULLETIN 510).
It was shown here too. It never has gone to video. Neither have
Mauvaises frequentations and Pere Noel a les yeux bleus, which New
Yorker subtitled and released before Maman. Some of the
documentaries -- which I haven't seen -- reportedly don't need
subtitles, but they're even rarer than the rest. Too bad: He is one
of the best French directors of all time.
17395
From: Elina Shatkin
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:16pm
Subject: RE: Napoleon Dynamite was pathetically funny for me
I have mixed feelings about Todd Solondz. I loved "Welcome to the
Dollhouse" for its unflinching look at teenage sexuality and its
awkward female protagonist who finds no redemption à la the standard
teen movie or after-school special (i.e. a makeover that would give her
a new look, a new set of friends and ultimately, a boyfriend). But with
each successive film, Solondz has flaunted an increasing brittleness
and brutality, almost as if to say, "Didn't think I could go this far?
Ha! I'll go farther."
Where "Dollhouse" was unwavering in its treatment of the protagonist,
it didn't strike me as condescending because A) it felt very honest (at
least recalling my own experiences) and B) the Heather Matarazzo
character was a heroine (an anti-heroine perhaps, but one with whom the
audience was intended to identify nonetheless).
But a couple of films later, the dark humor of "Dollhouse" has
calcified into the bitterness and icy condescension of "Storytelling."
"Happiness" had an annoyingly smug tone but still contained some
fascinating moments. Of the group I saw it with when it was released
theatrically: 3 people hated it, 3 loved it, no one was in the middle.
Then there's "Storytelling"...sigh.
Actually, if you just watch Fiction, the first segment of
"Storytelling" -- Selma Blair plays a college student who sleeps with
her African-American writing professor and then writes a short story
about it -- you would have a tight, fascinating albeit problematic
short film. It's really Nonfiction, the second part of the film -- Paul
Giamatti (typecast as the sad-sack) plays a filmmaker shooting a
documentary about a spoiled, brain-dead teenager and his vacuous family
-- that I take issue with. Nonfiction is almost twice as long as
Fiction, which is unfortunate since I think Fiction explored its
particular set of issues in a much more intelligent way.
In Nonfiction, and "Storytelling" as a whole, Solondz panders to an
audience that wants to feel superior to the characters on screen. It's
especially odd considering the way Solondz both skewers and pays homage
to "American Movie." I thought AM was brilliant and somewhat
exploitative though in the end, it didn't bother me because I felt like
the audience was laughing with and struggling alongside the characters,
not laughing at them. In "Storytelling," the
documentary-within-the-movie that Giamatti's character is making is
titled "American Scooby" and the cameraman is played by Mike Schenk,
the real life sidekick of the protagonist in AM.
The rest of the characterizations are generally shallow and
unconvincing: the stoner teen who is so utterly devoid of emotion,
ambition or thought he seems barely sentient; the high-strung, neurotic
mother; the driven, domineering father; the jock brother. The audience
is clearly supposed to dislike and look down on the family. The only
spark of life comes in the form of the magnificent Lupe Ontiveros who
is wasted in a screamingly obvious role as the Conscience of the Film:
the family's long-suffering Central American maid.
At least her character has some depth, which is more than can be said
for anyone else in the film, but using the only working-class, Latina
character as the film's moral center is not in and of itself
progressive, as "Storytelling" proves. In this overly-privileged,
perfectly manicured, upper middle-class world, Ontiveros' character is
too scary and threatening for Solondz to deal with so he defuses her by
making her into a saintly caricature for much of the film.
Even the film's climax plays into this. Solondz is clever that way.
When Ontiveros commits the film's heinous climactic act -- killing the
family by carbon monoxide poisoning -- it's an act of power for her
personally but for the viewer, it allows a moment of moral approbation
that's quickly eclipsed by condescending pleasure. Finally, a payoff to
the family's utter vapidity. This is the only reason this family
exists: as props in Solondz's gutless, one-dimensional, worldview based
on cleverness and smug, self-loathing
But cleverness isn't depth. "Storytelling" panders to the prejudices of
a (theoretically) liberal art-house audience that can complacently pat
themselves on the back because they're so much deeper than the
characters on screen.
Solondz is one of the more egregious examples of the "Look at me,
aren't I clever?" school of filmmaking that passes for intellect but I
think it's symptomatic of larger cultural trends. It seems like so many
people of my generation and the succeeding ones are only capable of
appreciating pop culture (let alone art) when it's filtered through the
lens of irony. Hence the current 80s revival.
PS - IMDB says "Storytelling" originally contained a third story about
a young college student discovering his sexuality that was cut from the
film. I'm so curious.
PPS - I am curious about Solondz's upcoming film "Palindromes," which I
hear makes his previous films look like strolls in the park.
PPS - I think I should probably re-watch Solondz's first feature,
"Fear, Anxiety & Depression") which if I recall correctly, features
himself in the lead role as the bumbling playwright who can't get the
girl.
From: Elizabeth Nolan
>> Napoleon Dynamite was pathetically funny for me... and I suspect in
>> some future years such an attitude will be akin to a racism or
>> sexism.
>> There's a huge difference between laughing AT a
>> character and laughing WITH them.
>
> But isn't it possible for a filmmaker to be laughing AT a character
> without hating them or being condescending, and for an audience to do
> the same? In the Coen Brothers films (as well as the films of Todd
> Solodnz, to bring up another director often described as mean towards
> his characters, or towards humanity), I find myself laughing AT
> characters that I also relate to. Is it necesarily mean to point out
> that we're all idiots sometimes?
I think Dave's point is good. Making a character ridiculous is largely
a question of emotional distance, which, once established, can be
played
with. - Dan
17396
From: Elina Shatkin
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:22pm
Subject: Seeking 35mm Cassavetes Prints
A good friend of mine is trying to stage a Cassavetes retrospective at
the Tirana Film Festival (yup, Albania does have a film industry). He
is doggedly trying to find 35mm prints (either American or European) of
various Cassavetes prints. I am trying to help him but I know NOTHING
about prints and booking. Does anyone have any suggestions or contact
info for studios or collectors who might have JC prints? I know the
Cinematheque here in LA screened "Too Late Blues" a while back as part
of its "Not On Video" series.
PS - He's already barked up the Ray Carney tree without much success.
--Elina Shatkin
17397
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:27pm
Subject: Re: Dreyer Interview by Carl Lerner
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> > Correct.
>
> It was a very, very different (and to my lights
> superior) publication back then.
>
> From my limited number of early 70s back issues, I'm also
inclined to agree. That decade was a good one for FQ which puts its
current incarnation to shame. The rot also started with Richard
Jameson.
Tony Williams
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
17398
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:50pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jean Eustache films translated to English
> It was shown here too. It never has gone to video. Neither have
> Mauvaises frequentations and Pere Noel a les yeux bleus, which New
> Yorker subtitled and released before Maman. Some of the
> documentaries -- which I haven't seen -- reportedly don't need
> subtitles, but they're even rarer than the rest.
The program for the Eustache festival at the Walter Reade a few years back
stated confidently that LE COCHON didn't need subtitles, but I thought it
desperately, tragically needed them.
I think a bunch of Eustache films have subtitles, including UN SALE
HISTOIRE, PERE NOEL, LES MAUVAISE FREQUENTATIONS (though in that case
they're completely unreadable at times against white backgrounds), LES
PHOTOS D'ALIX. I'm nearly sure that both versions of the amazing doc LE
ROSIERE DE PESSAC are subtitled. I don't know about the BOSCH short.
I've heard that NUMERO ZERO isn't subtitled, and it seems that LE COCHON,
isn't, but those might be the only two.
As for how to see them, that's a more difficult matter...
> Too bad: He is one of the best French directors of all time.
Yep. - Dan
17399
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:51pm
Subject: Re: RE: Napoleon Dynamite was pathetically funny for me
--- Elina Shatkin wrote:
>
> PS - IMDB says "Storytelling" originally contained a
> third story about
> a young college student discovering his sexuality
> that was cut from the
> film. I'm so curious.
>
It starred James Vanderbeek of "Dawson's Creek" fame
and it dealt with him and another guy having sex.
I have no doubt neither of them enjoyed it.
> PPS - I think I should probably re-watch Solondz's
> first feature,
> "Fear, Anxiety & Depression") which if I recall
> correctly, features
> himself in the lead role as the bumbling playwright
> who can't get the
> girl.
>
Correct. It was his Woody Allen rip-off. I was writing
for "Daily Variety" at the time and gave it one of the
worst reviews that paper has ever run.
Yet Todd continues to work.
So much for the power of film criticism!
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
17400
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Mon Oct 25, 2004 10:01pm
Subject: Re: Jean Eustache films translated to English
_Une Sale Histoire_ is absolutely amazing. Even my crummy
sixth-generation dub of it is amazing. So it's been subtitled? I was
practically ready to make my own subtitles for it, just to be able to
show it to friends...
-Matt
Dan Sallitt wrote:
>The program for the Eustache festival at the Walter Reade a few years back
>stated confidently that LE COCHON didn't need subtitles, but I thought it
>desperately, tragically needed them.
>
>I think a bunch of Eustache films have subtitles, including UN SALE
>HISTOIRE, PERE NOEL, LES MAUVAISE FREQUENTATIONS (though in that case
>they're completely unreadable at times against white backgrounds), LES
>PHOTOS D'ALIX.
>As for how to see them, that's a more difficult matter...
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact