Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 6:14am
Subject: Election Wow!
Oh my god, the heavy voter turnout and youth vote was -so- *awesome*!!
Bill, what was Bloom's quote about Nuremberg again?
17602
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 7:13am
Subject: OT: "Trouble Ahead, Trouble Behind"
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> Oh my god, the heavy voter turnout and youth vote was -so-
*awesome*!!
>
> Bill, what was Bloom's quote about Nuremberg again?
I don't recall. I think the relevant quote would be the part of "12
Steps, 12 Traditions" that talks about "bottoming out." What happens
to this country now will be like watching a four-year train wreck in
slow motion, with Casey at the controls, "high on cocaine."
17603
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 7:27am
Subject: Movie Quote
"Where do you think you are, kid? This is Guatemala with color tv."
-- Burt Reynolds, Hustle (1975)
17604
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 1:40pm
Subject: Re: Revenge of the Sith
Kurtz is Brando's character. Duvall plays Kilgore.
But you're right, the film and script are very different. Milius
comes from an uncomplicated right-wing libertraian stance and Coppola
is at least a bit more conflicted, hence all that trouble finding an
ending.
In Milius, I recall Marlowe joining Kurtz in battle against the Viet
Cong at the end. Also, Kurtz gets a lot of awful and completely
unplayable dialogue. Kudos to Brando for improving on it.
While the script contains strong images and moments, it's an
indulgent mess more in line with RED DAWN that with Milius' better
directorial or writing efforts. His main argument, still present in
the film, but a little more balanced, is that the USA lost the war
through not being ruthless enough - which might be news to the
victims of napalm and agent orange.
17605
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 1:54pm
Subject: Re: Ford after WWII erratum
> > "As Jaime quickly pointed out to me, I'm talking about Darryl,
> you're
> > talking about Richard...who fired his own Dad when he (Richard)
was
> > head of 20th! Maybe Spielberg used his producer as a model for
the
> > Great White in Jaws."
Well, it was named after Spielberg's lawyer.
A friend worked on a JAWS making-of doc, and was told, by more than
one person involved in the production, that the mechanical shark
WORKED FINE. It looked like what it was, a mechanical shark, but it
did everything it was supposed to do. The reason for the expensive
delays was actually that several highly-placed crewmembers had
acquired girlfriends on location and were in no hurry to leave.
Spielberg wasn't one of them, as far as I know. Though it's reported
that Dreyfuss drove him into the nearest city and hired a hooker so
SS could lose his cherry.
D Zanuck tried to protect Dassin from the blacklist by sending him to
London to make NIGHT AND THE CITY. And asked for an eleventh-hour
rewrite to incorporate Gene Tierney, who was suffering during her
marital breakup and needed a distraction. So that all makes me like
him.
On the other hand, he had a bedroom in back of his office and extra
wide seats in his screening room so he could canoodle with young
female acting hopefuls, which makes me like him a little less.
On the other other hand, it was two of these girlfriends who
persuaded him that MASH, was, in fact, a good movie.
17606
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 2:40pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>>
> On the other hand, when we asked them about animal rights in 1975,
> Danielle cited Rosa Luxemborg as having said something like: "When
we
> have finished making the revolution, we will have to look at the
> relations between people and animals."
>
But they never "finish" the revolution (or then they finish it
off)and they never get to "look at" relations between people, let
alone between people and animals.
17607
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 3:17pm
Subject: Tanner on Tanner
I wonder if anyone has been following Altman's new series "Tanner on
Tanner" on the Sundance Channel. I was a great fan of the original
series, "Tanner '88" (on HBO) and had done a long interview with
Altman about it and wrote an even longer article. My cable company,
Comcast, drove me crazy for weeks by substituting other programs
for the series (this is Florida, where anything can happen) so that
I finally managed to catch and tape the first three episodes only
last week. Watched the first one last night, which seemed
appropriate for an election day (also re-ran F9/11 rather than
watching predictable election returns). The first episode is very
much in the spirit of the "Tanner '88" series and is autoreferential
as hell, as Tanner's daughter -- the wonderful Cynthia Nixon -- who
has made a documentary about her father's 1988 campaign, (and shows
it at an independent film fest. where her work is criticized by no
less than Robert Redford)is followed around by a young guy who films
her with a digital camera for a documentary about the making of the
documentary... Other people playing themselves include Mario Cuomo,
who lambasts the Bush administration, Harry Belafonte, and Martin
Scorsese, who is hilariously harassed by a woman who insists on
giving him a remedy for asthma as he has dinner at Elaine's.
I think Sundance has a Tanner marathon on Sunday re-running the
entire series.
JPC
17608
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 3:43pm
Subject: Re: Revenge of the Sith
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
> Kurtz is Brando's character. Duvall plays Kilgore.
Pardon my obvious blunder.
>
> But you're right, the film and script are very different.
But not in the way I said in that hasty post. I looked back at the
script afterward, and several scenes besides Kilgore/Kharnage made it
into the final film, including the plantation scene that was put back
in Redux: the Playmates, the bridge, the tiger.
Milius
> comes from an uncomplicated right-wing libertraian stance and
Coppola
> is at least a bit more conflicted, hence all that trouble finding
an
> ending.
That's one theory. See below.
>
> In Milius, I recall Marlowe joining Kurtz in battle against the
Viet
> Cong at the end. Also, Kurtz gets a lot of awful and completely
> unplayable dialogue. Kudos to Brando for improving on it.
I think Brando's star demands are one of the reasons the ending is so
bad; Coppola's decision to reimpose Conrad on a script that was
basically a satiric version of the Odyssey, with few Conrad
references, is another. Brando wanted to idealizw Kurtz, making him a
failed liberal with a brilliantly distinguished record, and Coppola
agreed because he needed Brando to get the film financed; Milius made
had portrayed him as a gray Nowhere Man who used to be in charge of
Petroleum Supplies and surprised even his superiors by joining the
Green Berets, because of his undistinguished record and small gifts
for command. The dialogue he speaks at the end, when it is clear that
he has gone nuts, is deliberately comic. When some of the
more "fortune cookie" lines turn up in the mouth of the Rasouli in
The Wind and the Lion, Candice Bergen makes fun of them by
responding "And a stitch in time saves nine."
At the end of the film Willard joins Kurtz in firing at the US
helicopters who are coming to take them home. Freeze frame.
>
> While the script contains strong images and moments, it's an
> indulgent mess more in line with RED DAWN that with Milius' better
> directorial or writing efforts. His main argument, still present in
> the film, but a little more balanced, is that the USA lost the war
> through not being ruthless enough - which might be news to the
> victims of napalm and agent orange.
That's what Brando says in the release version, but it's not Milius's
position. Any interviews I've seen by Milius say that we had no
business being in Vietnam in the first place. When I spoke to him,
hoewever, he was still saying we could have won it in the early
stages by invading the North -- something no US commander ever even
thought of doing, because of China, of course.
The first draft of the script was written in 1969, after the Tet
offensive, when the troops had become drug addicted draftees with no
morale and the tactics had become as brutal as they are in Iraq now.
It mocks the deterioration of troops after the first big LBJ buildup
in 65; the Thompson strategic hamlets program, which Milius says was
based on a false analogy with Malaya, where Thompson had invented it,
but which is portrayed as still going on in the Kilgore section (you
can now here a quote about victory being eminent from Thompson being
read out and mocked by Brando at the end of Redux); Westmoreland's
desperate and genocidal "One War" policy, involving massive aerial
bombardment and defoliation with Agent Orange to drive the peasants
out of the countryside; and the Phoenix Program (systematic
assassination and terror), of which Willard is a product -- all
escalations undertaken when it became clear that we couldn't win.
Milius's heart seems to belong to the earliest phase of US
involvement, the Green Berets working with small groups of
montagnards and other locals, the "A Teams," which could easily have
reminded him of Seven Samurai. He named his production company The A
Team. (The interservice rivalry between the regular Army and the
Berets is portrayed satirically in his first draft for Lucas and
accentuated in the first draft he wrote for Coppola after the fall of
Saigon, with the added suggestion that some military commanders had
come to fear some kind of highly improbable CIA-Green Beret coup
d'etat.) Kurtz was the commander of a monatgnard-Green Beret division
on the Cambodian border whose forces and whose sanity have
deteriorated drastically since 1965 -- they are currently functioning
as predators, killing and looting North Vietnamese regulars for drugs
and treasure.
So on the one hand he says we shouldn't have been there; on the other
hand he says we could have "won it like WWII" if the troops from the
1965 buildup had been used to invade the North. It's perhaps a subtle
nuance, but that isn't the same as "being ruthless enough" -- it's a
military strategy that was politically impossible, as I'm sure Milius
knows. The ruthlessness came later, after that road wasn't taken, and
as the film shows, no amount could have been "enough" to win, any
more than it will be today in Iraq, where it is already 1969.
17609
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 3:44pm
Subject: Re: Ford after WWII erratum
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
> On the other other hand, it was two of these girlfriends who
> persuaded him that MASH, was, in fact, a good movie.
Probably at the same time -- he was into trolism (sp?).
17610
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 3:52pm
Subject: Re: Tanner on Tanner
>(also re-ran F9/11
Wet firecracker of the decade.
-Sam
17611
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 4:06pm
Subject: Re: Revenge of the Sith
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
>> His main argument, still present in
> the film, but a little more balanced, is that the USA lost the war
> through not being ruthless enough - which might be news to the
> victims of napalm and agent orange.
No I think the message is to declare the territory to be Hell and then argue
that of course the rules of Hell, not those of civilization apply.
What I do find intriguing in AN is Coppola / Storaro sense of Imperial hubris,
Gods whose feet will be encased in clay, the imposition of Roman color
scheme on Asian landscape; Storaro's slightly theatricalised sense of color
as applied to, let's just call it, the Theater of War.
I prefer the original to the Redux for this reason, more schematically coherent.
-Sam Wells
17612
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 5:37pm
Subject: Re: Tanner on Tanner
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003"
>
> >(also re-ran F9/11
>
> Wet firecracker of the decade.
>
> -Sam
Can you elaborate? (or maybe you did before and I missed it)
17613
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 6:11pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Rector"
wrote:
>
> Huillet was probably repeating what J-Ro (in FILM: THE FRONT LINE)
> quoted them as quoting in 1983 at the living cinema :
> "THE FATE OF INSECTS IS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE REVOLUTION"
Did he say, "Not more," or "not less"?
But the statement is comparing unlike things. It makes more sense to
compare the fate of insects vs. the fate of humans. Then, to the
extent that either of these is subject to human action, a better
question might be, which economic and political forms will better take
care of them. Since most insect species are in the tropical rain
forests, and capitalism isn't taking very good care of the rain
forests, capitalists aren't necessarily the best friends of the
insects. However, Richard Lewontin has commented how E.O. Wilson, who
does love ants, when complaining about the fate of the rain forest,
would provide examples only from Cuba. So it's true that
environmentalists often don't like revolutionaries, and
revolutionaries often don't like environmentalists.
If you're interested in the case against environmentalism or
ecologism:
http://66.108.51.239/boucher.txt or
http://66.108.51.239/boucher.pdf
http://66.108.51.239/anything-new.txt
And a response:
http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/ecology/boucher.htm
I came across this a few days ago. It points out that people may need
to choose between elephants and insects.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/myers_knoll.html
>
> This above quote is even more radical as a confrontation to
> revolutionaries to consider every type of living thing in the
making
> of revolution. In the 2001 interview with Huillet and Straub from
> the Viennale catalog, Huillet points out that Eisenstein's faith in
> tractors (from General Line) has at least one flaw: the devastating
> effect of tractors on the environment. These relationships are hard
> to reconcile for some.
That's an interesting point. The tractors in The General Line are so
small compared to the tractors of today. I don't know how much they
damaged the soil then. A little searching on the web showed that soil
compaction was a big problem in later decades.
One response would be similar to Boucher's; another might be along
these lines:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism-thaxis/1997-August/003602.html
I'd have to investigate some of this further.
I've never been much of environmentalist, but I do like animals, so I
was more bothered by the processing of the pigs in "The General Line,"
showing the beginnings of factory farming, which of course can be
extremely cruel.
Straub even says:
>
> "We are in an emergency situation: it's the outcome of the system
> that invented gas chambers. The current emergency comes from French
> and British social democracies: the point is not to slaughter Jews
> anymore but hundreds of thousands of animals as a preventive
measure
> to maintain market values. Some Jewish people may resent what I'm
> saying but I see no difference between this slaughter and the
> Holocaust; it's the same spirit, the same industrial system. (...)
> After all there is no need to be a Hindu to figure out that a
living
> being is a living being, whether its a Jew or a sheep. In fact Jews
> know this very well since they're the ones who invented the Easter
> Lamb."
>
I think the question of animal rights is different from the question
of environmentalism. Whereas it is difficult to formulate individual
or human duties toward the environment -- and it sometimes seems to me
a kind of aesthetic preference: nature is preserved for the same
reasons people preserve works of art -- the idea that one doesn't want
to cause suffering in animals is straightforward. Of course, it's
complicated because most people don't agree, and because it's
impossible to avoid. Even if one is a vegan, "mankind survives by
bestial acts."
I think these articles make some good points with regard to
environmentalism, animal rights, and capitalism.
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/mt/mt12capenv.html
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/wim/cong/vegan.html
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/bookstore/books/enviro/tobias.html
Some of these articles may have been written by a friend of mine, from
many years ago. If they ever take state power, I'll ask for a cushy
civil service job. But I don't think they have any expectation of
taking state power. Unlike Straub they don't consider the workers in
the US, Canada, and Western Europe even potentially revolutionary (one
of several controversial views that has got them expelled from online
mailing lists over the years). But it's good that Straub/Huillet don't
view their artistic work as isolated from life, and from political
struggles, even if they have illusions.
Paul
17614
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 6:13pm
Subject: Re: Tanner on Tanner
> Can you elaborate? (or maybe you did before and I missed it)
Yes. Grandstanding and attiudinizing on the part of F/911
is not politics, it's infotainment,
it's the rhetoric of television, delivers not the message but the product:
there's not history out there but a conspiracy.
"The Academy" has voted, but not for the paranoia of our liking.
-Sam
17615
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 6:39pm
Subject: Re: Tanner on Tanner
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003"
>> Yes. Grandstanding and attiudinizing on the part of F/911
> is not politics, it's infotainment,
>
Agreed. If the Straubs had done F/911 it would have been
politics.
Anyway i was trying to start a discussion of Tanner on Tanner,
not of F911. It was discussed to death here when it came out.
17616
From: samfilms2003
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 6:53pm
Subject: Re: Tanner on Tanner
> Agreed. If the Straubs had done F/911 it would have been
> politics.
I can only imagine. Maybe they and Michael Moore should
join forces ;-)
> Anyway i was trying to start a discussion of Tanner on Tanner,
> not of F911. It was discussed to death here when it came out.
My apologies. I'm not in the best of moods.....
-Sam
17617
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 8:55pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
> Straub even says:
> >
> > the point is not to slaughter Jews
> > anymore but hundreds of thousands of animals as a preventive
> measure
> > to maintain market values. Some Jewish people may resent what I'm
> > saying but I see no difference between this slaughter and the
> > Holocaust
I appreciate Herr S.'s point but did he really say "Some Jewish people..."? I would think that some non-Jewish people might resent it as well.
17618
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 9:16pm
Subject: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
Interesting, there's a (free) series of the Mexican Bunuels (Instituto Cervantes), which has already begun (and continues tonight): http://cultura.cervantes.org/newsletter/novFilms/films.htm
(Are these on celluloid? The Voice listing seems to have missed the first screening -- is there a good place to read about these things in advance? Not that that would necessarily give me free time to go, just that I'd know about one *more* thing I was missing..)
Also, just discovered the Fernandez series coming up at the Thalia: http://www.symphonyspace.org/genres/seriesPage.php?seriesId=53&genreId=2
17619
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 10:42pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
wrote:
>
> Interesting, there's a (free) series of the Mexican Bunuels
(Instituto Cervantes), which has already begun (and continues
tonight): http://cultura.cervantes.org/newsletter/novFilms/films.htm
> (Are these on celluloid? The Voice listing seems to have missed
the first screening -- is there a good place to read about these
things in advance? Not that that would necessarily give me free time
to go, just that I'd know about one *more* thing I was missing..)
Doesn't sound like video -- El rio y la muerte doesn't exist in a
subtitled video. I wonder where they got a subtitled anything! In any
case, here are my tips:
Monday, November 1st
8:00 pm Los Olvidados (The Forgotten Ones) (1950), 80 min.
It is magnificent, as everyone says. Here's a comment Bunuel made in
a postcard to an old friend and collaborator in the US: "The
irrational circulates in the film in the form of a chicken."
Gran cavalera is fun -- it saved Bunuel's ass, too. But it's not
exactly indispensable viewing.
Wednesday, November 3th
6:00 pm Susana (The Devil and the Flesh) (1950), 87 min.
8:00 pm Una Mujer sin Amor (A Woman Without Love) (1951), 91 min.
Both minor, but well worth it if unseen previously. Susana is funny
and sexy, and Mujer is Bunuel's best Borzage-y melodrama. (He admired
Borzage greatly.) Watch the furniture at all times, including its
reflections in the mirror! I think he had great sets for the first
time in Mexico and no freedom to film the rather lefty de Maupassant
story as he set out to, so he decided: "I'll just direct the
furniture.." But he directed it well.
Friday, November 5th
6:00 pm Subida al Cielo (Mexican Bus Ride) (1951), 80 min.
8:00 pm Robinson Crusoe (Robinson Crusoe) (1952), 90 min.
He ran out of money on Subida so he couldn't film an ending, but it's
wonderful -- it won Best Avant-Garde Film at Cannes, in part no doubt
because of Pittaluga's very French score. (Pittaluga also scored Los
olvidados -- then they had a falling out.) On Crusoe he was held down
a bit by the producers, but it's still a great film.
Monday, November 8th
6:00 pm El Bruto (The Brute) (1952), 81 min.
8:00 pm Él (This Strange Passion) (1952), 88 min.
El Bruto was kept from being a strong follow-up to Los olvidados,
which is what LB intended, by the same producers who kept Una mujer
from being Bunuel's first great literary adaptation, but it's flashy
and fun. El is sublime, the pivot on which Bunuel moved into his next
period as a filmmaker, and his most personal film. Gigantic. Cocteau,
for some reason, called it "Luis Bunuel's death certificate..."
Wednesday, November 10th
6:00 pm Abismos de Pasión (Wuthering Heights) (1953), 90 min.
8:00 pm La Ilusión Viaja en Tranvía (Illusion Travels by
Streetcar) (1953), 90 min.
Abismos is a very interesting attempt to make a story -- Wuthering
Heights, starting with Heathcliff's return -- that he had wanted to
do for years. Like a lot of cherished propjects, it didn't completely
gell, but it's well worth seeing. Bunuel later claimed that the
producer overdid the Wagner on the soundtrack, but it's actually
quite appropriate. The Biblical passage the old man reads from is
Ecclesiastes -- inserted by LB because it reminded him of the Marquis
de Sade. Beats the Wyler all hollow.
Illusion Travels by Streetcar is a sublime, vastly enteratining and
ravishingly beautiful film. Note that no story -- of the many it
tells -- has an ending, starting with the saynete they are all acting
in when the two guys run off and steal the streetcar: We see the
Fall, but not the Passion of Christ, and that affects the structure
of the rest of the film. Pure plaesure, sheer genius.
Friday, November 12th
6:00 pm El Río y la Muerte (The River and Death) (1954), 87 min.
8:00 pm Ensayo de un Crimen (The Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la
Cruz) (1955), 91 min.
El rio y la muerte is very underrated, and any chance to see it with
subtitles is not to be missed. It's a complex feud saga that is
played straight, although Keaton lurks somewhere in the wings. The
iron lung is from the book; Bunuel's invention is the scene where the
feud is triggered by a refranero -- a bawdy rhyme with grammatical
variations not unlike the lingusitic structures Freud cited as
governing unconscious behavior in "A child is being beaten..." The
skulls at the beginning of the first flashback refer, for the nth
time in LB, to Las hurdes.
Ensayo de un crimen is many people's favorite Bunuel -- I waver
between it, El, Las hurdes and Exterminating Angel. And Tristana and
Obscure Object of Desire. And... Like Illusion Travels by Streetcar,
Ensayo (aka The Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la Cruz) is a sheer
delight from beginning to end: one of the most radiantly, gracefully
perverse films ever made. Fans of Queer Theory should note that in
the interesting original novel Archie's "victims" are actually
victims of a bisexual serial killer, a sort of doppelganger of the
hero, who wills deaths that happen as if by magic. Structuring
absence? You'll be smiling too hard to think about it.
I've seen very little Fernandez, and not the best ones, I'm told. I
wish someone would show El or Ensayo with La otra, a Mexican noir
made the year Bunuel arrived, with del Rio in a double role. You can
see that the potential for what LB did with the culture and the
cinematographic institutions was already in place, but what he did
with them was transcendent.
17620
From: hotlove666
Date: Wed Nov 3, 2004 10:48pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
I see I missed some important ones. La mort en ce jardin and La
Fievre Monte a El Pao are minor, fun, and not indispensable. The rest
I omitted are indispensable.
17621
From: thebradstevens
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 0:18am
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
"I looked back at the script afterward, and several scenes besides
Kilgore/Kharnage made it into the final film, including the
plantation scene that was put back in Redux: the Playmates, the
bridge, the tiger."
In case anyone's interested, the screenplay (apparently a 1975 draft)
can be found here:
http://www.awesomefilm.com/script/apocalypsenow_draft.txt
17622
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 4:08am
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
>
> "I looked back at the script afterward, and several scenes besides
> Kilgore/Kharnage made it into the final film, including the
> plantation scene that was put back in Redux: the Playmates, the
> bridge, the tiger."
>
> In case anyone's interested, the screenplay (apparently a 1975
draft)
> can be found here:
>
> http://www.awesomefilm.com/script/apocalypsenow_draft.txt
Clarification: Milius wrote his first draft in 1969, to be directed
by Lucas w. Coppola producing. Coppola ended up owning it and decided
to make it himself after the war was over. Milius wrote a new draft
for him and started another, then went off to make Wind and the Lion.
The draft at the above link was written by Coppola at a time when
Brando was committed and Coppola was doing everything he could to get
Steve McQueen to play Willard, to satisfy foreign investors. That's
why you have descriptions like this, during the final firefight:
252 MED. VIEW ON THE GATE
Willard strides out of the darkness, into the positions
around the gate. He looks like a magnificent warrior --
Genghis. All the men: Montagnards, fierce Americans,
even the savage men of the P.B.R. crew either bow,
salute or kneel before Willard. The color pulsates
around the edge of the image, red and green, mauve and
purple.
Willard then proceeds to slaughter the enemy pretty much single-
handed through a combination of brains, killer instinct, manliness
and total cool. There was never any description of Willard like this
in any draft by Milius. Coppola also has him outsmart the people at
the plantation and even outsmart Kilgore -- giving him Kilgore's best
line to boot: "Charlie don't surf." Willard is much less cool in
Milius's drafts, where he's a passive observer away from his turf.
(He's a paratrooper, not a sailor. He throws up his first day on the
river in Draft 1.) In fact, urged by Coppola to give Willard SOME
action to perform, Milius had included (in his 3d draft, I believe) a
scene where Willard goes flying w. Kilgore and accepts his invitation
to shoot unarmed peasants from the helicopter for sport, nailing two
of them with a hunting rifle. McQueen wanted to work with the
director of Godfather, but he wanted to project a somewhat different
image than Milius had written, to say the least, and Coppola -- in
THIS draft -- was trying to give it to him. Happily, McQueen demanded
three million, then backed out, leaving Coppola muttering
about "stars" to the press. But he held on to Brando, and Brando
wrecked the film's ending with HIS star-struck ideas about how he
would play Kurtz.
Milius has always a different idea of heroism than Hollywood. It has
not served him well in his own battles. It would be very unfair to
attribute anything new in this draft to John Milius.
17623
From: Adam Hart
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 10:36am
Subject: Re: Chion's Babies
> Michel is a genius when he writes about sound, and very cranky and
> uneven when he writes about Lynch, Tati (disappointing book!) and
> Kubrick.
I think Chion's Tati book is one of the best things written on the
man. It's a transparent attempt to reproduce the (narratively)
undirected structure of Tati's films, and has several unfortunate
portions that must have amused Chion. But Tati's a difficult
filmmaker to write about (relatively few have tried), and Chion's
book is full of wonderful insight. I think that the book is meant to
be a starting point for understanding Tati, and it generally stays
away from comprehensiveness in favor of citing general trends and
themes. It's entertaining too, a quick read.
17624
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 11:19am
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
Coppola was evidently quite confused about what he wanted to say. He
obviously reverted to the idea of Marlowe as passive observer, since
he fired Keitel for being too strong. Sheen in the film does nothing
particularly conclusive, heroic or sympathetic until the ending, and
even then it's uncertain.
The film manages to leave its options quite open by having Brando
espouse a lot of philosophy consistent with Sheen's VO, but then
Sheen kills Brando - so the film can be embraced by liberals OR right-
wingers, as long as nobody looks too close.
> Milius has always a different idea of heroism than Hollywood. It
has
> not served him well in his own battles. It would be very unfair to
> attribute anything new in this draft to John Milius.
Fair enough.
Milius' enthusiasm for the Third Reich has always made me
uncomfortable. His boast that CONAN THE BARBARIAN would have been a
big hit in Hilter's Germany is no doubt deliberately provocative, but
also probably accurate and rather disturbing.
It's fascinating to me the enthusiasm liberal critics have for Walter
Hill, John Milius, some John Ford, etc...
17625
From:
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 7:39am
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
Always thought Walter Hill was a liberal. Especially after his Vietnam
allegory, "Southern Comfort". What have I missed? My other favorite Hill is "Streets
of Fire".
Mike Grost
PS The great state of Michigan voted for JOHN KERRY! We are still a Blue
State here (from the proud Detroit, Michigan member of a_film_by).
17626
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 1:28pm
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
> Always thought Walter Hill was a liberal. Especially after his
Vietnam
> allegory, "Southern Comfort". What have I missed?
Interviews, where he describes himself as a right-wing anarchist.
The trouble with Viet Nam allegories as a litmus test for an artist's
political persuasion is that both left and right tend to agree that
it was not a particularly successful operation from the US viewpoint.
But I'm sure that Hill has numerous liberal attidtudes mixed in with
his rightist libertarian stance - like Eastwood and Scwartzenegger.
17627
From: thebradstevens
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 1:39pm
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
I always thought that Hill - along with Milius, William Friedkin and
John Carpenter - took an essentially satiric view of right-wing
masculinity. Interestingly, Milius absolutely hated what Hill did
with his GERONIMO screenplay.
17628
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 2:59pm
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
> I always thought that Hill - along with Milius, William Friedkin
and
> John Carpenter - took an essentially satiric view of right-wing
> masculinity. Interestingly, Milius absolutely hated what Hill did
> with his GERONIMO screenplay.
It's not always clear when Friedkin is being satirical. When
discussing RULES OF ENGAGEMENT he would supposedly whip out articles
from Britain's The Sun newspaper to prove how accurate the film was.
Now, The Sun, for those of you unfamiliar with it, is a quasi-fascist
rag subsisitng on homophobia, xenophobia and pictures of naked
ladies. If he's being satirical it's quite a good joke, but isn't it
on him?
Carpenter is maybe the most liberal of the crowd, another of those
fascinating mixes of left and right ideology that Hollywood seems to
throw up. And there's always humour in what he does. But I'd still
characterise him more as a man of the right.
17629
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 4:42pm
Subject: Totally OT - Re: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003"
> The tallest building in Ho Chi Minh City is the Prudential
building,...
> I would see the Prudential sign glow out night out my window.
>
> But then again pics of Nokia cell phones outnumber pics of
> Uncle Ho about 500:1
>
> US and Vietnam have a complex relationship, I could go on, but...
>
> -Sam
I'm curious what movie viewing is like there. Are theaters still
important, or do people mostly watch video or VCD's?
I'm also curious what films were shown in the past. I've read (for
example in interviews with Chahine) that the French "tradition of
quality" films were widely distributed, from Cairo to Peking -- in
other words, precisely the films Truffaut didn't like.
Paul
17630
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 5:04pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> > On the other hand, when we asked them about animal rights in
1975,
> > Danielle cited Rosa Luxemborg as having said something like:
"When
> we
> > have finished making the revolution, we will have to look at the
> > relations between people and animals."
> >
> But they never "finish" the revolution (or then they finish it
> off)and they never get to "look at" relations between people, let
> alone between people and animals.
I'm certainly willing to consider the case against Straub and Huillet.
Also, as I mentioned before, I wonder how the audiences at recent New
York retrospective approached them. Did they think of them as
avant-garde filmmakers? By which I mean, did they approach their films
the same way they would a Michael Snow film, or one of the other
Essential Cinema films that gets shown at the Anthology, as
experiments in the nature of the medium? Or did they think of them as
nostalgia pieces, from the days when people had crazy political ideas?
Or did they think of them as acts of reverence towards generally
obscure works of high culture?
Based on watching people afterwards, I think some people definitely
liked the Bach film.
Paul
17631
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 5:44pm
Subject: Re: Chion's Babies
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Hart"
>
>
> > Michel is a genius when he writes about sound, and very cranky
and
> > uneven when he writes about Lynch, Tati (disappointing book!) and
> > Kubrick.
>
>
> I think Chion's Tati book is one of the best things written on the
> man.
Here maybe, but not in France.
It's a transparent attempt to reproduce the (narratively)
> undirected structure of Tati's films, and has several unfortunate
> portions that must have amused Chion. But Tati's a difficult
> filmmaker to write about (relatively few have tried), and Chion's
> book is full of wonderful insight. I think that the book is meant
to be a starting point for understanding Tati, and it generally stays
> away from comprehensiveness in favor of citing general trends and
> themes. It's entertaining too, a quick read.
I'll say. I was very disappointed in it, and I'm a big Chion fan, or
was at the time. Now I approach each new CRITICAL work with lowered
expectations. I haven't read "Le cinema, un art sonore," his latest
theoretical magnum opus yet, but all three voilumes on sound before
this were masterpieces, not just good introductions to the subject.
I'll certainly revisit the Tati book one of these days when I have a
reason to -- maybe expecting less, I'll like it better.
17632
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 5:52pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
> Coppola was evidently quite confused about what he wanted to say.
He
> obviously reverted to the idea of Marlowe as passive observer,
since
> he fired Keitel for being too strong. Sheen in the film does
nothing
> particularly conclusive, heroic or sympathetic until the ending,
and
> even then it's uncertain.
That's right. Total passivity. BSheen told me they improvised a lot
of stuff, including a whole scene where he fights his way into the
compound to kill Kurtz, taking out guards etc. Milius todl me he
imitated the look of that (cut) sequence in a (cut) sequence at the
end of Conan, now on the DVD as an extra. I assume the Coppola took
it out because hewanted Kurtz to accept death as some kind of
mystical necessity.
>
> The film manages to leave its options quite open by having Brando
> espouse a lot of philosophy consistent with Sheen's VO, but then
> Sheen kills Brando - so the film can be embraced by liberals OR
right-
> wingers, as long as nobody looks too close.
The vo of course was written much alter, and it does espouse Kurtz's
pov, which is the pov Brando wanted: that Kurtz, even in his madness,
is more honest than the lying bureaucrats. That point is hammered
again and again in Herr's vo -- not one of its strong points.
>
> > Milius has always a different idea of heroism than Hollywood. It
> has
> > not served him well in his own battles. It would be very unfair
to
> > attribute anything new in this draft to John Milius.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> Milius' enthusiasm for the Third Reich has always made me
> uncomfortable. His boast that CONAN THE BARBARIAN would have been a
> big hit in Hilter's Germany is no doubt deliberately provocative,
but
> also probably accurate and rather disturbing.
Milius todl me in 2002 that half of him loves the Empire and half of
him is against it. His sequel to Conan, which he was writing when we
spoke, would be the other side of the coin.
>
> It's fascinating to me the enthusiasm liberal critics have for
Walter
> Hill, John Milius, some John Ford, etc...
Please don't include me among the liberals after seeing Kerry take a
dive yesterday! And I don't consider Tag Gallagher to be one,
although I can't speak for him on that, but his brilliant piece on
Milius -- posted I believe at sensesofcinema -- argues that he's an
antiwar filmmaker.
17633
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 6:42pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
I noticed Willard's line about using an elephant gun to kill a bee
when it would be better to use a flyswatter. (He's thinking like
Rumsfeld! Small, light, agile Special Forces supported by air power.)
But anyway that reminds me of a Monty Python sketch -- the mosquito
hunter: "Well, I've been a hunter all my life. I love animals. That's
why I like to kill 'em. I wouldn't kill an animal I didn't like."
"A lot of people have asked us why we don't use fly spray. Well,
where's the sport in that?"
http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/mosquito.htm
17634
From: thebradstevens
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 7:31pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
"told me they improvised a lot of stuff, including a whole scene
where he fights his way into the compound to kill Kurtz, taking out
guards etc. Milius told me he imitated the look of that (cut)
sequence in a (cut) sequence at the end of Conan, now on the DVD as
an extra."
But this scene is in APOCALYPSE NOW, even in the non-redux version
(though admittedly there is a lot more of it in the workprint, which
also uses a different Jim Morrison track at the end). And it DOES
look very much like the scene in CONAN, which is actually included as
part of the film (as opposed to among the extras) in some - though
not all - of CONAN's UK video/DVD releases).
17635
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 8:53pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
>
> I noticed Willard's line about using an elephant gun to kill a bee
> when it would be better to use a flyswatter. (He's thinking like
> Rumsfeld! Small, light, agile Special Forces supported by air
power.)
I'm afraid that's Milius's line.
Rusmfeld's theory hasn't panned out too well, has it? I imagine
they'll be starting up a draft again soon, as they did for Vietnam.
They've already started the heavy bombing of civilians. If Tristan is
still checking in here: Become a Quaker, Tristan, before you're of
age! This is probably going to drag on for some time.
17636
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 8:55pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
>
> "told me they improvised a lot of stuff, including a whole scene
> where he fights his way into the compound to kill Kurtz, taking out
> guards etc. Milius told me he imitated the look of that (cut)
> sequence in a (cut) sequence at the end of Conan, now on the DVD as
> an extra."
>
> But this scene is in APOCALYPSE NOW, even in the non-redux version
> (though admittedly there is a lot more of it in the workprint,
which
> also uses a different Jim Morrison track at the end). And it DOES
> look very much like the scene in CONAN, which is actually included
as
> part of the film (as opposed to among the extras) in some - though
> not all - of CONAN's UK video/DVD releases).
Really? I have to look at Redux again. I hadn't seen it when I
interviewed JM, so I'm probably remembering our garbled conversation
rather than what I later saw.
17637
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 9:03pm
Subject: Cut Scenes: Twisted
I just watched the 10 cut scenes. As I suspected, it was heavily
trimmed over Kaufman's objections -- nothing that would have made it
a great film, but all things that would have made it better -- more
of Judd and Garcia's relationship, a more suspenseful pursuit on the
dock at the end, and an important scene where Garcia gives Judd a
seal's eye tour of San Francisco in his boat, cut way down in the
release version.
But Phil actually comes out and says -- without naming names --that
Koppelson made him cut those scenes against his will -- on a DVD
distributed by Paramount. I was surprised!
Another piece of DVD censorship I spotted while listening to
Soderbergh's commentary on Ocean's 11 (all in the interests
of "cinema and the city" articles for CdC): When the casino is
demolished, the commentary track goes dead for a few minutes, then
comes back. But if you listen to Matt Damon's separate commentary, he
throws off a comment in an undertone that they had to substitute the
casino we see going down for the NY NY casino going down after 9/11.
That must have been more extensively discussed on the filmmaker's
track before someone removed it.
17638
From:
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 4:39pm
Subject: Re: Cut Scenes: Twisted
Bill,
I'm a tad confused: are these deleted scenes available on the DVD? If so, it
sounds like a must-buy.
As you know, I mildly enjoyed the theatrical release, but I felt it could
have been a semi-comeback for Kaufman if he had had a freer artistic reign.
Peter
17639
From: thebradstevens
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 9:52pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
"I imagine they'll be starting up a draft again soon, as they did for
Vietnam. They've already started the heavy bombing of civilians. If
Tristan is still checking in here: Become a Quaker, Tristan, before
you're of age! This is probably going to drag on for some time."
And once Bush bans abortion, there's going to be lots of extra babies
who'll grow up to become cannon fodder.
17640
From: hotlove666
Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 10:50pm
Subject: Re: Cut Scenes: Twisted
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I'm a tad confused: are these deleted scenes available on the DVD?
If so, it
> sounds like a must-buy.
>
> As you know, I mildly enjoyed the theatrical release, but I felt it
could
> have been a semi-comeback for Kaufman if he had had a freer
artistic reign.
>
> Peter
they're on the DVD.
17641
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 1:12am
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
I ordered a copy online of the screenplay for "Streets of Fire" and
received it today. Mike, I thought you'd like to know that it was
originally conceived as a trilogy, with the following two parts: "The
Far City" and "Cody's Return". The titles appear on the last page of
this 6/14/83 draft. I've heard that Hill has written at least one of
them, I'm sure it'd be a fascinating read.
-Aaron
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Always thought Walter Hill was a liberal. Especially after his
Vietnam
> allegory, "Southern Comfort". What have I missed? My other favorite
Hill is "Streets
> of Fire".
>
> Mike Grost
>Detroit, Michigan member of a_film_by).
17642
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 1:32am
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
There's a pretty good list of screenplays available online at:
http://www.script-o-rama.com/
17643
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:19am
Subject: Re: Walter Hill (was APOCALYPSE NOW)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
"Always thought Walter Hill was a liberal. Especially after his
Vietnam allegory, 'Southern Comfort'. What have I missed? My other
favorite Hill is 'Streets of Fire'."
THE WARRIORS was Hill's pardagmatic film. He re-cycled the premise
for other pictures beside SOUTHERN COMFORT. Here's a link to an
interview with Sol Yurick who wrote the novel on which the film was
based:
http://www.theindependentreviewssite.org/v3_i4/v3_i4_index.html
Richard
17644
From:
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 5:21am
Subject: Fuse (Pjer Zalica): a satire from Bosnia
Cable TV here recently showed Gori vatra / Fuse (Pjer Zalica, 2003), a
rollicking satirical comedy from Bosnia. I enjoyed it quite a bit - until its dark
and gloomy ending (a real turn-off).
Did anyone else see this?
It was apparently shown recently in New York City as part of a New Film
Directors festival.
Mike Grost
17645
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:46pm
Subject: Tanner, anyone?
Even though there doesn't seem to be any interest in the subject
among this Group, I want to be on record as saying that
Altman's "Tanner on Tanner" series (I have watched the first 4
episodes)is terrific, quite worthy of the original "Tanner '88" and
very very contemporary and relevant. Is it being ignored just
because it's "just television"? It could be the best stuff Altman
has done since "The Player." But I'm not going to rave if no one is
interested.
What is discussed on "a film by" is ultimately decided by a half-
dozen regular contributors -- if they don't care about a given
subject, then the subject will be burried. And I can't expect Bill
K.-- the most prolific of all -- to write about "Tanner" since he
doesn't have a TV (or doesn't watch it, I don't remember) -- an
attitude I have to respect but which I don't quite understand.
17646
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:52pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
"Even though there doesn't seem to be any interest in the subject
among this Group, I want to be on record as saying that
Altman's "Tanner on Tanner" series (I have watched the first 4
episodes)is terrific"
It's showing on BBC4 (UK) tonight, in a 105-minute time slot. I guess
this must be the first 4 episodes edited together. Are there more
than 4? Anyway, I'm really looking forward to it. I watched
TANNER '88 again last week, and was once more blown away. It's really
first rate satire: Altman's point isn't that the people involved in
politics are fools (virtually the first thing we learn about Tanner
is that he has a PHD), but that they are all victims of a system that
makes them look like fools. It raises fascinating questions about the
nature of identity - about how identity is no longer absolute, but
rather something that is mediated by various systems of communication.
And I just ordered the DVD of GUN, which includes the Altman directed
ALL THE PRESIDENT'S WOMEN episode (as well as the James Foley pilot).
Anyone seen that?
"And I can't expect Bill K.-- the most prolific of all -- to write
about "Tanner" since he doesn't have a TV (or doesn't watch it, I
don't remember)"
If Bill doesn't have a TV, I wonder how he managed to watch the tape
of a Bunuel film I sent him recently. Maybe he just doesn't have an
aerial (or a cable connection).
17647
From: Michael Lieberman
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:00pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
I enjoyed "Tanner on Tanner" as well. I don't really see the difference between American movies and TV much, and notice how many great movies from Europe were produced for television in the past 5-10 years
(need we begin with "Dekalog" and end with "Beau Travail"?)
The importance of Altman's return to TV really shows now, I guess: The Old Democratic Party's final days. Altman's idea of planting several documentators throughout the show (the film student, the old campaign
videographer editing porn at night, and Alex Tanner wanting to make a film about her father, not unlike Alex Kerry who's doing the same.
For those who don't think of good television as just "television", might I suggest Soderbergh's "K Street" once again, perhaps his best work to date?
ML
----- Original Message -----
From: "jpcoursodon"
To: a_film_by@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [a_film_by] Tanner, anyone?
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:46:11 -0000
Even though there doesn't seem to be any interest in the subject
among this Group, I want to be on record as saying that
Altman's "Tanner on Tanner" series (I have watched the first 4
episodes)is terrific, quite worthy of the original "Tanner '88" and
very very contemporary and relevant. Is it being ignored just
because it's "just television"? It could be the best stuff Altman
has done since "The Player." But I'm not going to rave if no one is
interested.
What is discussed on "a film by" is ultimately decided by a half-
dozen regular contributors -- if they don't care about a given
subject, then the subject will be burried. And I can't expect Bill
K.-- the most prolific of all -- to write about "Tanner" since he
doesn't have a TV (or doesn't watch it, I don't remember) -- an
attitude I have to respect but which I don't quite understand.
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor | |
| |
Yahoo! Groups Links
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">mailto:a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
17648
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:14pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> Even though there doesn't seem to be any interest in the subject
> among this Group, I want to be on record as saying that
> Altman's "Tanner on Tanner" series (I have watched the first 4
> episodes)is terrific, quite worthy of the original "Tanner '88" and
> very very contemporary and relevant. Is it being ignored just
> because it's "just television"? It could be the best stuff Altman
> has done since "The Player." But I'm not going to rave if no one is
> interested.
>
> What is discussed on "a film by" is ultimately decided by a half-
> dozen regular contributors -- if they don't care about a given
> subject, then the subject will be burried. And I can't expect Bill
> K.-- the most prolific of all -- to write about "Tanner" since he
> doesn't have a TV (or doesn't watch it, I don't remember) -- an
> attitude I have to respect but which I don't quite understand.
I
a) can't afford it
b) know if I had it, I'd spend way too much time taping
c) loathe propaganda, and tv news has become a propaganda engine for
the right.
But you're one of those 6 regular posters, JP -- it's your turn to
keep a thread alive. What did you like about Tanner 2?
17649
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:28pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Lieberman"
>
and Alex Tanner wanting to make a film about her father, not unlike
Alex Kerry who's doing the same.
>
In the "Alex in Wonderland" episode there is a tremendous sequence
in which Alex Tanner arrives in a studio to interview Ron Reagan and
finds that Alex Kerry is there to do the same thing and there has
been a mistake. So there's an uncomfortable moment where Alex T.
tries to take over Alex K's interview and is finally rebuffs by the
initially accomodating Alex K. Cynthia Nixon is fantastic there as
throughout the series -- such an incredible range of expression...
One major theme of the series is the ubiquitous presence of video.
The student follows Alex everywhere, filming her as she films her
documentary and there are camera crews all over the place.
Another great moment: Alex has to drop her father's impassioned
tirade against the Irak war from her film because Kerry has promised
a cabinet post to him if he wins and the speech would embarrass
him. "Reality check" -- to quote the title of a Tanner '88 episode.
>
JPC
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
17650
From: Craig Keller
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:35pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
>Even though there doesn't seem to be any interest in the subject
>among this Group, I want to be on record as saying that
>Altman's "Tanner on Tanner" series (I have watched the first 4
>episodes)is terrific, quite worthy of the original "Tanner '88" and
>very very contemporary and relevant. Is it being ignored just
>because it's "just television"? It could be the best stuff Altman
>has done since "The Player." But I'm not going to rave if no one is
>interested.
JPC, I'm very interested in 'Tanner on Tanner,' and would love to hear more about it -- the only reason I'm not seeing it right now is because I don't have Sundance (nor have the option with my cable company, strangely enough -- although I did have it while living in Seattle and New York). I've been reserving comments on 'Tanner '88' until I finished making my way through the recent DVDs -- I'm up to Episode 6 now, and am very impressed. This is some of the most -aesthetically radical- television I've ever seen (never mind Trudeau's excellent scripts), current "l'age d'or des series" included. Thinking in large part (but only in one part) of the "glassy obfuscation" of the mise en scene -- I can honestly say I've never quite seen -that- before on the airwaves..
(New intros to each episode on the DVDs feature modern-day 'Tanner on Tanner'-era Jack, Alex, and T.J., btw -- I'm assuming these first aired during the rebroadcast of the series on Sundance last year.)
craig.
17651
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 6:05pm
Subject: Re: Fuse (Pjer Zalica): a satire from Bosnia
> Cable TV here recently showed Gori vatra / Fuse (Pjer Zalica, 2003), a
> rollicking satirical comedy from Bosnia. I enjoyed it quite a bit -
> until its dark and gloomy ending (a real turn-off). Did anyone else see
> this?
I saw a little of it at Toronto in 2003, but can't say I enjoyed it: that
big, aggressive acting style came off a bit blustery to me. - Dan
17652
From: samfilms2003
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 6:14pm
Subject: Totally OT - Re: Fipresci site alert
> I'm curious what movie viewing is like there. Are theaters still
> important, or do people mostly watch video or VCD's?
>
> I'm also curious what films were shown in the past. I've read (for
> example in interviews with Chahine) that the French "tradition of
> quality" films were widely distributed, from Cairo to Peking -- in
> other words, precisely the films Truffaut didn't like.
>
> Paul
Preoccupied with my own filming, I didn't get much of a chance to
assess the filmgoing scene.
There was a big crowd nightly at the theater down the block from
my Hotel. And around the corner from it (perhaps attached) was
the French Cultural Center, which had a fairly international program
of movies displayed, maybe half docs.
I do know that L'Espace Hanoi (I didn't get to Hanoi this trip) has a
a varied cinema series:
http://www.ambafrance-vn.org/espace/
Truthfully, I didn't get to the movies, although I'd planned to see "Hero"
one night in Cho Lon (the Chinese section of the city) - it was playing
nearby but dubbed in Vietnamese; I figured I'd rather see it not dubbed,
not that I know a word of Mandarin :) so was gonna hop on a "Honda Om"
and head over but something came up..
It would seem you can buy any popular DVD you can imagine in some
markets - "China made" copies as they say, cost $1 US / ~ 16,000 VND,
I suspect you could negotiate in quantity. They sold VCD also.
As I mentioned one time before, everyone with intellectual/artfilm interests that
I met asked me about Tsai and had seen his films, although I'm not sure they
were distributed theatrically there.
and I did catch "The Devil, Probably" (Eng subtitles) on the French channel on
satellite in my hotel.
-Sam
17653
From: George Robinson
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 7:18pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
I hadn't been following this thread all that closely -- I haven't watched
the series 'cause I'm not that big an Altman fan -- but I completely
vapor-locked this afternoon when the first of the new e-mails showed up on
my computer and my immediate reaction was, "Alain Tanner, yeah, I wonder
what he's been doing lately."
Gotta get some sleep at night, kiddies.
g
I would no more teach children military
training than teach them arson or robbery
or assassination.
--Eugene V. Debs
17654
From: George Robinson
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 7:13pm
Subject: Re: Fuse (Pjer Zalica): a satire from Bosnia
It's a very clever film and I think the ending is entirely keeping with the
bitter, sardonic tone of the rest.
For those who haven't seen it, it's about a backwater town in Bosnia, rife
with post-war corruption and still riven by ethnic splits, preparing for a
putative visit from then-President Clinton (sigh), who the inhabitants
expect will shower them with American largesse. (Remember the days when we
showered people with largesse as well as bombs?) Very funny but also very
dark. I think, Mike, that you let the slapstickiness of the first two-thirds
keep you from realizing just how downbeat the film really is throughout.
George (Downbeat and other jazz magazines) Robinson
I would no more teach children military
training than teach them arson or robbery
or assassination.
--Eugene V. Debs
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 5:21 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Fuse (Pjer Zalica): a satire from Bosnia
>
> Cable TV here recently showed Gori vatra / Fuse (Pjer Zalica, 2003), a
> rollicking satirical comedy from Bosnia. I enjoyed it quite a bit - until
> its dark
> and gloomy ending (a real turn-off).
> Did anyone else see this?
> It was apparently shown recently in New York City as part of a New Film
> Directors festival.
>
> Mike Grost
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
17655
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 7:51pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>
> I
>
> a) can't afford it
I just don't believe that. Even the poor have a TV. I think it's
just an attitude. And you know so many people I'm sure it would be
very easy for you to get someone to tape the Altman series for you.
You do have a TV set and a VCR, don't you?
> b) know if I had it, I'd spend way too much time taping
That's a bit like saying, I don't want a telephone because if I
had one I'd be on the phone talking constantly. It's always possible
to exercise restraint.
> c) loathe propaganda, and tv news has become a propaganda engine
for
> the right.
There is some truth in that, although it is somewhat exagerated
(unless you mean Fox News). But if you don't like the news on TV,
you don't have to watch. And anyway how do you know they're
propaganda for the right since you don't watch TV? (actually the
right says and has always insisted that TV and the media in general
have a leftist, "liberal" bent. So it's all a matter of point of
view).
> But you're one of those 6 regular posters, JP -- it's your turn to
> keep a thread alive. What did you like about Tanner 2?
Hard to discuss with people who haven't seen it. First, have you
seen "Tanner '88"? Tanner 2 is very much like it in concept and
spirit so I like it for the same reasons I did the original. I wrote
about it at length in POSITIF #333, November 1988.
There would be a lot to say about the "impression of reality"
(or "effet de reel"-- amusing that the French "reel" without an
accent on the first "e" reads like the English "reel"! And Tanner's
campaign slogan in '88 was "Tanner for real!"))concept in relation
to Altman's constant intermingling of fiction and "real" situations
and actual famous or well-known people playing themselves. There are
times when we're no longer dealing with "effect" -- only reality is
left... but what kind? At the same time the constant theme of Tanner
2 as well as of Tanner 1 is the systematic questioning of the
reality at hand as it is thoroughly cannibalized, distanced and
recycled into fiction by television. In Tanner 2 Altman has moved a
step further thanks to technological evolution within 16 years.
Everybody is a filmmaker, everybody walks around with a tiny
camcorder in hand, everybody capturing everybody else on video.
Altman can be amazingly daring. Tanner is revealed to have
inspired part of Kerry's speech at the convention (he practically
dictates it to Cavanaugh) But asked about it by journalists he
denies any input. Later he has to compromise about his stand on the
war because Kerry has promised him a cabinet position...
I also find it very moving to find Michael Murphy and Cynthia
Nixon playing father and daughter again after sixteen years. The
real "star" of the series -- beside the video image, of course -- is
Cynthia Nixon, who is absolutely fantastic as a struggling
documentary maker, enthusiastic, naive, shrewd, insecure, pushy,
oversensitive and tough at the same time. Every slightest emotion
registers on her face, in her eyes. She has any number of great
moments: bursting into tears during a Q&A after screening her film
(and being chided by Robert Redford!), seezing when Cavanaugh tells
her she can't interview Kerry, then when TC and her father ask her
to drop the clip of Tanner condemning the war, or the scene i
mentioned in another post, where she sort of muscles in onto Kerry's
daughter's interview with Ron Reagan. It all has to be seen to be
believed.
JPC
At least 90% of the dialogue in the series sounds improvised. The
occasional traditional, "well-written" "line" stands out as an
awkward concession to a dramaturgy the series has completely left
behind.
17656
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 7:59pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> I hadn't been following this thread all that closely -- I haven't
watched
> the series 'cause I'm not that big an Altman fan -- but I
completely
> vapor-locked this afternoon when the first of the new e-mails
showed up on
> my computer and my immediate reaction was, "Alain Tanner, yeah, I
wonder
> what he's been doing lately."
>
> Gotta get some sleep at night, kiddies.
>
Do yourself a favor, George. Watch Tanner '88 which is now on DVD.
Altman was trailblazing there. Forget about why you're not a big
Altman fan. Alhough very personal, the series is definitely not
ordinary Altman. Then you can move on to the new series.
17657
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 11:19pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
JP - It costs 30 something a month to get cable, and that's too much for me at
the moment. That will change in 2005.
I know I theoretically could restrain myself from spending ten minutes finding
my pan-and-scan tape copy of House of Bamboo because TCM is running it
letterboxed, programming carefully to be sure I bag the better version and
thereby update my copy, and doing the same thing with films I haven't got or
films I could get better maybe four times a day...or more--- I know I
theoretically could restrain myself, but I really couldn't. I'd be taping a lot and
probably watching even more.
I have seen enough CNN to know that Fox isn't the only dreck-source, and
that mantra about the liberal press is part of the propaganda I'm avoiding. I'm
fine with my blogger buddies and KPFK radio. I get Harry Shearer every
Sunday on KCRW, and Ian Masters for two meaty hours after that on KPFK,
talking at length to experts who actually know what's going on. Sure I could
exercise restraint about watching the corporate news broadcasts if I had
cable, but it's like driving by a gory car wreck...people slow down to look, and
I'm sure I would, too, if the disaster was playing on my tv every night.
I do have a friend -- Lurking Marvin -- who tapes things for me, permitting me
to discover Carnival, for example, but he's moving to Berkeley, so I'll have to
get cable one of these days. I also pick up cheap screeners to sample cable
series. So I have seen some of K Street -- I actually rented the DVD -- and it
sounds as if Soderbergh was inspired by Tanner 1 and 2, although I've seen
neither. By around episode 3 of K Street I wanted to see more, and
recommended that Torino program some of it, which they have. It's a very
intriguing form, which I now know that Altman invented, and no doubt does
very well. And I, too, have the hots for Cynthia Nixon...even without seeing her
in this.
One extra reason I may not catch Tanner 2 even on DVD: Watching a known
felon steal another election, using voting machines and other tricks that we
were warned about far in advance, and seeing Kerry actually stop the count,
when he promised not to in every speech he made to those people who fried
their brains out waiting on line in Fla. and got soaked waiting till the wee
hours in Ohio, has made the 2004 election a rather depressing topic for me.
Watching a miniseries about it would be like watching a disease-of-the-week
miniseries about a ghastly incurable illness that I had just been diagnosed
with.
I'll probably save Tanner 2 for my old age, like opera. I'll at least wait a few
weeks....
17658
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 11:25pm
Subject: Totally OT - Re: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003"
>
> Truthfully, I didn't get to the movies, although I'd planned to see
"Hero"
> one night in Cho Lon (the Chinese section of the city) - it was
playing
> nearby but dubbed in Vietnamese; I figured I'd rather see it not
dubbed,
> not that I know a word of Mandarin :) so was gonna hop on a "Honda
Om"
> and head over but something came up..
I still haven't seen "Hero." (I'm curious about the roughly
contemporary "Alexander," but my expectations are low... Apropos of
nothing except that I'd like to see a movie with both Angelina Jolie
and Maggie Cheung, I'll mention Arthur Toynbee developed a scenario in
which Alexander, surviving past 33, took his armies across the Tian
Shan mountains and the Gobi desert, formed an alliance with the six
other Chinese states, and conquered the Qin Dynasty.)
>
> It would seem you can buy any popular DVD you can imagine in some
> markets - "China made" copies as they say, cost $1 US / ~ 16,000
VND,
> I suspect you could negotiate in quantity. They sold VCD also.
I guess I incorrectly assumed VCD's were more common than DVD's in
East Asia. I live next to Chinatown in NYC, and VCD's are plentiful
here.
>
> As I mentioned one time before, everyone with intellectual/artfilm
interests that
> I met asked me about Tsai and had seen his films, although I'm not
sure they
> were distributed theatrically there.
That's encouraging. I don't get the impression there's similar
interest in Tsai in the US, but I could be wrong. His films have been
released in the US, and he often comes to NYC to speak. Who are the
people everyone is interested in? I'd say Wong Kar-wai is an art film
star. I think Godard remains one. Wong's films seem to attract big
crowds, and there was a line around the block to see "Sauve Qui Peut"
at MoMA last year. Anybody else?
>
> and I did catch "The Devil, Probably" (Eng subtitles) on the French
channel on
> satellite in my hotel.
>
>
> -Sam
17659
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:19am
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>:
>
> And I, too, have the hots for Cynthia Nixon...even without seeing
her
> in this.
>
I don't have the hots for her -- she could be my daughter (and
she's not "my type" or any of my types). And if she (Alex Tanner)
was my daughter, I know I'd love her to death and she would drive me
crazy. (see how I relate to her as Alex and not as an actress-
playing-Alex -- something I don't think I have ever done before --
but that's the magic of the Altman's approach and the incredible
relationship he has been able to establish with his actors).
> One extra reason I may not catch Tanner 2 even on DVD: Watching a
known
> felon steal another election, using voting machines and other
tricks that we
> were warned about far in advance, and seeing Kerry actually stop
the count,
> when he promised not to in every speech he made to those people
who fried
> their brains out waiting on line in Fla. and got soaked waiting
till the wee
> hours in Ohio, has made the 2004 election a rather depressing
topic for me.
> Watching a miniseries about it would be like watching a disease-of-
the-week
> miniseries about a ghastly incurable illness that I had just been
diagnosed
> with.
>
> I'll probably save Tanner 2 for my old age, like opera. I'll at
least wait a few
> weeks....
Bill, we're all disgusted and depressed, but it's no reason to
throw Altman's work in the dustbin of history. You sound like you're
confusing "art" and "reality" -- which is very appropriate in the
context of discussing the Tanner thing... So Kerry 'sold out" by
conceding, so what else is new? That's politics. "It's Chinatown."
Are you saying you don't want to watch anything that might upset
you, remind you of some unpleasant reality?
Your old age is closer than you think, Bill. You couldn't even be
my son! Don't "save" anything for it. You'll never enjoy opera if
you don't now -- but I am convinced you would enjoy Tanner. It is
NOT a disease of the week TV movie. I think you should write about
it for Cahiers.
JPC
17660
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:41am
Subject: Re: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- jpcoursodon
>
> I don't have the hots for her -- she could be my
> daughter (and
> she's not "my type" or any of my types).
And you're not "her type" anymore, J-P, as she's come
out as a lesbian.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
17661
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:16am
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon
>
>
> >
> > I don't have the hots for her -- she could be my
> > daughter (and
> > she's not "my type" or any of my types).
>
> And you're not "her type" anymore, J-P, as she's come
> out as a lesbian.
>
> This makes perfect sense, david, and i love her none the less. And
I'm glad you're coming out of your slumber, David, but don't you
have anything else to say about the series? Are you too poor to
watch TV like Bill? We keep having endless threads here about very
elitist events such as a Straub retro in Vienna (which only people
who have been invited can attend, unless you live in Vienna)or in
NYC (same comment)whereas cable is universal and pretty affordable,
but no, it's too American, I guess, we'd rather discuss the latest
Godard to death.
Bill challenged me to keep the Tanner thread alive, and that's
what I'm trying to do here. It's not too often that something turns
me on the way this Altman stuff has.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
17662
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:37am
Subject: Re: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- jpcoursodon
> I'm glad you're coming out of your slumber, David,
I've been busy writing about Isherwood.
> but don't you
> have anything else to say about the series? Are you
> too poor to
> watch TV like Bill?
Poor, and I hate TV outside of "Seinfeld"re-runs and
"That 70's Show." I plan to see the Altman on DVD.
I guess, we'd rather
> discuss the latest
> Godard to death.
>
Not really.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
17663
From:
Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 9:46pm
Subject: Re: Re: Tanner, anyone?
Jean-Pierre Coursodon wrote:
>It's not too often that something turns
>me on the way this Altman stuff has.
I love "Tanner '88," Jean-Pierre, and like "Tanner on Tanner" very much.
Craig's term, "glassy obfuscation," is a good way to describe the mise-en-scene
of both series. You don't often find this sort of formal sophistication on TV
these days, in my opinion.
Did you see Altman's last feature, "The Company"? It was my favorite film of
2003 and is in contention with "3 Women" and "Short Cuts" as my favorite
Altman film ever.
I reviewed it for The Film Journal.
http://thefilmjournal.com/issue9/thecompany.html
Peter
17664
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:20am
Subject: Re: Re: Tanner, anyone?
> we'd rather discuss the latest
>Godard to death.
At least at the end of the month when 'Moments choisis des Histoire(s) du cinema' and 'Notre musique' open in New York. As much as that does excite me, with two more episodes of 'Tanner '88' down earlier today, I can say I share JP's excitement over the series. The arc and pacing is masterful (qualities one might think an 11-episode canvas would necessarily tote along... though many other lesser series testify to the contrary), and the attention to detail extraordinary. Take for example the Hollywood poolside fundraiser: Rebecca DeMornay's earnest plea for Jack to "break through the television screen" when talking to her (after she takes umbrage at his non-recognition of her), his unease at doing just that but the ease with which he slips into public-address mode after she introduces him to the assembled crowd (he assumed the role just as easily when Alex persuaded him to squeeze the anti-apartheid rally into his schedule), the fear of being photographed or filmed in another unscripted moment when Deke pops out of the pool (this time with DeMornay, following the "ambush" on his meeting with the Rev. Billy Cryer) -- Jack's ambivalence about coming off as too natural, lest he seem more contrived than ever, is a major undercurrent of the series and the man's psyche itself. As much as you rave about Cynthia Nixon in this, JP, and I agree (opened my eyes toward her in a way that insipid, idiotic 'Sex in the City' never did -- although I always liked Kristin Davis), for me it's Michael Murphy who shines brightest. I always thought he was great, but as Jack Tanner (the role of a lifetime no doubt for any actor) he's beyond praise -- conveying a vapidness and a deep intelligence by turns, and whether we get one or the other, Murphy's performance suggests it's a result of the character's mood or, maybe more accurately, current 'optimism-quotient.'
Two other things about this work, and Altman, which I appreciate:
(1) His democratic depictions of any kind of social group that enters the story. As an example in 'Tanner '88,' he gives equal heft to both the country/bluegrass group during the Memphis event (following the "assassination attempt") and the hair-metal band Harlow during the Hollywood fundraiser. He's interested enough in both cases to zoom slowly into the musicians' fingers on their fretboards, no matter how "silly" the visual presentation (or music) is in either case.
(2) His incredible, incredible -bifurcation- of spaces all throughout the series. If it's not glass objets d'art dividing the frame, it's an assemblage of coffeepots; a fan of bullets and gunparts shot from overhead, tracking along the curve of the table (while the Secret Service agents take part in some poolside firearm oiling), or the gathering of agents and all the table stuff become convex and black-steel-polished in the lenses of an interlocutor's aviator sunglasses; monitors broadcasting a debate, resting in front of soundproof glass in front of the debating candidates' heads on the other side (Jack facing camera, Dukakis in profile, Jackson facing away, all in almost-alignment on the z-axis); or the scum and leaf-bits floating on the pool's surface as Deke comes up (POV shot) with his waterproof-camera. Altman's restless tracking shots, pans, and zooms have never felt more at ease (or virtuosic) as they navigate the maze of the 'Tanner' world. The attention to color on the video is also extraordinary, and renders each environment "hyper-real" -- whether it's the planes of pastel at the poolside gathering, the '80s kitsch-art inside the mansion (the parallel universe to the house in Rivette's 'L'Amour par terre'?), the grey/white/blacks of the placards and surroundings during the apartheid celebration, the overbright steely finish to the fluorescent-lit woodwork of the early HQ (during the real-time focus-group feedback session), or the almost Chihuly-like rendering of Jack's impassioned off-the-cuff speech in the first episode, 'Tanner '88' shocks by means of its very (first impression only!) "cheap" video aesthetic's treatment to light and color -- the harmony of light and color in all the aforementioned is hardly so casual as it might seem at first glance, and yet by means of the camera movement and the interplay of the colors, it does come back somehow, in the process, to the very "uncalculatedness" its video-sheen would at first purport!
I put Altman right up there with Godard in terms of breakthrough video-work with this series (serial film/video, really), JP.
craig.
17665
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:20am
Subject: Re: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- ptonguette@a... wrote:
>
> Did you see Altman's last feature, "The Company"?
> It was my favorite film of
> 2003 and is in contention with "3 Women" and "Short
> Cuts" as my favorite
> Altman film ever.
>
> I reviewed it for The Film Journal.
>
> http://thefilmjournal.com/issue9/thecompany.html
>
Excellent piece, Peter! Altman's use of space is
comparable in many ways to Michael Snow -- and never
more so than in "The Company."
"My Funny Valentine" is more than a "theme song" tome.
It's the greatestpopular song ever written. Altman
uses Lee Wiley's and Chet baker's renditions to great
effect. The other great versions are by Sarah Vaghan
(on the "Live in Tokyo" album),Matt Damon (in "The
Talented Mr. Ripley") and, of course, Nico.
Van Dyke Parks, his "grey eminence" status looming
larger than ever thanks to "Smile," did the
arrangements for Altman. The only piece by Van Dyke
himself is the one for the climactic ballet.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
17666
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:05am
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
for me it's Michael Murphy who shines brightest. I always thought he
was great, but as Jack Tanner (the role of a lifetime no doubt for
any actor) he's beyond praise
Haven't seen him as Tanner, but I can imagine. I think Murphy's great
too -- great and way underrated. His sendup of Steve McQueen's
idiotic performance as Bullitt in Brewster McCloud is a particularly
fond memory.
17667
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:07am
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> > Van Dyke Parks, his "grey eminence" status looming
> larger than ever thanks to "Smile," did the
> arrangements for Altman. The only piece by Van Dyke
> himself is the one for the climactic ballet.
Guess I'd better see it! BTW, he has scored everything Ken Kwapis
ever made -- including his episode of Eerie, Indiana!
17668
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:10am
Subject: Tanner, anyone?
Wonderful post, Craig, and you make me want to watch the
whole "Tanner '88" series again. I agree about the greatness of
Murphy but I was praising Cynthia N. in "Tanner on Tanner" as being
totally the focus of the series (although certainly not in
a "starring" kind of way) -- even though she was great as a 19-year
old in "Tanner '88" and Murphy is great, quite moving, in "T on T"
too. But their greatness is not a star turn kind of greatness.
They're just there -- and you have to keep reminding yourself that
they are actors playing a part -- and there is something almost
upsetting about the naturalness of the whole thing.
To Peter: I wrote a long piece on "Short Cuts" for Positif (also
reviewed "The Player") which was anthologized in a book
called "L'Amour du cinema" -- unfortunately it's in French... I
still haven't seen "The Company."
17669
From:
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:35am
Subject: Re: Fuse (Pjer Zalica): a satire from Bosnia
Much of this film deals, comicly but also movingly, with reconciliation
between the various ethnic groups in Bosnia. Plus the process of healing and
forgiveness after a war. So it has a great deal of positive and hopeful things to
say.
I saw it two weeks ago, when I still harbored hopes for a Kerry victory. The
film offered (allegorically) hope that America and the rest of the world could
be reconciled, and that peace might break out. Now however...
Mike Grost
"Is anyone in America living for future forgiveness?"
- Allen Ginsberg, "Wichita Vortex Sutra"
(written during the Vietnam war)
17670
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 10:58am
Subject: new ROUGE up
Dear friends -
The 4th issue of ROUGE (www,rouge.com.au) is now on-line. Contents
include: two essays by the Spanish master Víctor Erice, one of them a
fond appreciation of Manoel de Oliveira; a master-class from Erice's
friend José Luis Guerin; "Ozu's Women" by Shigehiko Hasumi (who is in
the MOVIE MUTATIONS book); Thomas Elsaesser's study of film and TV
representations of the Red Army Fraction; accounts of a recent
Antonioni short by Jonathan Rosenbaum and Enrica Antonioni; an extract
from Jean-Jacques Schuhl's award-winning INGRID CAVEN: A NOVEL; notes
from Australian avant-gardist James Clayden's MAREY PROJECT; and Robert
Kramer's "Letter to Bob Dylan".
Of particular note to A FILM BY members: a focus on 'Hitchcock 1948/9'
including Jean-Pierre Coursodon on ROPE and Mark Rappaport on THE
PARADINE CASE; and a dossier of 'John Hughes on (and with) Jacques
Rivette' introduced by Jonathan Rosenbaum.
Adrian
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17671
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:21pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
wrote:
>
> Interesting, there's a (free) series of the Mexican Bunuels
(Instituto Cervantes), which has already begun (and continues
tonight): http://cultura.cervantes.org/newsletter/novFilms/films.htm
> (Are these on celluloid?
I was able to see only ROBINSON CRUSOE this week. They projected a
DVD, but it looked good. They showed the Spanish dubbed version,
without subtitles. Take their statement about showing the films with
English subtitles with a grano de la sal.
I don't know Spanish, but the only scene I thought I really lost was
the conversation between Robinson Crusoe and Friday over the Bible.
A comparison with CAST AWAY would be interesting. In both cases
there's a transformation of what are very specifically petit bourgeois
values. It reminds me of the discussion of nihilism on the Film
Philosophy list:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0411&L=film-philosophy&P=2834
17672
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:29pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
"I was able to see only ROBINSON CRUSOE this week. They projected a
DVD, but it looked good. They showed the Spanish dubbed version"
It's worth noting that the Spanish version is not simply dubbed, but
is an entirely different film, consisting of different takes
throughout.
17673
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:48pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
> A comparison with CAST AWAY would be interesting. In both cases
> there's a transformation of what are very specifically petit
bourgeois
> values. It reminds me of the discussion of nihilism on the Film
> Philosophy list:
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind
0411&L=film-philosophy&P=2834
I accidently posted without finishing... I'll just add, Buñuel is
clearly concerned with society, and my first impression is that
Robinson Crusoe's relation to Friday (and to some extent to nature)
changes from one of domination to one of solidarity and friendship,
whereas CAST AWAY and the Simone de Beauvoir discussion approach the
response to the possibility of freedom from the standpoint of isolated
individuals.
Paul
17674
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:07pm
Subject: Re: Tanner, anyone?
I saw TANNER ON TANNER last night. It's obviously wonderful, but my
initial impression is that it's not quite up to the level of
TANNER '88. While watching the latter series again last week (for
maybe the fourth time), I felt I was encountering a work as complex
as Rivette's OUT 1. The satire of the new series, though hilarious
and very precise, struck me as comparatively one-dimensional. But
repeat viewings may alter this opinion.
I can certainly testify to the accuracy of Altman's satire,
specifically the various scenes involving documentary filmmakers
getting in each other's way. Last week, a couple of Italian
filmmakers were interviewing me on London's South Bank for a
documentary about Abel Ferrara, and the shoot was constantly being
interrupted by some guys making a documentary about skateboarders.
The people interviewing me didn't feel they could reasonably object
to this, since one of them had previously produced his own
documentary about skateboarders! It was a 100 per cent pure Robert
Altman moment.
It's incredible how 'real life' keeps generating Altmanesque events
in TANNER ON TANNER. In TANNER '88, Jack Tanner's daughter was named
Alex, and now John Kerry has a daughter named Alex, which inspires a
scene wherein the two daughters must try and interview Ronald
Reagan's son at the same time, since he has assumed that the two
Alexs were one person. And, of course, this connects with such things
as the various Barbaras in CALIFORNIA SPLIT.
It was also nice to see TANNER ON TANNER finding new ways to use
the "Exercise your right to vote" song, which turned up everywhere in
TANNER '88. Here, it becomes the tune played by Jack Tanner's mobile
phone - I don't believe mobile phones even existed when the first
series was made. Needless to say, this also relates to Altman's
typical use of repeated musical motifs, from the title song in THE
LONG GOODBYE to 'My Funny Valentine' in THE COMPANY.
There's also a lot of wonderful stuff at the Democratic convention -
shots of people waving to Jack and Alex, taking their picture, etc.
My guess is that they're doing this because they recognize Cynthia
Nixon from SEX AND THE CITY. Brilliant stuff, though it should be
pointed out that the intermingling between fiction and reality found
in the two Tanner series owes a lot to Haskell Wexler's MEDIUM COOL.
17675
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:42pm
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay (was Re: Revenge of the Sith)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
> It's fascinating to me the enthusiasm liberal critics have for
Walter
> Hill, John Milius, some John Ford, etc...
I think that's a topic worth pursuing. I have some thoughts, but I'm
more interested in what other people think.
Paul
17676
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:45pm
Subject: Rope (Rouge)
Jean-Pierre's article on "Rope" in the new "Rouge"
http://www.rouge.com.au/4/rope.html
is absolutley first-rate, particularly in identifying
the ten-minute take as the "obscure object of desire"
that Hitchcock utilizes to replace that traditional
heroine in peril. However he is mistaken in claiming
Dall and Granger to be "obviously a homosexual
couple," as there's nothing obvious about their
relationship at all. Not that he's the first to make
this mistake (Jean Renoir went to far as to complain
"we neevr se th boys kiss") it's simply that Hitchcock
gave Laurents a free hand to depict the upper-class
gay urban world of that time with an amazing degree of
precision. Dall and Granger obviously have had carnal
knowledge of one another in the past, but their status
in the film is one of former lovers now probably
reduced to the sttus of fuckbuddies. Granger resents
this to some degree (a bit like Bruno Todeschini
resents Pascale Greggory's droping him in "Those Who
Love Me Can Take the Train"), but not enough to
protest. Dall's eyes are on James Stewart and the
entire murder plot constitutes his attempt to not only
seduce Stewart physically but dominate him
intellectually -- throw his "theories" back in his
face and declare himself to be their true master.
Visually "Rope" has much in common with "Dial Mfor
Murder" in 3-D, as it's a film about a room.
Dramatically a kind of 3-D of another sort trnaspires
as recounted by Laurents in his memoir "Original Story
By." When he was hired Laurenta at first wasn't sure
if Hitch knew he was gay, then when it became clear
that he did Laurents wasn't sure if Hitch knew he was
having an affair with Farley.
And Hitch did.
Laurents also discusses Hitch's first choice for
Rupert Cadell -- Cary Grant. With Stewart in the role,
Dall is mistaken to believe he's gay, whereas with
Grant. . .
Realizing that Hitch had him dead to rights (just as
Fellini had O'Toole for "Toby Dammit") Grant backed
away.
Had he stayed the film's last scene would have had a
very different emotional tone.
But not one of the camera movements would have been
altered!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
17677
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 4:06pm
Subject: Re: Rope (Rouge)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Jean-Pierre's article on "Rope" in the new "Rouge"
>
> http://www.rouge.com.au/4/rope.html
>
> is absolutley first-rate, particularly in identifying
> the ten-minute take as the "obscure object of desire"
> that Hitchcock utilizes to replace that traditional
> heroine in peril. However he is mistaken in claiming
> Dall and Granger to be "obviously a homosexual
> couple," as there's nothing obvious about their
> relationship at all.
David, there are heterosexual, married people who live together
but who, for one reason or another (usually boredom) have stopped
having sexual intercourse. They are still referred to as "a couple."
Same thing for Dall and Granger. They live together, they are
obviously somewhat more than roommates (they're close enough to plan
and execute a "perfect murder" together) and they have some fairly
clear, although not blatant, homosexual characteristics. Whether
they actually have sex together at that point in their history is
irrelevant. They're homosexuals and they're a couple.
But thanks for the praise.
JPC
17678
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 4:43pm
Subject: Re: Re: Rope (Rouge)
--- jpcoursodon
> David, there are heterosexual, married people who
> live together
> but who, for one reason or another (usually
> boredom) have stopped
> having sexual intercourse. They are still referred
> to as "a couple."
> Same thing for Dall and Granger. They live together,
> they are
> obviously somewhat more than roommates (they're
> close enough to plan
> and execute a "perfect murder" together) and they
> have some fairly
> clear, although not blatant, homosexual
> characteristics.
True. Playing Poulenc is a dead giveaway.
Yes, it'sa true what you're saying about coupledom,
but at the time of its release "Rope" was (and to a
large degree still is) perceived as being about a gay
romantic couple. Review after review mentions this as
if it weren't problematized by the film in any way.
> Whether
> they actually have sex together at that point in
> their history is
> irrelevant.
>
I can't say that I agree. "Rope" was inspired by the
Leopold and Loeb case. Leopold and Loeb were indeed
lovers, but their victim was a child rather than an
adult. The fact that they had read Nietszche was
brought up at the trial -- and is the basis for Rupert
Cadell in the film. Hitchcock's film circles around
sexuality but never quite hones in on it (eg. the
dialogue about separate bedrooms, and the
chicken-strangling bit), though the circling itself
remains daring.
"Complusion" the second film version of the case
"de-gayed" the pair by adding a girl. A quite ordinary
girl (Diane Varsi in love with Dean Stockwell and who
wouldn't be?) not the chic fag-hag of "Rope."
"Swoon," the third version, deals with gay sexuality
full bore. On the alternate track of DVD,
writer-director Tom Kalin (ever the post-modernist)
speaks of wanting to have a TV set in L & L's room on
which scenes from "Rope" and "Compulsion" would appear
in the background, but getting the rights proved
impossible.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
17679
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 4:47pm
Subject: Re: Rope (Rouge)
"at the time of its release "Rope" was (and to a large degree still
is) perceived as being about a gay romantic couple. Review after
review mentions this as if it weren't problematized by the film in
any way."
Van Sant's ELEPHANT comes across as a kind of remake of ROPE
(complete with long takes) - and Van Sant's presentation of
homosexuality seems to me even more problematic than Hitchcock's!
17680
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: Rope (Rouge)
--- thebradstevens
>
> Van Sant's ELEPHANT comes across as a kind of remake
> of ROPE
> (complete with long takes) - and Van Sant's
> presentation of
> homosexuality seems to me even more problematic than
> Hitchcock's!
>
A very astute observation! But with Gus this cuts
several different ways. As you may recall the notion
that the Columbine killers were a gay couple was
advanced on the internet by Matt Drudge -- who was fed
the line by L. Brent Bozzell. Rather than back away
from the notion, Gus advances it speculatively via the
kiss (always seen as "proof" in cultural terms) At the
same time John Robinson's beauty discombobulated
critic after critic -- particularly Todd McCarthy. Why
is this insanely beauticul boy the moving center
thorugh which all events must pass and all camera
movements must return?
Because that's why the movies were invented.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
17681
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:27pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> As far as Godard goes, I would be absolutely amazed if he weren't
as
> anti-imperialist as ever. His analysis of our intervention in ex-
> Yugoslavia just doesn't identify it as an imperialist adventure.
>
Although others are getting bored of this thread -- and so am I! --
that reminds me of a comment Jean-Pierre Gorin made recently when he
spoke in New York. Others who were there can correct me if I'm
misinterpreting him.
Gorin looked back on his role as "Yoko Ono" to Godard's "John Lennon,"
leading him astray from the cinema into politics. He's proud of his
role, and thinks the films they did together were "gorgeous." He
describes John Simon standing up after LETTER TO JANE was shown,
saying, "You people are sick." That was a proud moment for him.
However, he points out, "nobody is Marxist anymore." And apparently
Godard was not Marxist then. Gorin describes him as like a 16th
century monk and that his use of politics was a rhetorical strategy. I
think "rhetorical strategy" is the phrase he used. Godard was
experimenting with different rhetorics. Now, whether it is literally
true that Godard political beliefs in the late 1960's/
1970's were "rhetorical strategies," this is an attempt to put them
at a certain distance.
Godard jokes about how communism could never work in "Notre
Musique." But his position is different from anti-Communism of his
friend Glucksmann and his late friend Furet, who believe that
Communism like radical Islam is nothing but: "'LONG LIVE DEATH!':
religious shell, nihilist kernel! (Why someone who dislikes radical
Islam is so eager to defend Bosnia and Chechnya, I don't know…) Furet
would have been editor of the shoddy "Livre noir du communisme" had he
lived. Furet suggests it represents a refutation of all utopian
aspirations, at least for the present, and in a letter to Godard
claims Godard's "Histoire(s)" for his views.
But Godard's position is vague. Here's an excerpt from an interview
with Youssef Ishaghpour. I'm glad he puts some distance between
himself and the questionable viewpoints of Furet et al., but I doubt
whether Godard's "pensées" and "etudes" will lead anywhere productive.
YR : Il y a eu l'« utopie » de la révolution russe qui s'est
métamorphosée en cauchemar et qui est représentée, avec tout ce que
cela implique, par la momie mitée et obscène de Lénine, du
fait de son exposition.
Godard: … L'histoire de la Russie n'est pas faite, et c'est
vraiment dommage par rapport aux historiens. Même quand Furet fait
l'histoire de la Révolution, il y a des images, c'est-à-dire une
pensée. Quand il fait l'histoire de la Russie, il n'y en a plus, il y
a du texte et même pas sur du texte, comme disait Péguy, mais sous du
texte, alors que c'est étonnant toutes les images qu'il y a et qu'on
commence à voir aujourd'hui, Furet n'a même pas vu un paysan russe
dans un film d'Eisenstein. J'avais envie, dans The Old Place, de
faire une séquence et puis on ne l'a pas faite parce qu'on retombait
dans les Histoire(s) du cinéma, je voulais rapprocher deux photos de
morts, en disant celui-ci est mort en Russie et celui-là en Allemagne,
où est la différence, où est l'absence de différence. Je ne trouve pas
la même chose dans fascisme et communisme..., je ne m'avancerai pas,
je peux dire des hypothèses ou m'opposer à quelqu'un en disant que ce
que vous affirmez lorsque vous dites que le mal était dans le
communisme, il faudrait le penser plus, faire plus d'études, au lieu
de toutes ces disputes idéologiques qui ne sont pas une recherche de
la vérité,alors que les images sont là.
Paul
17682
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:11pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
>
> "I was able to see only ROBINSON CRUSOE this week. They projected a
> DVD, but it looked good. They showed the Spanish dubbed version"
>
> It's worth noting that the Spanish version is not simply dubbed,
but
> is an entirely different film, consisting of different takes
> throughout.
It's also longer, because Spanish audiences don't know the Crusoe
story as well. The Spanish version I taped years ago off tv doesn't
contain the dream sequence where O'Herlihy plays himself and his
father, but one never knows if that was simply cut to fit a slot. If
I had to guess from the copy I have I'd say it was cut from the
Spanish release version altogether. The English version is now out on
DVD.
17683
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:15pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
I'll just add, Buñuel is
> clearly concerned with society, and my first impression is that
> Robinson Crusoe's relation to Friday (and to some extent to nature)
> changes from one of domination to one of solidarity and friendship,
> whereas CAST AWAY and the Simone de Beauvoir discussion approach the
> response to the possibility of freedom from the standpoint of
isolated
> individuals.
>
> Paul
Durgnat places this whole period of Bunuel's work -- as he was
transitioning back to being a European director -- under the
heading "from solitude to society." That applies as well to what he
calls the revolutionary trilogy: Death in this Garden, Cela s'appelle
l'aurore and (ironically, however) Fever Mounts at El Pao. It also
applies in spades to The Young One, which has some affinities w.
Crusoe.
17684
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:24pm
Subject: Wexler (Was: Tanner, anyone?)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
>
it should be
> pointed out that the intermingling between fiction and reality
found
> in the two Tanner series owes a lot to Haskell Wexler's MEDIUM COOL.
I just resaw that and would also note that Demy was combining
documentary and fiction in a different way in Model Shop at the same
time Wexler was shooting Medium Cool in Chicago.
Incidentally, the Wexler documentaries I viewed for a CdC piece on
this aspect of his career are great -- especially the most recent,
Bus Riders Union, a 90-minute epic (to borrow Joseph K's description)
that is a political film of great importance (1999), and a very
moving one. (Wexler was one of the camera operators on Bread and
Roses, which used the doc/fic approach of Medium Cool at some points -
- the subject matter is connected to that of Bus Riders Union, a must-
see film for all political junkies now experiencing withdrawal.)
Wexler is finishing editing a feature documentary on the dangerous
consequences of routine sleep-deprivation in H'wd filmmaking which
will premiere in January at Sundance. Right now he's in Amiens, which
is showing a major retrospective of his work as cameraman and
filmmaker.
17685
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:30pm
Subject: So-called right-wing filmmakers (was: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
> wrote:
>
> > It's fascinating to me the enthusiasm liberal critics have for
> Walter
> > Hill, John Milius, some John Ford, etc...
>
> I think that's a topic worth pursuing. I have some thoughts, but I'm
> more interested in what other people think.
>
> Paul
I'll kick it off. See Tag Gallagher's article on Milius at
sensesofcinema for a reason liberal critics -- and even radical ones -
- might like his work, and Tag's book on Ford, as well as numerous
statements by the Straubs, for a more nuanced point of view on Ford.
As for Carpenter, also mentioned as a right-wing filmmaker, he had a
conversion experience after Big Trouble in Little China. He had been
a Kentucky-bred conservative until he had a few experiences with the
power of the studios and how they used it, the worst of which was
with Diller on Big Trouble. So he took 6 months off and read a lot,
subscribed to sebveral newspapers, watch public-access cable, and re-
emerged a left-wing filmmaker, getting back to his low-budget roots
with Prince of Darkness and releasing They Live, the most radical
film of the 80s, just before the election of Bush I. So in his case
you have to distinguish between before and after.
17686
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:39pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> >
> > As far as Godard goes, I would be absolutely amazed if he weren't
> as
> > anti-imperialist as ever. His analysis of our intervention in ex-
> > Yugoslavia just doesn't identify it as an imperialist adventure.
> >
>
> Although others are getting bored of this thread -- and so am I! --
> that reminds me of a comment Jean-Pierre Gorin made recently when he
> spoke in New York. Others who were there can correct me if I'm
> misinterpreting him.
>
> Gorin looked back on his role as "Yoko Ono" to Godard's "John
Lennon,"
> leading him astray from the cinema into politics. He's proud of his
> role, and thinks the films they did together were "gorgeous." He
> describes John Simon standing up after LETTER TO JANE was shown,
> saying, "You people are sick." That was a proud moment for him.
> However, he points out, "nobody is Marxist anymore." And apparently
> Godard was not Marxist then.
The Straubs have never called themselves Marxists, because they
haven't studied the writings of Marex in the kind of depth they
wopuld need to call themsleves that. If you want a clear view of
Godard's ideas before the Dziga Vertov Group period, look back at his
interview about la Chinoise in CdC, widely available here in Godard
on Godard, vol. 1. I don't see any change between then and now.
17687
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:42pm
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> > It's worth noting that the Spanish version is not simply dubbed,
> but
> > is an entirely different film, consisting of different takes
> > throughout.
>
> It's also longer, because Spanish audiences don't know the Crusoe
> story as well. The Spanish version I taped years ago off tv doesn't
> contain the dream sequence where O'Herlihy plays himself and his
> father, but one never knows if that was simply cut to fit a slot. If
> I had to guess from the copy I have I'd say it was cut from the
> Spanish release version altogether. The English version is now out on
> DVD.
The dream sequence, with his father lecturing him and washing a pig (I
think?), was in the DVD we saw. One odd detail was that there were a
few words of English spoken by O'Herlihy, I'd say about 3 or 4 times
in the film.
I'm eager to see it again in English. I was thinking about a sending a
copy to my seven year old nephew, but he's probably too young...
Paul
17688
From: rpporton55
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:48pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>
> --- In a_film_by@y> The Straubs have never called themselves Marxists, because they
> haven't studied the writings of Marex in the kind of depth they
> wopuld need to call themsleves that. If you want a clear view of
> Godard's ideas before the Dziga Vertov Group period, look back at his
> interview about la Chinoise in CdC, widely available here in Godard
> on Godard, vol. 1. I don't see any change between then and now.
In a rather unsuccessful interview that a friend and I conducted with Godard some years
ago, he referred (after I asked him about films such as Tout Va Bien) to his Dziga-Vertov
period as akin to "school break." This was characteristically cryptic, but I took it to mean
that he had either become embarrassed by these films or , in retrospect, wasn't taking
them seriously anymore. But it's all a mater of decoding....
R. Porton
17689
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:51pm
Subject: Re: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
>> It's also longer, because Spanish audiences don't know the Crusoe
>> story as well. The Spanish version I taped years ago off tv doesn't
>> contain the dream sequence where O'Herlihy plays himself and his
>> father, but one never knows if that was simply cut to fit a slot. If
>> I had to guess from the copy I have I'd say it was cut from the
>> Spanish release version altogether. The English version is now out on
>> DVD.
>
>The dream sequence, with his father lecturing him and washing a pig (I
>think?), was in the DVD we saw. One odd detail was that there were a
>few words of English spoken by O'Herlihy, I'd say about 3 or 4 times
>in the film.
The DVD version boasts, I believe, the Spanish version as an audio option -- but if it's just a matter of a different audio channel, there's no way the disc will switch to this actual "Spanish language version" consisting of different takes.
craig.
17690
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:52pm
Subject: Re: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
> In a rather unsuccessful interview that a friend and I conducted with Godard some years
>ago, he referred (after I asked him about films such as Tout Va Bien) to his Dziga-Vertov
>period as akin to "school break." This was characteristically cryptic, but I took it to mean
>that he had either become embarrassed by these films or , in retrospect, wasn't taking
>them seriously anymore. But it's all a mater of decoding....
Is this interview available online anywhere?
craig.
17691
From: rpporton55
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:59pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
>
> Is this interview available online anywhere?
>
> craig.
No, I should have said it was unpublised. And it was unpublishable. I might have shared
some of the blame, but my friend kept asking JLG rather silly abstruse questions when he
should have been more concrete. It wasn't that long ago, but in the days before I had a
computer. So I don't even think I have a transcript; I must have destroyed it in disgust. My
nameless collaborator did videotape it, though. So there is a record of that interview that I
would never want to watch! RP
17692
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 7:13pm
Subject: Re: Wexler (Was: Tanner, anyone?)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>
> I just resaw that and would also note that Demy was combining
> documentary and fiction in a different way in Model Shop at the same
> time Wexler was shooting Medium Cool in Chicago.
>
I spoke with some people who were doing a documentary film, unrelated
to the convention, at the time of the Republican Convention this
summer. While they were in Times Square, one of them was sprayed by
mace. I suggested going back in the middle of the melee and making
another Medium Cool, but he was less than enthusiastic about my idea.
By the way I also heard from the same people that security at Lincoln
Center turned away someone wearing a simple bandana from the Anthony
Mann retrospective because they thought the bandana might have
political symbolism.
Paul
17693
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 11:22pm
Subject: Re: So-called right-wing filmmakers (was: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
>
> I'll kick it off. See Tag Gallagher's article on Milius at
> sensesofcinema for a reason liberal critics -- and even radical ones -
> - might like his work, and Tag's book on Ford, as well as numerous
> statements by the Straubs, for a more nuanced point of view on Ford.
>
I wasn't able to find Tag Gallagher's article. Do you have the web
location?
Paul
17694
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 11:35pm
Subject: Re: Making political films politically (Was: Fipresci site alert
> In a rather unsuccessful interview that a friend and I conducted
with Godard some years
> ago, he referred (after I asked him about films such as Tout Va
Bien) to his Dziga-Vertov
> period as akin to "school break." This was characteristically
cryptic, but I took it to mean
> that he had either become embarrassed by these films or , in
retrospect, wasn't taking
> them seriously anymore. But it's all a mater of decoding....
>
> R. Porton
It's my own impression that Godard has disavowed most or all of the
Dziga-Vertov stuff since the early 80s. But it's worth adding that,
according to J-P Gorin (seen recently in Vienna), Godard recently
invited him to come to Le Havre and for them both to publicly
discuss all their work together--something I don't believe he's been
interested in doing up until now.
Jonathan
17695
From:
Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 7:16pm
Subject: Re: Re: So-called right-wing filmmakers (was: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay)
Paul Gallagher wrote:
>I wasn't able to find Tag Gallagher's article. Do you have the web
>location?
Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge Tag's (great) piece on Milius is
not available online.
Peter
17696
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 0:20am
Subject: Re: Bunuel; Fernandez (NYC)
"It's also longer, because Spanish audiences don't know the Crusoe
story as well. The Spanish version I taped years ago off tv doesn't
contain the dream sequence where O'Herlihy plays himself and his
father"
That's in a French-dubbed version I have (which derives from the
Spanish print). This version is also much more violent than the
English version, though it's possible that the print of the English
version I saw (the one screened by the BBC) had been cut.
17697
From: Paul Fileri
Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 0:32am
Subject: Re: J-P Gorin (was: Making political films politically)
Paul Gallagher wrote:
> Although others are getting bored of this thread -- and so am I! --
> that reminds me of a comment Jean-Pierre Gorin made recently when he
> spoke in New York. Others who were there can correct me if I'm
> misinterpreting him.
>
> Gorin looked back on his role as "Yoko Ono" to Godard's "John Lennon,"
> leading him astray from the cinema into politics. He's proud of his
> role, and thinks the films they did together were "gorgeous." He
> describes John Simon standing up after LETTER TO JANE was shown,
> saying, "You people are sick." That was a proud moment for him.
> However, he points out, "nobody is Marxist anymore." And apparently
> Godard was not Marxist then. Gorin describes him as like a 16th
> century monk and that his use of politics was a rhetorical strategy.
Here's what I have, looking at my notes I took that afternoon at the
Walter Reade in September.
Gorin said that he still feels there is a very "alive" mix of naivete
and complexity in his films with Godard. It was an "idiotic," "ballsy"
and "prescient" brand of filmmaking. The films were done cheaply,
crudely, in a matter of days -- a sort of precursor to all the talk of
the "democratization of filmmaking." He also feels that it's no longer
interesting to look at which parts were done by him versus which were
done by Godard. It was "garage-band filmmaking" that was a matter of
form, not just content.
They thought in Marxist terms, "as many did" at the time. "We were
thinking we would right the wrongs of past practice," Gorin explained.
There's the cliché in which Gorin is often cast as Godard's "Yoko Ono,"
but the films are still worth looking at today, he insisted. Yet Gorin
also spoke of Godard and himself as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
standing next to the grave of Yorick (Marxism), because now there's
only "the ghost of Marxism." I believe Gorin's words were that Godard
was "addicted to rhetoric like a sixteenth-century monk."
He laughed and recalled the NYFF press screening after which John Simon
stood up to accuse the two of them of having "diseased minds." But
Gorin admitted that "in some ways, it was very naive" and that Simon
was "right in a way" -- they were a bit "diseased." With prompting
from Kent Jones, who invoked the line about the Velvet Underground
inspiring a thousand other bands, Gorin said they had wanted others to
follow them and let a thousand films bloom, "as can be done now." It
was "science fiction" then but the "Cassandra-like film" was an
"anticipation of now."
- Paul
17698
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 1:33am
Subject: Re: J-P Gorin (was: Making political films politically)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Paul Fileri
> Paul Gallagher wrote:
> Here's what I have, looking at my notes I took that afternoon at the
> Walter Reade in September.
Thank you! I'm glad you took notes.
Paul
>
> Gorin said that he still feels there is a very "alive" mix of naivete
> and complexity in his films with Godard. It was an "idiotic," "ballsy"
> and "prescient" brand of filmmaking.
17699
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 1:41am
Subject: Re: Re: J-P Gorin (was: Making political films politically)
>> Here's what I have, looking at my notes I took that afternoon at the
>> Walter Reade in September.
>
>Thank you! I'm glad you took notes.
>
>Paul
Yes -- many thanks for posting that, Paul F. Ed Grant (on this list?) also posted a long overview of the Gorin talk on the Godard listserv (which has now switched servers, and I'm reminded I need to update my account).
Anyone here who wants a copy of 'Vladimir et Rosa' on DVD, let me know off-list, and I'll make one from you (from a bootleg I bought on eBay -- print's a little beat-up, and the sound is a few seconds out of synch for the last few minutes, but otherwise it's fine). I'm including it in packages I'm sending to a few on this list already, which I'm taking care of finally after finding a brand of DVD-Rs that work fine with my SuperDrive.
As I've said before, maybe, I regard 'Vladimir et Rosa' very, very highly -- political content aside, it's one of the cinema's grandest comedies.
craig.
17700
From: jaketwilson
Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 2:01am
Subject: Re: So-called right-wing filmmakers (was: APOCALYPSE NOW screenplay)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Paul Gallagher wrote:
>
> >I wasn't able to find Tag Gallagher's article. Do you have the
web
> >location?
>
> Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge Tag's (great) piece
on Milius is
> not available online.
Actually, it was posted on this list: message 2739.
JTW
Home Film Art Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits) Links About Contact