Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact
a_film_by Main Page
Posts From the Internet Film Discussion Group, a_film_by
This group is dedicated to discussing film as art
from an auteurist perspective. The index to these files of posts can be found at http://www.fredcamper.com/afilmby/ The purpose of these files is to make our posts more accessible, for downloading and reading and to search engines.
Important: The copyright of each post below is owned by the
person who wrote the post, and reproducing it in any form requires
that person's permission.
It is possible to email the author of any post by finding a post
they have written in the a_film_by archives at
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/messages and
emailing them from that Web site.
18401
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:15am
Subject: Re: Aviator
"Gangs of NY was drastically recut at Harvey Weinstein's behest and
was definitely discombobulated"
Do we actually know that GANGS was recut? As far as I can recall,
Scorsese always insisted that the release version was his 'director's
cut'. I've seen a workprint which includes 20 minutes of extra
footage, none of which makes the film seem any less discombobulated.
18402
From: Michael E. Kerpan, Jr.
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:22pm
Subject: Re: Bernal and Brocka
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera" wrote:
> No--there's an Ozu list?! On yahoogroups, perhaps? I never knew...
A former e-group, turned into a Yahoo group:
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/ozu/messages
Oh well, if not there -- then a side discussion spawned by the
Miyazaki mailing list, perhaps?
MEK
18403
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:17pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- thebradstevens wrote:
> Do we actually know that GANGS was recut? As far as
> I can recall,
> Scorsese always insisted that the release version
> was his 'director's
> cut'. I've seen a workprint which includes 20
> minutes of extra
> footage, none of which makes the film seem any less
> discombobulated.
>
That'san interestig question in that, to my mind,
"Gangs" is far less discombulated on a narraive level
than "New York New York" (which I much prefer.)
Clearly there's a mix involved as"gangs" was a project
that "took on a life of its own" in a negative sense,
well into production. Cameron Diaz had a far stronger
and more compelling through-line than the
"Hamlet"-like hesitation of Leonardo over anile Day
Lewis'rather pallid villain. All manner of interesting
details about the world of Five Points ( the
underground caves, the cavernous bar/whorehoses
replete wiht "Molly Girls") werefar more interesting
than the main story.
Looking forward to "The Aviator."
18404
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:28pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> "Gangs of NY was drastically recut at Harvey Weinstein's behest and
> was definitely discombobulated"
>
> Do we actually know that GANGS was recut? As far as I can recall,
> Scorsese always insisted that the release version was
his 'director's
> cut'. I've seen a workprint which includes 20 minutes of extra
> footage, none of which makes the film seem any less discombobulated.
No, we don't actually know - it's always possible that Martin
Scorsese and Thelma Schoenmaker (sp?) simultaneously lost the ability
to make movies. An editor friend who saw Gangs with me commented that
TS had broken all records for overlapping dialogue from one scene
with the image of another - a favorite trick of hers for dealing with
MS's long rough-cuts: In Gangs it was used in about 15% of the
scenes. I would not expect Scorsese to talk about it.
Tonight, speaking to an audience of editors etc., MS and TS drily
observed that Aviator was around 3 hrs in the first cut, and that
reducing it was routine ("I can get 20 minutes out of that with no
sweat, Marty"; "after that it wasn't a struggle" etc.) That's code
for the audience, who are Academy voters, that the film wasn't fucked
with this time - something all there would have inferred from the
widely reported struggles that raged over the post-production of
Gangs, and from the condition in which the film was released. I doubt
if the 20 minute-longer version you saw was anything like a roughcut,
or a final director's cut.
I've always suspected that the subsequent decision to do two Kill
Bills was based on the failure of Gangs after Weinstein's famed
scissors had been at work on it. Ironically, there's probably a
better three-hour movie lurking in that material than the two-parter
that was released, but it certainly worked better commercially than
Gangs!
18405
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:58pm
Subject: Heaven and Hell art book
Last year, I attended an art exhibit called Heaven and Hell; this book
features the 110 original paintings created by 58 leading artists.
----------
We have all asked the question, "Is there a Heaven? or Is there a Hell?
at least once in our lives. And we have all been faced with the active
consideration about the subject matter when facing life's difficulties
and loss presented in daily life. Heaven and Hell provides a timely
topic in relationship to the state of the world and over saturation and
gross exaggeration of the media. Heaven and Hell offers a rich
environment and colorful backdrop to ponder the book's subject matter
for generations to come.
This hard bound, archival book volume features 110 original paintings,
created by 58 leading artists from around the United States, Mexico,
Ireland and Canada. Text features complimentary artist statements about
their artistic vision and 116 literary quotes that support the subject
matter.
----------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18406
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:23am
Subject: Heaven and Hell art book
Last year, I attended an art exhibit called Heaven and Hell; this book
features the 110 original paintings created by 58 leading artists.
Elizabeth
----------
We have all asked the question, "Is there a Heaven? or Is there a Hell?
at least once in our lives. And we have all been faced with the active
consideration about the subject matter when facing life's difficulties
and loss presented in daily life. Heaven and Hell provides a timely
topic in relationship to the state of the world and over saturation and
gross exaggeration of the media. Heaven and Hell offers a rich
environment and colorful backdrop to ponder the book's subject matter
for generations to come.
This hard bound, archival book volume features 110 original paintings,
created by 58 leading artists from around the United States, Mexico,
Ireland and Canada. Text features complimentary artist statements about
their artistic vision and 116 literary quotes that support the subject
matter.
----------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18407
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:24am
Subject: Fwd: Heaven and Hell art book
>
>
> Last year, I attended an art exhibit called Heaven and Hell; this book
> features the 110 original paintings created by 58 leading artists.
> Elizabeth
>
----------
> We have all asked the question, "Is there a Heaven? or Is there a
> Hell? at least once in our lives. And we have all been faced with the
> active consideration about the subject matter when facing life's
> difficulties and loss presented in daily life. Heaven and Hell
> provides a timely topic in relationship to the state of the world and
> over saturation and gross exaggeration of the media. Heaven and Hell
> offers a rich environment and colorful backdrop to ponder the book's
> subject matter for generations to come.
>
> This hard bound, archival book volume features 110 original paintings,
> created by 58 leading artists from around the United States, Mexico,
> Ireland and Canada. Text features complimentary artist statements
> about their artistic vision and 116 literary quotes that support the
> subject matter.
>
>
----------
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18408
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:44pm
Subject: Re: AVIATOR
I saw AVIATOR on WED.
DiCaprio does as best as he can. By the end in the hearings, you sense
he is HH, but I wish his persona as a young man would have carried some
of that. He was still a bit of LDiC at the beginning.
The first scene is a link to the 'germ phobia' but that child does not
seem to be the child who would grow up to be HH, a quick-minded active
genius.
The K Hepburn impersonation is there in image, but lacking the
confidence of the woman. Much time is spent with her, but to what end?
I was waiting for more reference HH (was she his Rosebud?). If just
one of many, too much time spent on KH, but the footage was probably
too hard for Scorsese to omit. Many entertaining scenes between KH and
HH: visit to the family home (which was completely demolished in real
life in a hurricane), breakup ('you are an actress'). Ava Gardner was
less entertaining and the high school girl really went no where.
Perhaps that is the story of his love life... it went no where.
I would have preferred more time with the aviation aspects and his male
colleagues. This was a tremendously risky activity and much more had
to be going on that just throwing out ideas and spending money. THE
CRASH scene is terrific (but the hospital scene ridiculous) except for
the flowers. I would have liked more about TWA and Pan Am going head
to head for routes or whatever.
The color is remarkable over the course of the film, not over done, but
just about as close to garish as tolerably possible. The production
design remarkable, especially given the variety of major sets.
The scenes peopled with many extras are terrific and remind me of
scenes from classic films before CGI. The production design of the Pan
Am office is quite nice.
I thought the film moved quite well given its length, not always smooth
or balanced, but doing a lot of different things to please a large
audience (no sex, some non-sexual nudity (?), one F-word). I think
people will like it, both audiences and critics.
I think the awards will be all over the place this year. (I saw the
Assassination of Richard Nixon with Sean Penn but don't now if it is a
2004 or 2005 release).
Elizabeth
> From: "Gabe Klinger"
> The first thing that struck me about THE AVIATOR -- which is as
> dull and discombobulated as GANGS OF NEW YORK -- is that
> it's a remake of 8 1/2 in many ways. The second thing that struck
> me is that Leo DiCaprio is actually amazing as Hughes.
>
> So I'll leave it at that for now. I wonder if others have seen it yet.
>
> Gabe
18409
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:49pm
Subject: RE: AVIATOR
I saw AVIATOR on WED.
DiCaprio does as best as he can. By the end in the hearings, you sense
he is HH, but I wish his persona as a young man would have carried some
of that. He was still a bit of LDiC at the beginning.
The first scene is a link to the 'germ phobia' but that child does not
seem to be the child who would grow up to be HH, a quick-minded active
genius.
The K Hepburn impersonation is there in image, but lacking the
confidence of the woman. Much time is spent with her, but to what end?
I was waiting for more reference HH (was she his Rosebud?). If just
one of many, too much time spent on KH, but the footage was probably
too hard for Scorsese to omit. Many entertaining scenes between KH and
HH: visit to the family home (which was completely demolished in real
life in a hurricane), breakup ('you are an actress'). Ava Gardner was
less entertaining and the high school girl really went no where.
Perhaps that is the story of his love life... it went no where.
I would have preferred more time with the aviation aspects and his male
colleagues. This was a tremendously risky activity and much more had
to be going on that just throwing out ideas and spending money. THE
CRASH scene is terrific (but the hospital scene ridiculous) except for
the flowers. I would have liked more about TWA and Pan Am going head
to head for routes or whatever.
The color is remarkable over the course of the film, not over done, but
just about as close to garish as tolerably possible. The production
design remarkable, especially given the variety of major sets.
The scenes peopled with many extras are terrific and remind me of
scenes from classic films before CGI. The production design of the Pan
Am office is quite nice.
I thought the film moved quite well given its length (tho the KH scenes
will strain some not fond of her persona; I like her), not always
smooth or balanced, but doing a lot of different things to please a
large audience (no sex, some non-sexual nudity (?), one F-word). I
think people will like it, both audiences and critics. I will see it
again, it deserves the attention.
I think the awards will be all over the place this year. (I saw the
Assassination of Richard Nixon with Sean Penn but don't now if it is a
2004 or 2005 release).
Elizabeth
> From: "Gabe Klinger"
> The first thing that struck me about THE AVIATOR -- which is as
> dull and discombobulated as GANGS OF NEW YORK -- is that
> it's a remake of 8 1/2 in many ways. The second thing that struck
> me is that Leo DiCaprio is actually amazing as Hughes.
>
> So I'll leave it at that for now. I wonder if others have seen it yet.
>
> Gabe
18410
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:56pm
Subject: RE: AVIATOR
I saw AVIATOR on WED.
DiCaprio does as best as he can. By the end in the hearings, you sense
he is HH, but I wish his persona as a young man would have carried some
of that. He was still a bit of LDiC at the beginning.
The first scene is a link to the 'germ phobia' but that child does not
seem to be the child who would grow up to be HH, a quick-minded active
genius.
The K Hepburn impersonation is there in image, but lacking the
confidence of the woman. Much time is spent with her, but to what end?
I was waiting for more reference HH (was she his Rosebud?). If just
one of many, too much time spent on KH, but the footage was probably
too hard for Scorsese to omit. Many entertaining scenes between KH and
HH: visit to the family home (which was completely demolished in real
life in a hurricane), breakup ('you are an actress'). Ava Gardner was
less entertaining and the high school girl really went no where.
Perhaps that is the story of his love life... it went no where.
I would have preferred more time with the aviation aspects and his male
colleagues. This was a tremendously risky activity and much more had
to be going on that just throwing out ideas and spending money. THE
CRASH scene is terrific (but the hospital scene ridiculous) except for
the flowers. I would have liked more about TWA and Pan Am going head
to head for routes or whatever.
The color is remarkable over the course of the film, not over done, but
just about as close to garish as tolerably possible. The production
design remarkable, especially given the variety of major sets.
The scenes peopled with many extras are terrific and remind me of
scenes from classic films before CGI. Just a delight to enjoy... real
eye candy for a cinematic viewer. The production design of the Pan Am
office is quite nice.
I would have liked more comments on SCARFACE than the OUTLAW. I
understand the breasts/tits/clouds and the 'staying away from violence'
but Scarface is a more interesting movie to me. The HELL's ANGELS
simulations are easy to appreciate for their efforts and fun to watch.
I thought the film moved quite well given its length (tho the KH scenes
will strain some not fond of her persona; I like her), not always
smooth or balanced, but doing a lot of different things to please a
large audience (no sex, some non-sexual nudity (?), one F-word). I
think people will like it, both audiences and critics. I will see it
again, it deserves the attention.
I think the awards will be all over the place this year. (I saw the
Assassination of Richard Nixon with Sean Penn but don't now if it is a
2004 or 2005 release).
Elizabeth
> From: "Gabe Klinger"
> The first thing that struck me about THE AVIATOR -- which is as
> dull and discombobulated as GANGS OF NEW YORK -- is that
> it's a remake of 8 1/2 in many ways. The second thing that struck
> me is that Leo DiCaprio is actually amazing as Hughes.
>
> So I'll leave it at that for now. I wonder if others have seen it yet.
>
> Gabe
18411
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:56pm
Subject: RE: AVIATOR
I saw AVIATOR on WED.
DiCaprio does as best as he can. By the end in the hearings, you sense
he is HH, but I wish his persona as a young man would have carried some
of that. He was still a bit of LDiC at the beginning.
The first scene is a link to the 'germ phobia' but that child does not
seem to be the child who would grow up to be HH, a quick-minded active
genius.
The K Hepburn impersonation is there in image, but lacking the
confidence of the woman. Much time is spent with her, but to what end?
I was waiting for more reference HH (was she his Rosebud?). If just
one of many, too much time spent on KH, but the footage was probably
too hard for Scorsese to omit. Many entertaining scenes between KH and
HH: visit to the family home (which was completely demolished in real
life in a hurricane), breakup ('you are an actress'). Ava Gardner was
less entertaining and the high school girl really went no where.
Perhaps that is the story of his love life... it went no where.
I would have preferred more time with the aviation aspects and his male
colleagues. This was a tremendously risky activity and much more had
to be going on that just throwing out ideas and spending money. THE
CRASH scene is terrific (but the hospital scene ridiculous) except for
the flowers. I would have liked more about TWA and Pan Am going head
to head for routes or whatever.
The color is remarkable over the course of the film, not over done, but
just about as close to garish as tolerably possible. The production
design remarkable, especially given the variety of major sets.
The scenes peopled with many extras are terrific and remind me of
scenes from classic films before CGI. Just a delight to enjoy... real
eye candy for a cinematic viewer. The production design of the Pan Am
office is quite nice.
I would have liked more comments on SCARFACE than the OUTLAW. I
understand the breasts/tits/clouds and the 'staying away from violence'
but Scarface is a more interesting movie to me. The HELL's ANGELS
simulations are easy to appreciate for their efforts and fun to watch.
I thought the film moved quite well given its length (tho the KH scenes
will strain some not fond of her persona; I like her), not always
smooth or balanced, but doing a lot of different things to please a
large audience (no sex, some non-sexual nudity (?), one F-word). I
think people will like it, both audiences and critics. I will see it
again, it deserves the attention.
I think the awards will be all over the place this year. (I saw the
Assassination of Richard Nixon with Sean Penn but don't now if it is a
2004 or 2005 release).
Elizabeth
> From: "Gabe Klinger"
> The first thing that struck me about THE AVIATOR -- which is as
> dull and discombobulated as GANGS OF NEW YORK -- is that
> it's a remake of 8 1/2 in many ways. The second thing that struck
> me is that Leo DiCaprio is actually amazing as Hughes.
>
> So I'll leave it at that for now. I wonder if others have seen it yet.
>
> Gabe
18412
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:01pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
Is *that* why the grass on the golf course was blue? I have to admit
I thought that the color timing simply hadn't been finalized. I don't
know if I found the movie dull, exactly, but I haven't found any of
the recent Scorseses particularly involving -- big and burnished to a
fault, airless and overworked. Blanchett is indeed marvelous, though
her comment just before she and Hughes make love that she's "all
sharp elbows and knees" only draws attention to the fact that she's,
well, not. I don't think they make cheekbones like that any more.
(The shoulder pads Sandy Powell gives her are, however, right on the
money). The test flight and crash of the XF11 (or whatever it is) is
balls-out brilliant, and I positively beamed to see Frances Conroy
(SIX FEET UNDER's Ruth Fisher) turn up as the Hepburn matriarch. But
Di Caprio -- boy, so bland and boring. Even in his least impressive
movies, Scorsese has always been dynamite with actors, but this is
two in a row with a big hole where the lead performance ought to be.
By the way, the singers you refer to are Rufus and Loudon Wainwright
(the latter played the mayor of the forest town in BIG FISH), who
have never looked as similar as they do with their hair slicked back
here. (Rufus, in fact, IS a bit felliniesque.) As a big fan of both,
it was a delight to see them turn up, and I love the way the father,
who appears in the second Coconut Grove scene, comes off as a
prematurely aged version of the son, as if the decadence of the place
has sapped the youth right out of him.
Sam
>
> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:44:47 -0000
> From: "hotlove666"
>Subject: Re: Aviator
>
>The digital simulation of two-strip Technicolor until 1935 -- much
>discussed in the "below the line" screening I attended tonight -- is
>one factor that makes this almost the only Hollywood in the Twenties
>film I like (the genre has always struck me as our version of le mode
>retro); another is the portrayal of the Coconut Grove as a den of
>lions, with a no doubt accurate but rather scary singer presiding.
>(HE'S a bit Fellinesque.) Scorsese's version of overlapping dialogue
>in the Hepburn lunch party scene makes it as brutal as one of Jake
>LaMotta's fights. All in all a pleasant surprise. I had almost
>written this director off.
18413
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:25pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
"it's always possible that Martin Scorsese and Thelma Schoenmaker
(sp?) simultaneously lost the ability to make movies."
As far as I'm concerned, they lost the ability to make movies (or at
least movies that had any compelling reason to exist) with KUNDUN,
and again on BRINGING OUT THE DEAD. GANGS OF NEW YORK simply made it
three times in a row. When I asked Monte Hellman what he thought of
it, all he said was "nobody in that film goes to the toilet"!
The version I saw was a workprint, but pretty rough - no voiceover,
no credits. Several scenes that required optical effects only existed
as illustrated storyboards! Nevertheless, the scene that introduced
Cameron Diaz helped to make a little more sense of her character (she
appears in a slow-motion shot immediately after a discussion of the
stolen music box, thus defining her as less a flesh and blood
character than the embodiment of 'romantic' dreams).
But this still feels to me like a film that was compromised long
before it entered the editing room - Scorsese's admirers are
attempting to rationalize their understandable disappointment by
fantasizing about the masterpiece that was destroyed by Harvey
Weinstein.
It's painful to think that not so long ago, Scorsese represented
everything good about American cinema, and Spielberg represented
everything bad about it. Yet the Spielberg quickie Leonardo D went on
to star in after GANGS is so much more purposeful and disciplined
that Scorsese's epic.
18414
From: Dave Kehr
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:31pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
Having just seen Universal's very fine new DVD of "Hell's Angels" --
it's the UCLA restoration, complete with the two-strip Technicolor
that obviously inspired Scorsese -- I couldn't help but be
distracted by all of the digital gunk in "The Aviator." I don't
think there's a single process shot in "Hell's Angels" (miniatures,
yes, but no rear projection), which gives an incredible immediacy to
the flying sequences, whereas "The Aviator" is all animated, and all
boring. There's certainly nothing in "The Aviator" that comes close
to the brilliance of the dirigible sequence in "HA" certainly one of
the most powerful visions of death that the movies have given us.
18415
From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:36pm
Subject: Re: Dial "!" for Criterion
from an article in today's Chicago Tribune:
Criterion keeps its upcoming slate under pretty tight wraps, and
release dates are indeed prone to delay for numerous reasons. But
[Criterion producer Kim] Hendrickson is willing to confirm a few new
titles for the Criterion faithful and hint about several more in store
for 2005 and beyond. These include Powell/Pressburger's "The 49th
Parallel" and "A Canterbury Tale," Antonioni's "L'Eclisse," Les
Blank's riveting Werner Herzog documentary "Burden of Dreams," and a
new edition of "Seven Samurai" (plus possibly other re-released
Kurosawa titles as well).
"We're always addressing the issues of the library and getting out new
filmmakers that we haven't been able to put out before," Hendrickson
says. "I feel like 2005 is the introduction of a lot of people to the
Criterion library that you haven't seen before. John Ford is possibly
on the horizon. There will be Mizoguchi and a few more women inserted
into the collection. But we're driven as much by what the collection
is missing and how we're going to address those gaps."
http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/movies/mmx-0411300323nov30,0,761895.story?coll=mmx-movies_heds
18416
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:53pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- samadams@e... wrote:
>
> By the way, the singers you refer to are Rufus and
> Loudon Wainwright
> (the latter played the mayor of the forest town in
> BIG FISH), who
> have never looked as similar as they do with their
> hair slicked back
> here. (Rufus, in fact, IS a bit felliniesque.)
More than a "bit"
http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g011/rufuswainright.html
Rufus is an amazing character. Somebody should give
him a chance to make a movie musical of his own
someday.
The song "Dinner at Eight" on his "Want One" CD is all
about his often testy relationship with his father.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
18417
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: Dial "!" for Criterion
--- Jason Guthartz wrote:
These include
> Powell/Pressburger's "The 49th
> Parallel" and "A Canterbury Tale," Antonioni's
> "L'Eclisse," Les
> Blank's riveting Werner Herzog documentary "Burden
> of Dreams," and a
> new edition of "Seven Samurai" (plus possibly other
> re-released
> Kurosawa titles as well).
>
Glad to hear they're bringing out "L'Eclisse" -- far
and away my favorite Antonioni. Not only Alain Delon
at his most beautiful but the stock market crash scene
is amazing. Nothing like it anywhere else in the
cinema. I have a Japanese laser of it in French.
Yes there was a French version ebcause everything was
post-synched and Monica Vitti is multi-lingual.
It also has one of Fusco best minimal scores, and the
DP was the greatest of them all - Gianni Di Venannzo.
I did the liner notes for Criterion's "Seven Samurai"
laser. I imagie they're keeping them for the DVD.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
18418
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:02pm
Subject: OT but curious about F-word
F***! BBC to air Springer musical
By Tara Conlan, Daily Mail
3 December 2004
http://www.thisislondon.com/showbiz/articles/15099271?
source=Daily%20Mail&ct=5
The BBC is to screen the most expletive-strewn programme in TV history.
More than 8,000 obscenities will be broadcast when BBC2 shows a screen
version of the musical Jerry Springer The Opera in January.
The figure dwarfs the previous swearing record of 246 when Channel 4
aired the film Reservoir Dogs last year.
EAN Comment: I thought The Big Lebonski would have had the swearing
record.
18419
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:05pm
Subject: Re: Bringing out the Dead (Was: The Aviator)
Is it a consensus that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is the worst film ever? It is
my favorite Scorsese from the 90s
----- Original Message -----
From: "thebradstevens"
To:
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:25 PM
Subject: [a_film_by] Re: Aviator
>
>
> "it's always possible that Martin Scorsese and Thelma Schoenmaker
> (sp?) simultaneously lost the ability to make movies."
>
> As far as I'm concerned, they lost the ability to make movies (or at
> least movies that had any compelling reason to exist) with KUNDUN,
> and again on BRINGING OUT THE DEAD. GANGS OF NEW YORK simply made it
> three times in a row. When I asked Monte Hellman what he thought of
> it, all he said was "nobody in that film goes to the toilet"!
>
> The version I saw was a workprint, but pretty rough - no voiceover,
> no credits. Several scenes that required optical effects only existed
> as illustrated storyboards! Nevertheless, the scene that introduced
> Cameron Diaz helped to make a little more sense of her character (she
> appears in a slow-motion shot immediately after a discussion of the
> stolen music box, thus defining her as less a flesh and blood
> character than the embodiment of 'romantic' dreams).
>
> But this still feels to me like a film that was compromised long
> before it entered the editing room - Scorsese's admirers are
> attempting to rationalize their understandable disappointment by
> fantasizing about the masterpiece that was destroyed by Harvey
> Weinstein.
>
> It's painful to think that not so long ago, Scorsese represented
> everything good about American cinema, and Spielberg represented
> everything bad about it. Yet the Spielberg quickie Leonardo D went on
> to star in after GANGS is so much more purposeful and disciplined
> that Scorsese's epic.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
18420
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:11pm
Subject: Re: Bringing out the Dead (Was: The Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Is it a consensus that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is the worst film
ever? It is
> my favorite Scorsese from the 90s
I liked it, but then I also like Kundun. Neither has the stature of
Casino, which I recently resaw, but then very little recent cinema
does. Scorsese himself has yet to match it.
18421
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:24pm
Subject: Re: OT but curious about F-word
As Michael Wadleigh once pointed out, it would be pretty difficult to
top WOODSTOCK, in which you have several thousand people
simultaneously shouting the word 'fuck'.
18422
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:38pm
Subject: Re: Re: OT but curious about F-word
--- thebradstevens wrote:
>
> As Michael Wadleigh once pointed out, it would be
> pretty difficult to
> top WOODSTOCK, in which you have several thousand
> people
> simultaneously shouting the word 'fuck'.
>
>
>
>
And as we've been speaking of his editing skill -- or
lack of same -- it should be pointed out that Marty
and Thelma edited "Woodstock."
I wasat the party in Wadleigh's aprtment on th eupper
est Side when he came up to them and pleaded for their
help.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
18423
From: Jonathan Takagi
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:20pm
Subject: Re: Bringing out the Dead (Was: The Aviator)
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:05:16 -0200, Ruy Gardnier
wrote:
> Is it a consensus that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is the worst film ever? It is
> my favorite Scorsese from the 90s
While I was watching it, someone started moaning really loud up in front.
After the theatre staff came in and went back out several times, they ended
up calling the paramedics and cancelled the screening with fifteen minutes left
in the movie. I never did go back to watch the end.
Jonathan Takagi
18424
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:27pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
Detroit here is still Aviator-less. Am laying in a supply of banana ice cream
to take to the premiere.
But wish to echo Dave Kerr's comments on "Hell's Angels" (seen here on cable
TV). This has got to be one of the most lavishly produced air films ever made.
And the dirigible scenes are unforgettable.
Have read that HA was mainly really directed by James Whale. It certainly has
the German Expressionist look that sometimes went with Whale's productions,
with the sort of elaborate sets one finds in Lang's Metropolis, Ulmer, etc.
Plus Whale's concerns over the horrors of war in general, and WW I in particular.
Sam Goldwyn once chewed out a screenwriter: "You call this a script? Give me
two screenwriters, and I could have written this script myself!". Always had
the impression that this summed up Hughes' movie "creativity" too: that
everything was ghosted by his employees. Could be completely wrong.
By the way, loved Kundun. This has always been my favorite Scorsese film.
Mike Grost
18425
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:29pm
Subject: Re: Dial "!" for Criterion
> I did the liner notes for Criterion's "Seven Samurai"
> laser. I imagie they're keeping them for the DVD.
I've got the earlier DVD of "Seven Samurai", and your very
informative liner notes are included.
As for the re-release, I assume it's going to be similar to their
recent "M" disc, with bonus features not present on the first
barebones edition.
-Aaron
18426
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:32pm
Subject: Re: Bringing out the Dead (Was: The Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Is it a consensus that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is the worst film
ever? It is
> my favorite Scorsese from the 90s
Saw this 9 times during its initial theatrical run, and haven't seen
it since. I wouldn't go so far as to say its my favorite Scorsese of
the 90s (that would be CASINO), but I think it's got a great deal of
flair and heart that was, for me, was missing in GANGS. Nic Cage was
even solid, and I'm not the biggest fan of his. I recall Scorsese
likening him to Lon Chaney during press for the film.
-Aaron
18427
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:36pm
Subject: Re: DN 993 OT apologize for email snafu - email was being sent but remained in out box ean eom
18428
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:48pm
Subject: Re: Bringing out the Dead (Was: The Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Takagi
wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:05:16 -0200, Ruy Gardnier
> wrote:
>
> > Is it a consensus that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is the worst film
ever? It is
> > my favorite Scorsese from the 90s
>
> While I was watching it, someone started moaning really loud up in
front.
> After the theatre staff came in and went back out several times,
they ended
> up calling the paramedics and cancelled the screening with fifteen
minutes left
> in the movie. I never did go back to watch the end.
>
> Jonathan Takagi
Would be curious to know what ER thinks of this film (and this
incident!)
18429
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:51pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
Always had
> the impression that this summed up Hughes' movie "creativity" too:
that
> everything was ghosted by his employees. Could be completely wrong.
It's sure not how they portray it in the film.
> By the way, loved Kundun. This has always been my favorite Scorsese
film.
I think it's a very good film - an experiment combining lots of
different contemporary forms (music videos, commercials, etc.) to
produce a contemporary epic style, kind of like Ray kicking the
Bronston style in the ass in 55 Days and particularly King of Kings.
VERY inventive filmmaking, seriously underappreciated.
18430
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 6:11pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
"I think it's a very good film - an experiment combining lots of
different contemporary forms (music videos, commercials, etc.) to
produce a contemporary epic style, kind of like Ray kicking the
Bronston style in the ass in 55 Days and particularly King of Kings.
VERY inventive filmmaking, seriously underappreciated."
I guess there's a kind of auteurist logic in Scorsese going from
KUNDUN to THE AVIATOR. KUNDUN is a film that Howard Hughes would
surely have loved, since it exposes the threat posed to the 'free'
world by godless communists. Hughes should have produced this for RKO
(perhaps under the title I ESCAPED FROM THE RED MENACE), with Jack
Webb playing the Dalai Lama. It's telling that the kind of project
Hughes offered to his pet directors as a loyalty test should become
a 'personal' work by one of the most widely admired American
directors of the 90s.
18431
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:22pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
"I guess there's a kind of auteurist logic in Scorsese going from
KUNDUN to THE AVIATOR."
But he didn't go from directly from KUNDUN to THE AVIATOR, and his
latest isn't his last.
"KUNDUN is a film that Howard Hughes would surely have loved, since
it exposes the threat posed to the 'free' world by godless
communists."
You must have watched the movie through RCP glasses. Hughes would
have loved it as much as Rupert Murdoch loved it (see below.)
"Hughes should have produced this for RKO (perhaps under the title I
ESCAPED FROM THE RED MENACE), with Jack Webb playing the Dalai Lama.
It's telling that the kind of project Hughes offered to his pet
directors as a loyalty test should become a 'personal' work by one
of the most widely admired American directors of the 90s."
KUNDUN is a post-cold war movie; it's about the end of a way of life
brought about by forced modernization whether capitalist or
communist. The movie is completely different from any Hughes project
because it was made under completely different circumstances; China
is a major trading partner of the US, and if that was the case during
Hughes' day he would no doubt behave like Rupert Murdoch and
propagandize in favor of the PRC (KUNDUN will never be shown on
Murdoch's Star TV.)
Richard
18432
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:18pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
Brad Stevens wrote:
>It's painful to think that not so long ago, Scorsese represented
>everything good about American cinema, and Spielberg represented
>everything bad about it. Yet the Spielberg quickie Leonardo D went on
>to star in after GANGS is so much more purposeful and disciplined
>that Scorsese's epic.
I fully agree. The Spielberg you're referring to - "Catch Me If You Can" -
was just about my favorite narrative film of 2002. It may be unfair to compare
the two directors, Spielberg and Scorsese, but I don't think anything
Scorsese has done lately can match Spielberg's recent quartet of "A.I.," "Minority
Report," "Catch Me," and "The Terminal." The last one isn't as good as the
three which preceded it, but the final sequence, for example, is stunning; a
"Technicolor fantasia," as Henry Sheehan put it, celebrating in visual terms
Victor's entry into America and the accomplishment of his goal. I can't think of
anything as formally interesting going on in, say, "Gangs of New York."
The last Scorsese I liked was "Cape Fear."
Peter
18433
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:32pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
"But he didn't go from directly from KUNDUN to THE AVIATOR, and his
latest isn't his last"
I never said he went directly from one film to the other. Nor did I
say that THE AVIATOR was his 'last' film. You're putting words into
my mouth.
"KUNDUN is a post-cold war movie; it's about the end of a way of life
brought about by forced modernization whether capitalist or
communist."
It's about the end of a way of life which allowed religious leaders
to live in luxury by exploiting the superstitions of their people. At
least, that's my point of view - but it's one that Scorsese clearly
has little time for, since he presents the end of this 'way of life'
as a tragedy, and depicts the communists as stereotyped bad guys who
like raping nuns. It's RAMBO for art-house audiences.
The 'forced modernization in KUNDUN isn't 'capitalist or communist' -
it's communist. The two terms are not interchangeable (though the
film would have been more challenging if it had presented them as
such).
"The movie is completely different from any Hughes project because it
was made under completely different circumstances; China is a major
trading partner of the US, and if that was the case during Hughes'
day he would no doubt behave like Rupert Murdoch and propagandize in
favor of the PRC (KUNDUN will never be shown on Murdoch's Star TV.)"
Very interesting. But I don't see how any of this is relevant to a
reading of the film (which doesn't deal with modern-day China).
18434
From: Dave Kehr
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:36pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
Whale is credited with "dialogue direction," which presumably means
all the awful stiff upper lip stuff with Ben Lyon and James Hall, by
far the weakest material in the film. Still, it's hard to imagine
Whale, with all of his sexual reticence, directing the utterly
blatant, "Outlaw"-esque scene in which Harlow (billed as "Harlowe")
seduces Lyons. I've never heard of anyone ghosting the aviation
stuff, which was clearly where Hughes's heart lay and was his main
reason for wanting to make the movie.
"The Aviator" is very disingenous about Hughes's movie career, with
no mention of the films he produced before "Hell's Angels" (a few of
which will be on TCM this month) and no reference to his shameful
RKO tenure (though he does seem to have sheltered Nick Ray from the
blacklisters). Between "The Aviator" and "Hell's Angels," there's
no doubt in my mind to whom the more personal filmmaker is, and it
ain't Marty.
Dave Kehr
18435
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:38pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- ptonguette@a... wrote:
>
> The last Scorsese I liked was "Cape Fear."
>
For me it was "The Age of Innocence." Times have
changed. Filmmaking has changed. Film MARKETING has
replaced it --leving him in the lurch.
I'm amazed he's gotten this far. When I saw"Who's That
Knocking on My Door" (in an early cut when it was
entitled "I Call First") I loved it but never imagined
he'd have a future outside of a brand of New York
independent filmmaking that was dying even then
(Shirley Clarke, Morris Engel, Cassavetes "Shadows"
and above all, Jonas Mekas' "Guns of the Trees" -- the
quintessential New York movie.)
He was an outsider when he began and he's STILL an
outsider. One of his students, Oliver Stone, has TWO
Oscars. Marty? Zip.
But he keeps on keepin' on.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
18436
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:42pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
"I never said he went directly from one film to the other. Nor did I
say that THE AVIATOR was his 'last' film. You're putting words into
my mouth."
My apologies, but I wasn't certain of your intent there.
"It's about the end of a way of life which allowed religious leaders
to live in luxury by exploiting the superstitions of their people. At
least, that's my point of view - but it's one that Scorsese clearly
has little time for, since he presents the end of this 'way of life'
as a tragedy, and depicts the communists as stereotyped bad guys who
like raping nuns. It's RAMBO for art-house audiences."
Well, in my view the deliberate destruction of a traditonal way of
life is a tragedy, especially when it dosen't result in improved
conditons for the subject people, and it was certainly a tragedy for
the 1.2 million ethnic Tibetans who perished under the PRC
occupation. We're not talking about a revolution of the Tibetan
people against their overlords, a revolution that would be entirely
justifiable. The PRC set up a new system of exploitation and a new
ruling class of cadres, and Tibetans are second class citizens in the
TAR, a fact acknowledged by Deng Xiao Peng as long ago as 1978. The
CCP has often criticized itself for "mistakes" in the TAR and has
made a few small steps to ameliorate conditions there.
Now if you're a Maoist, then Deng is a capitalist roader who betrayed
the revolution so anything he had to say is moot. My Maoist friends
reject anything coming from the party after the fall of the Gang of
Four and deny that anything like genocide took place in Tibet. They
long for the great days of the Cultural Revolution, and on these
issues I respectfully dissent. (And yes, I've read the books on the
TAR issued by the Foreign Language Press but Amnesty International's
reports are more convincing.)
"The 'forced modernization in KUNDUN isn't 'capitalist or communist' -
it's communist. The two terms are not interchangeable (though the
film would have been more challenging if it had presented them as
such)."
I agree with that.
"...I don't see how any of this is relevant to a reading of the film
(which doesn't deal with modern-day China)."
But how is likening the movie to a Howard Hughes project relevant to
a reading of the film? The movie's distribution in Asia was limited
by Disney as a result of Chinese lobbying, and while this may not
necessarily be relevant to a reading of the film it does cast doubt
the cold war analogy you seem to be suggesting by invoking Hughes.
By the way, there's a very interesting movie about life in today's
TAR called WINDHORSE which was partially (and secretly) shot in Lhasa.
In comradely disagreement,
Richard
18437
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:24pm
Subject: BRINGING OUT THE DEAD
I haven't seen this movie since it first came out, but would like to
see it again. I remember being struck by the 'realistic psychology' of
it all. Paramedics are first responders and interact with patients in
their own environments, often outside of homes, in the streets, car
crashes, bars, and even theaters (as Jonathan posted). It makes for
'no escape' from the work area for these people who come in all
varieties and certainly bring those particular personalities to the
job.
Certainly as an ER MD, one is always ready to respond, help when
outside of the ER (which is in someway a sterile environment, and one
that the MD's and RN's can leave)... the paramedics don't get to leave
the world in which they work, they live in that world. I think I
remember that as one of the subtle views of the film. As an aside, I
personally found the requirement of being on the job / doing the job
for 24 hours straight less difficult than the sense of having to remain
in that place for 24 hours, almost like a penal existence... once you
signed in*, you couldn't leave, although I would walk outside every so
often.
*I worked in an ER that had only one doctor on duty.
18438
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:30pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
"in my view the deliberate destruction of a traditonal way of life is
a tragedy"
Not always. The Third Reich was certainly a 'way of life' - and anti-
Semitism had a long tradiiton in Germany.
"especially when it doesn't result in improved conditons for the
subject people, and it was certainly a tragedy for the 1.2 million
ethnic Tibetans who perished under the PRC occupation."
All true. But none of this exonerates Tibet's religious leaders from
criticism - except in Scorsese's mind.
"But how is likening the movie to a Howard Hughes project relevant to
a reading of the film?"
KUNDUN clearly belongs to a tradition of anti-communist hysteria in
American cinema. I just object to the idea that Scorsese's art-house
stylistics somehow elevate his film above such things as I MARRIED A
COMMUNIST and RED DAWN.
18439
From: Elizabeth Nolan
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:33pm
Subject: DEATH scene: THE TUNNEL
A previous post mentioned a death scene. I recently saw THE TUNNEL
about people trying to get a tunnel built from West Berlin to East
Berlin to get their loved one out. There is a scene where a woman is
at the wall (which was just erected in the course of the movie) trying
to talk with her boyfriend who is on the other side. They have met
several times at different points in the wall which the boyfriend has
to work on building. He tries to escape through the barbed wire, etc,
tries to climb the wall... if first shot by a young soldier, warned,
shot again, warned by an anguished young soldier who tried to stop
another soldier from shooting the boyfriend again. All this is going
on while the girlfriend is hearing this. The wall is too high for
either to climb. Another man tries to help and his simple words "A man
is dying" struck me as just perfect. If we could change the words from
"... is dead or died" to "... is dying" we might be struck by what we
could do to avoid the finality of so many events.
The scene continues with the girl trying to reach up over the wall to
the boy, trying to reach, more shots with him slumping down, and she
slumps down, still trying to touch him proximally through the wall.
18440
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:20pm
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
Friday, 11.20 PM. Just watched another DRAGNET episode - 'The Big
Bar', from 1953. Once again, I have the impression that everything
has been ruthlessly pared away to essentials, and simultaneously
expanded to bizarre lengths. The opening scene shows Joe Friday and
two other cops arriving at a bar where a double-homicide has taken
place (very striking overhead shots showing Friday discovering the
corpses). Friday's main witness is a bartender who speaks no English -
so all of Friday's questions must be translated into Spanish, and
the man's responses translated back into English, thus doubling the
scene's length.
Later, there is a close-up of the coroner reading his report - but
although we see the man's lips moving, what we hear is Friday's
voiceover narration telling us what the man is saying!
The climax is a five-minute car chase in which we don't actually see
the car chase! We simply hear reports coming over the police radio
while we observe one of the cops marking the progress of the chase on
a map.
Was Webb turning out work of such obvious stylistic ambition on a
weekly basis? If he'd been making 'B' films instead of disposable
television segments, the cultists would be all over him.
18441
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:58pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
--- thebradstevens wrote:
> Was Webb turning out work of such obvious stylistic
> ambition on a
> weekly basis?
Not always. Most of the time the shows were quite
simple. The central idea was everything in the show
was based on a version of an actual case and/or dealt
with he details of police investigations that laymen
don't really know about. The example of having to
translate the testilemony of a witness who deosn't
speak English is typical. This happens all the time in
reallife, but Webb saw fit to make it the centerpiece
of that show in that particular way.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
18442
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:14pm
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
There are some ancestors in feature films for the techniques described in
Dragnet. These are "semi-documentary" crime films, a genre popular in the
1945-1953 timeframe. The genre as a whole certainly influenced Dragnet.
"He Walked By Night" (Alfred Werker, and reportedly Anthony Mann) has a
sequence in which a Hispanic officer translates the dialogue of a Spanish speaking
witness. This film is a look at the LAPD, and a lab officer is played by ...
Jack Webb. Webb's involvement here sometimes causes this picture to be cited as
an ancestor for Dragnet, although one suspects the Truth is More Complicated.
"The Naked City" (Jules Dassin), which looks at the New York police solving a
murder, has a narrator who sometimes says the dialogue being silently mouthed
by a character on screen.
Radio was very big in this era - and was the original home of Dragnet.
Unusual narrative techniques were apparently popular in radio - and apparently
influenced both Orson Welles and film noir, including the semi-docs.
A chart showing a history of semi-documentary film is on my web site at:
http://members.aol.com/MG4273/semigrid.htm
Mike Grost
18443
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 2:21am
Subject: New Film Noir book
All A FILM BY-ers will be interested to see THE FILM NOIR READER 4, just out
(eds. Alain Silver & James Ursini, Limelight Editions, New Jersey). The back
cover highlights contributors Robin Wood, JP Telotte, R Barton Palmer and
Robert Porforio, but a glance at the contents page also reveals Tony
Williams, Michael E Grost - and me!
A hefty piece by ex-CAHIERS dude Nicolas Saada looks interesting, too.
Film noir may (or may not) take place in Hell, but this book is Heaven.
Adrian
18444
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 1:22am
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
Mike's point is well-taken. In fact, the semi-doc predates The Naked
City by a few years and was spurred, I suspect, by the wartime newsreels
which, on the homefront, must have had a disproportionate impact -- no
TV, remember. Certainly a film like House on 92nd Street owes much to
its producer's (Louis de Rochemont) background in newsreels.
I suspect that the (slow) movement towards lighter, more portable
equipment had something to do with all this as well.
(An aside, someone should write an essay sometime on the need of new-ish
media to prove their verisimilitude; after all, the early English novel
sold itself at first as a product of "reality." Think of all those Defoe
and Richardson novels that were predicated on having been "discovered"
manuscripts rather than acts of imagination. And then compare to the
historical recreation subgenre in early cinema. But that's a story for
another time.)
George (Not discovered, entirely imaginary) Robinson
MG4273@a... wrote:
>There are some ancestors in feature films for the techniques described in
>Dragnet. These are "semi-documentary" crime films, a genre popular in the
>1945-1953 timeframe. The genre as a whole certainly influenced Dragnet.
>"He Walked By Night" (Alfred Werker, and reportedly Anthony Mann) has a
>sequence in which a Hispanic officer translates the dialogue of a Spanish speaking
>witness. This film is a look at the LAPD, and a lab officer is played by ...
>Jack Webb. Webb's involvement here sometimes causes this picture to be cited as
>an ancestor for Dragnet, although one suspects the Truth is More Complicated.
>"The Naked City" (Jules Dassin), which looks at the New York police solving a
>murder, has a narrator who sometimes says the dialogue being silently mouthed
>by a character on screen.
>Radio was very big in this era - and was the original home of Dragnet.
>Unusual narrative techniques were apparently popular in radio - and apparently
>influenced both Orson Welles and film noir, including the semi-docs.
>A chart showing a history of semi-documentary film is on my web site at:
>http://members.aol.com/MG4273/semigrid.htm
>
>Mike Grost
>
>
>
18445
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:41pm
Subject: Re: New Film Noir book
This book is my first ever publication in paper print as a film critic.
(Everything else has appeared on my web site & nowhere else.)
And this e-mail is the first news that the book was actually published.
And the first news about the very distinguished colleagues who are in the
book.
Will check to see if it is in Detroit bookstores tomorrow. Want to read the
whole book.
Thanks for the news,
Mike Grost
In a message dated 04-12-03 20:23:01 EST, Adrian Martin writes:
<< All A FILM BY-ers will be interested to see THE FILM NOIR READER 4, just
out
(eds. Alain Silver & James Ursini, Limelight Editions, New Jersey). The back
cover highlights contributors Robin Wood, JP Telotte, R Barton Palmer and
Robert Porforio, but a glance at the contents page also reveals Tony
Williams, Michael E Grost - and me!
A hefty piece by ex-CAHIERS dude Nicolas Saada looks interesting, too.
Film noir may (or may not) take place in Hell, but this book is Heaven.
Adrian
>>
18446
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:03pm
Subject: Re: New Film Noir book
Congratulations to Tony, Mike, and Adrian for their contributions to this
terrific-sounding book! I'll be sure to pick it up as soon as I can.
On the topic of noirs (and at the risk of self-promotion), buffs of the genre
may be interested to know that a 16,000 word article of mine on Bob Rafelson
will be appearing in the forthcoming edition of The Film Journal. I
interviewed Rafelson extensively for the piece. This is relevant because Rafelson's
"The Postman Always Rings Twice," "Black Widow," "Blood and Wine," and -
especially - last year's brilliant "No Good Deed" are the films I think of when the
subject of contemporary noir films comes up.
Peter
18447
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:10pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
David Ehrenstein wrote:
>For me it was "The Age of Innocence."
I like "The Age of Innocence" too, but I never felt it was the
no-holds-barred masterpiece it should have been. But I should probably have another look at
it. And I don't necessarily make great claims for "Cape Fear" either, but I
think it is awfully sleek as a work of efficient movie storytelling (which is
more than I can say for "Gangs of New York.")
The one Scorsese film I love is "After Hours." This may or may not be
related to the film's debt to "The Trial." Parenthetically, there's a pretty funny
story about "The Trial" which I thought of when Fred was talking about the
sort of films screened in art houses and thought of as "movie art" back in the
60s. Peter Bogdanovich has talked of the time he and Welles were once at a
screening of "The Trial" at, I believe, a museum or some other formal setting.
Welles was laughing uncontrollably at the film; he thought of it as a comedy.
Not realizing who he was (or maybe they did?), the highbrow audience kept
shushing Welles all throughout the screening. I believe Bogdanovich tells this
story in Leslie Megahey's documentary, "The Orson Welles Story."
Peter
18448
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:22pm
Subject: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
When I saw "Man of Marble", Wajda's often very funny satirical film, I was
the only person laughing in the theater. But these were not snobs. The whole
rest of the sparse audience was elderly Polish-American senior citizens, hungry
for a rare glimpse of the homeland they had left so many years ago. And they
were appalled by my laughter. I hastily toned down my response to silent
chuckling, which offended no one.
People can enjoy film for all sorts of legitimate reasons...
When I saw "White Dog" (Fuller) in 1982, the only other people in the theater
were six little old ladies who said "Aww!" every time the dog showed up. The
Detroit ad campaign was a low key "He was a beautiful dog she nursed back to
health". These animal lovers were the only ones who turned out for the film...
Mike Grost
18449
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 2:34am
Subject: Re: New Film Noir book
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> Congratulations to Tony, Mike, and Adrian for their contributions
to this
> terrific-sounding book! I'll be sure to pick it up as soon as I
can.
>
> > Peter
Thanks Peter,
As usual, the author is the last one to know that it has come out.
But I'm certain Alain Silver has sent a copy out and it may arrive
in Monday's mail along with a royalty check which, I hope, will pay
half the cost of my DVD Christmas present THE YAKUZA PAPERS!
Tony
18450
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 2:39am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens" <- except in
Scorsese's mind.bradstevens22@h...> wrote:
>
> "in my view the deliberate destruction of a traditonal way of life
is
> a tragedy"
>
> Not always. The Third Reich was certainly a 'way of life' - and
anti-
> Semitism had a long tradiiton in Germany.
> > KUNDUN clearly belongs to a tradition of anti-communist hysteria
in
> American cinema. I just object to the idea that Scorsese's art-
house
> stylistics somehow elevate his film above such things as I MARRIED
A
> COMMUNIST and RED DAWN.
Didn't Joe Pesci want to play in it? He would have made a great
Chairman Mao.
Tony Williams
18451
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:12am
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
"Dragnet" was, of course, originally a radio program which began in
1949. Jack Webb developed the show (with the support of the corrupt
LAPD) having starred in two detective series, "Pat Novak: For Hire"
and "Jeff Regan, Investigator."
I've listened to many epsiodes of "Dragnet," and the radio program is
not nearly as pared down as the two TV seriers were. What is most
striking about the radio show is how grim it is. There was nothing
exotic about the landscape of Dragnet -- it lacked the sophisticated
banter of, say, Blake Edwards's "Richard Diamond," on which star Dick
Powell always managed to croon a tune and the stylized hardboiled
dialogue and characters of a "Broadway Is My Beat" or "Yours Truly,
Johnny Dollar." And since there was no aural equivalent of the
flamboyant visual chiaroscuro that makred film noir movies, the
result was overwhelmingly bleak (so much so that I'm surprised the
show was a hit). There was one episode in which a boy standing on
his porch gets killed by a stray bullet and we hear the mother's
reaction as Joe Friday tells her the news -- it is disconcerting,
almost obscene, in its intimacy, as the listener feels like an
intruder on much too personal a moment.
Each year, Dragnet presented a special Christmas episode, "A Rifle
For Christmas," in which a kid gets a gun as a present and
accidentally kills his best friend -- Happy Holidays!
By the way, Jack Webb may have been conservative, but priot
to "Dragnet" he appeared on a radio series called "One Out Of Seven,"
which attacked racial prejudice and promoted brotherhood.
18452
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:50pm
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
Have been thoroughly enjoying this discussion of Dragnet.
And by the way, have not intended anything I posted to be at all a put-down
of the show. Was just trying to link it to other works.
On the Radio show being grim:
Lots of early television seems surprisingly grim, too. The Gunsmoke episodes
seen recently on the Western Chanel seem relentlessly tragic, often dealing
with the severely disturbed. This whole approach seems to have been an accepted
part of TV drama. Early TV was "talky". There was not much budget except for
characters to stand around and talk. And often the talk seems to psychoanalyze
the characters and explore in depth all their tragic flaws.
Mike Grost
18453
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:35am
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
--- George Robinson wrote:
>
> (An aside, someone should write an essay sometime on
> the need of new-ish
> media to prove their verisimilitude; after all, the
> early English novel
> sold itself at first as a product of "reality."
> Think of all those Defoe
> and Richardson novels that were predicated on having
> been "discovered"
> manuscripts rather than acts of imagination. And
> then compare to the
> historical recreation subgenre in early cinema. But
> that's a story for
> another time.)
>
Actually someone wrote a novel about it.
"Myron" by Gore Vidal
This sequel to Myra Breckinridge takes place in a
Hollywood nether-world in which space and time are
intersected. The border is marked by a movie theater
playing "Call Northside 777" -- a Louis de Rochemont production.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
18454
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:35am
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> On the Radio show being grim:
> Lots of early television seems surprisingly grim, too. The Gunsmoke
episodes
> seen recently on the Western Chanel seem relentlessly tragic, often
dealing
> with the severely disturbed.
Like "Dragnet," "Gunsmoke" was originally a radio series, and a
highly literate one at that. It's surprising how often on the radio
program highly likable and/or sympathetic characters end up dead.
By the way, Mike, if you get the Good Life cable channel, every
Monday it's showiing what I consider to be the greatest of all TV
crime shows, "Harry O."
And congratulations to you, Tony and Adrian on the publication of the
publication of Film Noir Reader 4!
18455
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:39am
Subject: Re: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
--- MG4273@a... wrote:
> When I saw "Man of Marble", Wajda's often very funny
> satirical film, I was
> the only person laughing in the theater. But these
> were not snobs. The whole
> rest of the sparse audience was elderly
> Polish-American senior citizens, hungry
> for a rare glimpse of the homeland they had left so
> many years ago. And they
> were appalled by my laughter.
My boyfriend Bill was nearly tossed out of the Thalia
for laughing during Bunuel's "El." The audience had
taken it all in with utter solemnirty -- even the last shot.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
18456
From:
Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:58pm
Subject: Re: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
For the record, amusing as I may find the story about Welles, I think I would
be seriously annoyed by excessive audience laughter during "The Trial," as
its qualities as a dreamlike narrative mean far more to me than its elements of
comedy. But I would make an exception if Orson were in the audience.
Peter
18457
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 5:13am
Subject: Re: Bernal and Brocka and AVIATOR
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Kerpan, Jr."
wrote:
> Oh well, if not there -- then a side discussion spawned by the
> Miyazaki mailing list, perhaps?
>
> MEK
Possibly, in fact, most likely. Thanks for the link to the Ozu list.
Echo David K.'s comments re: Hell's Angels. The aerial battle
sequences are tremendous, not just for the scope but the intensity
of the men dying in mid-air.
18458
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 5:44am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
China is a major trading partner of the US, and if that was the case
during Hughes' day he would no doubt behave like Rupert Murdoch and
> propagandize in favor of the PRC (KUNDUN will never be shown on
> Murdoch's Star TV.)
>
> Richard
Eisner behaved more courageously w. Kundun than with F911 -- Disney
was planning to sell a lot of Mickey Mouse hats to China (which is
currently recording record growth in sales of all leisure items from
abroad), and the Chinese demanded that he not release Kundun anywhere
when he put it out, or else. (That said, I don't ythink they gave it
much of a push.) By way of contrast, the very EX-socialist Rupert
Murdoch paid the current president's daughter 2 million plus for a
bio of her Dad that will probably never be published to weasel his
way into mainland China with Star.
As I recall, all the appropriate things were said (on NPR, anyway) at
the time of Kundun's release about the way the destroyed Tibetan
society had been "structured," but I don't recall anyone suggesting
that as a result the Chinese were right in what they did to it.
Certainly for me the spiritual side of the question tips the balance
in favor of the Buddhists, who were/are proprietors of one of the
oldest and most powerful spiritual technologies on earth.
The other side of what Brad is saying concerns Hughes' politics. I do
believe that Scorsese's best work has always reflected contemporary
American politics, which has been pretty far right of middle by
European standards all my life. That doesn't mean HE's far right of
middle - just that he works close to the heart of the country, as
have many of our best filmmakers. Many were in fact far to the right
of Scorsese, who wanted to do a movie about Wounded Knee, for
example. Hawks was a right-winger, for instance. I knew Boetticher
well, and I can promise you he and Mary weren't old Eugene McCarthy
supporters! Ironically, Fuller, who was taxed with anti-communism,
was a real lefty, but not Budd.
This is one reason Cimino is still so controversial: Deer Hunter and
Dragon have patriotic, right-wing American heroes, and as was
previously noted, the portrayal of class struggle in Heaven's Gate is
somewhat vitiated by Michael's identification with characters who are
exceptions to their respective classes.
I remember thinking at the time it was announced that Aviator might
be a good film because it was about a reactionary, and it is. After
Hours, one of Scorsese's best small films, is a virtual remake of The
Street! None of this means that all American filmmakers have to be
like Scorsese to do good work. Ferrara certainly isn't; Hellman
isn't; McBride isn't -- to name three contemporary filmmakers who
have been or are subjects of Brad's books. I think a convincing
argument can be made fore preferring Ferrara to Scorsese, and
politics would definitely come into the argument, although even
there...
I prefer Ferrara myself, but I'm not sure I'd make the case based on
pollitics, now that I think about it.
18459
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 5:55am
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, George Robinson wrote:
> Mike's point is well-taken. In fact, the semi-doc predates The
Naked
> City by a few years and was spurred, I suspect, by the wartime
newsreels
> which, on the homefront, must have had a disproportionate impact --
no
> TV, remember. Certainly a film like House on 92nd Street owes much
to
> its producer's (Louis de Rochemont) background in newsreels.
> I suspect that the (slow) movement towards lighter, more portable
> equipment had something to do with all this as well.
Hitchcock claimed at the time of Shadow of a Doubt -- much of which
was shot on location -- that wartime restrictions on materials used
to build sets was a factor in the decision to take the production to
Santa Rosa.
18460
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:03am
Subject: Re: Jack Webb's DRAGNET
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
> By the way, Jack Webb may have been conservative, but priot
> to "Dragnet" he appeared on a radio series called "One Out Of
Seven," which attacked racial prejudice and promoted brotherhood.
Conservatism and racism don't have to go hand in hand, or didn't
until Nixon's Southern Strategy put Republicans back on top after a
century of the South electing Dixiecrats who were among the worst
racists in Washington. We are in a new phase of American conservatism
that is finally beginning to look an awful lot like fascism, with a
homegrown set of scapegoats being measured for concrete overcoats as
we speak.
18461
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:07am
Subject: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
>
> My boyfriend Bill was nearly tossed out of the Thalia
> for laughing during Bunuel's "El." The audience had
> taken it all in with utter solemnirty -- even the last shot.
When Bunuel ran into his producer, Oscar Dancigers, coming out of an
early screening in Mexico City, the poor man was in tears. "They're
laughing harder at it than they would at Cantinflas!" he moaned.
Given that it was being sold as a melodrama, that reaction didn't
help ticket sales.
18462
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:21am
Subject: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
> For the record, amusing as I may find the story about Welles, I
think I would
> be seriously annoyed by excessive audience laughter during "The
Trial," as
> its qualities as a dreamlike narrative mean far more to me than its
elements of
> comedy. But I would make an exception if Orson were in the
audience.
>
> Peter
You'd have to. Dick Wilson told me that when Welles told the story of
the furniture-throwing incident in the little plane carrying them to
Fortaleza, the three surviving jangadeiros took off their shoes so
they'd be ready to hit the water when Welles' laughter caused the
plane to fall apart.
Peter told another funny story about The Trial at the DGA memorial
ceremony. After going along with Peter's statements that The Trial
was a failure for years, but with increasingly obvious lack of
relish, Welles called him in Paris one day and said: (imagine Peter
doing Welles' voice): "You know that movie of mine that you HATE? We
can see it this afternoon, because they're giving me a mdeal for
making it!" That was the screening where he disturbed the audience by
laughing. "Pornograph" is pretty funny at the beginning.
Incidentally, Kafka reportedly fell down laughing when reading
portions of The Castle to friends, so Welles' interpretation of his
film as a comedy isn't so far of, despite extraordinary dreamlike
passages like the Parable of the Law.
Bosley Crowther panned The Trial on its American release, which (with
his double pan of Chimes, echoed by Kael) may account for Welles'
decision not to finish The Deep. He knew it would have been blasted
for technical flaws if he went to the trouble of finishing it, and he
was looking for a comeback hit -- hence the brilliant decision to
make The Other Side of the Wind look like a work-print.
18463
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:47am
Subject: Tibet (OT) (Re: Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> "especially when it doesn't result in improved conditions for the
> subject people, and it was certainly a tragedy for the 1.2 million
> ethnic Tibetans who perished under the PRC occupation."
>
> All true. But none of this exonerates Tibet's religious leaders
from
> criticism - except in Scorsese's mind.
If nobody else will, I'll dispute the 1.2 million figure, since there
were only about 1.2 million people in Tibet to begin with.
The 1953 census of China reported Tibet's population as 1,273,969.
This figure seems to include all of the Chamdo (Kamb) region in
Eastern Tibet, most of which is in Sichuan and not part of the current
Tibet Autonomous Region, but excludes ethnic Tibetans to the
northeast, in Qinghai Province.
As in other remote regions, such as Tsinghai, Sikang and Sinkiang, the
census figures were based on population figures supplied by the local
government authorities instead of counts of individual households.
Nonetheless, according to Leo Orleans (The China Quarterly, July-Sept.
1966), prior to 1950 both visitors to Tibet and the Lhasa government
also had estimated Tibet's population to be between 1 million and 1.5
million. Tibet's government in exile might be relying on a 1924
statement by Sir Charles Bell in "Tibet - Past and Present" estimating
Tibet's population as six million. The figure of 1.2 million it
published in the Tibetan Review in 1984 was based on refugee accounts
and delegations sent to Tibet in 1979-1983, but the published account
doesn't explain how the numbers were calculated.
Tibet may have had a declining population in the early 1950's: "The
practice of consigning one male child of three to the clerical order
plus widespread polyandry... would undoubtedly have had a depressing
effect on the region's past birth rate and probably some lingering
effect during the early years of the new regime. At the same time, the
dearth of medical personnel and very inadequate medical facilities
were reflected in an extremely high death rate, particularly among the
infants."
If 1.2 million Tibetans were killed, this would have had substantial
demographic effects, but there are currently about 2.5 million ethnic
Tibetans inside the Tibet Autonomous Region, consistent with a 1.5 %
growth rate over the past 50 years, not mass extermination. "If the
Chinese killed 1.2 million in the early 1960s then whole cities and
huge portions of the countryside, indeed almost all of Tibet, would
have been depopulated, transformed into a killing field dotted with
death camps and mass graves---of which we have not seen evidence. The
thinly distributed Chinese military force in Tibet was not big enough
to round up, hunt down, and exterminate that many people even if it
had spent all its time doing nothing else."
(http://michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html)
There were rebellions against Chinese rule, first in Eastern Tibet
beginning in 1952, leading to the Kanting rebellion of 1955-56, the
Mimang Tsongdu (People's meetings) movement, culminating in the 1959
revolt in Lhasa. Dawa Norbu (The China Quarterly, Mar. 1979) considers
it a revolt not in defence of Tibet's borders, but in "defense of
Tibetan Buddhism as personified by the Dalai Lama."
Following the 1959 rebellion, "the International Commission of Jurists
in Geneva found Communist China guilty of genocide in an attempt to
destroy the Tibetan people as a religious group. An Indian member of
the Commission placed Tibetan losses at 65,000." (Orleans, p. 121).
However, the violence may have been less great. A British journalist
in Lhasa, Noel Barber, described the day-to-day events in "From the
land of lost content: The Dalai Lama's fight for Tibet. According to
Dawa Norbu, the rebellion was relatively small in scale. He writes
that it had widespread popular support, but popular participation was
limited because the Tibetans were scattered throughout vast mountain
regions, and the revolt lacked "modern organization and
communications." Led by about 10,000 Khambas, Tibet's warrior class,
participants included "the Tibetan army of only a little more than
3,000 men, most of Lhasa's 20,000 monks, and a great number of the
10-30,000 public that surrounded the Dalai Lama's palace [on March 10,
1959]." The Chinese Army entered Tibet (about 40,000 Chinese troops
plus 29,000 militia) and was able to suppress the revolt by April 14,
capturing or driving into exile the rebels. Norbu writes, "Considering
Tibet's total population of 1.2 million, China thought the rebellion
by 20,000 people, mostly people who were deceived and intimidated to
join in it, was not all that significant." However, the Khamba army
was well armed, since arms passed freely over the Indian border, and
the Tibetan army did inflict a good deal of damage on PLA
troops.According to Khamba leader Gompo Tashi Andrugtsang memoirs,
"Four Rivers, Six Ranges," in the largest battles, 20 to 70 Khambas
killed 700 Chinese at the Nyemo river, and 400 Khamba killed 550
Chinese at Po Tamo with 40 Tibetans lost.
Norbu's interpretation of the Tibetan rebellion might be of interest:
"In order to have a revolt against the Tibetan 'theocracy' as such,
Tibetans must become, as a minimum condition, secularized; and to have
an indigenous revolution, Tibetans must become anti-Buddhist. The
whole value system must lose its meaning and sanctity. And the Dalai
Lama must be proven to be a man, not a Buddha. As we have seen, the
situation was far from being what the Chinese Communists would like it
to have been. To impose revolution on a functioning society is like
burying a man alive. In such a case one man's conception of revolution
inevitably becomes another man's destruction. Hence, the Tibetan
Rebellion."
18464
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:18am
Subject: Tibet (OT) (Re: Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
"If nobody else will, I'll dispute the 1.2 million figure, since there
were only about 1.2 million people in Tibet to begin with."
Thank you for the additional information. I was relying on the 6
million total population figure for ethnic Tibetans living in the TAR
and the PRC as cited in the "Tibetan Review." The figure may have
been arrived at by including territory calimed by Tibet in 1914.
Also, the deaths were attributed to famine as well as military
action, and the famine is said to have coincided with the famine that
occured in the PRC proper in the 1960s. Pace Michael Parenti, there
is credible evidence of a fairly vast prison system and some prisons
may have functioned as death camps.
The question of how many Tibetans perished as a result of the PRC
invasion is reminiscent of debates that took place 25 years ago over
the number of Cambodians who died as a result of the Pol Pot
revolution. Maybe we'll get a more reliable figure when the PRC
allows a truth and reconciliation comission to be establised.
Richard
18465
From: Michael Brooke
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:44am
Subject: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
>
> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:22:34 EST
> From: MG4273@a...
> Subject: Re: Laughter (was Aviator)
>
> When I saw "Man of Marble", Wajda's often very funny satirical film, I
> was
> the only person laughing in the theater. But these were not snobs. The
> whole
> rest of the sparse audience was elderly Polish-American senior
> citizens, hungry
> for a rare glimpse of the homeland they had left so many years ago.
> And they
> were appalled by my laughter. I hastily toned down my response to
> silent
> chuckling, which offended no one.
This reminds me of a conversation I had back in early 1990 with a
Polish woman whose favourite (then) recent film was Aki Kaurismäki's
'Leningrad Cowboys Go America', which she wanted all her fellow Poles
to see. When I asked why (I enjoyed it, but only as a moderately
amusing comedy - otherwise, it's one of Kaurismäki's least interesting
films), she said it was because it was the first film she'd seen that
made America look like Poland - and she thought that as Poland was
starting to build closer ties to the West, it would be a useful
corrective to some of her compatriots' more starry-eyed impressions.
Michael
18466
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 2:30pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- hotlove666 wrote:
I do
> believe that Scorsese's best work has always
> reflected contemporary
> American politics, which has been pretty far right
> of middle by
> European standards all my life. That doesn't mean
> HE's far right of
> middle - just that he works close to the heart of
> the country, as
> have many of our best filmmakers.
You are forgetting "The Big Shave" and "Street Scenes
1970" (I make a brief appearance at the end of the
later.) He is a filmmaker of the left, who
occasionally deals wit figures fromthe right, as in
"Taxi Driver." In "Kundun" politics tok a back seatto
the spiritual interest of a man who wouldhave been a
priesthad he not also been heterosexual ( and not a
pedophile.)
>
> This is one reason Cimino is still so controversial:
> Deer Hunter and
> Dragon have patriotic, right-wing American heroes,
> and as was
> previously noted, the portrayal of class struggle in
> Heaven's Gate is
> somewhat vitiated by Michael's identification with
> characters who are
> exceptions to their respective classes.
>
This is aVERY important point. I can't tell you how
many arguments I've gtten into with people whoclaim
that "Heaven's Gate" is a leftistfilm "depicting the
class struggle." Bob Somerby of "The Daily Howler"
persists in believing so to this day!
If that were only the case.
I would say that at best Cimino's politics are
extremly muddled, due to his devotion to "exceptionaL'
heroes. This in turn hasled to his fasciantion with
Alice Rosenbaum and his desire to remake "The
Fountainhead."
>
> I prefer Ferrara myself, but I'm not sure I'd make
> the case based on
> pollitics, now that I think about it.
>
Neither would I. The politics of heroin are even more
muddled that that of the "mainstream" --as Garrel has
demonstrated in another context.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
18467
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:51pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
> > the portrayal of class struggle in
> > Heaven's Gate is
> > somewhat vitiated by Michael's identification with
> > characters who are
> > exceptions to their respective classes.
> >
>
> This is aVERY important point. I can't tell you how
> many arguments I've gtten into with people whoclaim
> that "Heaven's Gate" is a leftistfilm "depicting the
> class struggle." Bob Somerby of "The Daily Howler"
> persists in believing so to this day!
HEAVEN'S GATE is explicitly concerned with the question: To what
extent can an individual who comes from a privileged background but
is nonetheless sympathetic towards the struggles of the working class
align himself with (and usefully assist) a proletarian revolution?
Cimino isn't a member of the working class. Why shouldn't he deal
with this question? To not deal with it would be dishonest (like Ken
Loach, a privileged middle-class filmmaker who acts as if he were a
poor working slob).
THE SICILIAN deals with a related question: To what extent can the
cult of the charismatic hero be reconciled with a class struggle
which privileges the group over the individual? Or: To what extent
can a narrative cinema which tends to depict class struggle by
focusing on the struggles of a charismatic hero be turned to
genuinely radical ends?
Cimino is attempting to tackle the problem of how to make a left-wing
film within an American narrative form. (As opposed to, say, Oliver
Stone, who simply tries to pretend that this problem doesn't exist.)
"The politics of heroin are even more muddled that that of
the "mainstream""
Ferrara is an old-fashioned humanist.
18468
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:12pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- thebradstevens wrote:
>
> Cimino is attempting to tackle the problem of how to
> make a left-wing
> film within an American narrative form. (As opposed
> to, say, Oliver
> Stone, who simply tries to pretend that this problem
> doesn't exist.)
A problem solved by Warren Beatty in "Bonnie and
Clye," "Shampoo," "Reds" and above all "Bulworth."
>
> "The politics of heroin are even more muddled that
> that of
> the "mainstream""
>
> Ferrara is an old-fashioned humanist.
>
Tony Bennett is a humanist. Abel Ferrara thinks he's
Lester Young.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
18469
From: programming
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:18pm
Subject: Curtis Harrington's USHER
Did any New Yorkers see (or has anyone else seen someplace else) Curtis
Harrington's USHER (2002, 40 mins.).
Would love to hear comments.
Patrick F.
18470
From:
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 0:48pm
Subject: Re: Curtis Harrington's USHER
I reviewed the film some months back:
http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue8/usher.html
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18471
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:03pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> HEAVEN'S GATE is explicitly concerned with the question: To what
> extent can an individual who comes from a privileged background but
> is nonetheless sympathetic towards the struggles of the working
class
> align himself with (and usefully assist) a proletarian revolution?
There is no question that the question is raised, and raised
explicitly. What you say about The Sicilian is also quite
interesting. So few people even bother to address the possible
political significance of that film - written by an uncredited Gore
Vidal - and I think that's a shame.
Here are 2 contrasting statements by Michael in the interview we did
in 1982. I've never had an English transcript, because I didn't do
one at the time - it was translated directly from an oral transcript
I did into a tape recorder to go fast. So this is translated back
from French:
"I don't see [Heaven's Gate] as a political film. I don't see The
Deer Hunter as a political film. I don't much like politics. Those
films aren't stories about politics, but about people caught up in
events, for whatever reason. The stories reveal those events.
Americans are very bad, at every level, with political statements. We
don't know how to make them, and when we make them we do them pretty
badly."
Earlier:
(After noting that the bar, Heaven's Gate, was built with exactly the
same dimensions as the marriage hall in Deer Hunter): "[The
immigrants] have already started to become everything Averill has
rejected. It's one reason for his disappointment; he sees this
transformation, this process, going on; he sees it first of all in
the division that has already marked the community: the merchants
have already separated from the others, they have already adapted to
the horrible idea of the death list. It's the natural order of
things: they separate themselves from the others and group together;
they dance to Strauss, to their own music....
"Averill doesn't understand the importance of material things for
these people, and particularly for Ella. He doesn't understand the
importance of the gift he gives her, or its meaning. After all, he
has rejected materialism; I believe he's an idealist, and that the
present is just a whim, whereas she takes it as something much more
meaningful. Aristocrats who are idealists are always disappointed
when the people they're trying to help express interest in material
things. They expect to encounter the image of their own idealism, and
they rarely do."
I'm curious what NYers thought of the film when it was screened there
recently. Dan?
18472
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:14pm
Subject: Re: Curtis Harrington's USHER
Nice review. Have you seen any of his early short
films like "Fragment of Seeking" ?
--- ptonguette@a... wrote:
> I reviewed the film some months back:
>
> http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue8/usher.html
>
> Peter
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
18473
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:53pm
Subject: Bitchun Flick Alert
May, wr. and dir. by Lucky McKee, starring Angela Bettis. Bettis is
aamzing. McKee co-directed the doc. Toolbox Murders: As It Was, which
I presume is about the making of the Hooper remake -- in which Bettis
starred. He has also co/wr-dir All Cheerleaders Die (direct to video)
and upcoming The Woods, Brew and Red.
Cult growing. Here is the "favorite lines" thread at Imdb:
Adam: "What are you reading about?"
May: "Amputation"
Adam: "Is that for work?"
May: "No. It's just for fun."
>
Girl on sidewalk: "I love your costume! Got any cold ones in there?"
(meaning in the cooler)
May: "Yes I do."
>
I loved it when she was waving goodbye to Adam's hands in the park.
"So Long, Hands!" I think she says.
hehe
>
That line, and of course, when Adam leaves her apartment:
(to her doll)
"I told you to face the goddam wall!!!"
>
"I like weird. I like weird a lot."- Jeremy Sisto, "May"
Re: My Sig. is my favorite!
>
-at sewing machine-
"...I think I need more parts."
>
"I don t think she could rip his finger in one bite though. That part
was a little farfetched."
>
" It's still really burning up in here, have you got some ice I can
rub on my nipples?"
>
"I throw a stick, and nothing happens!"
>
Polly (Ana Faris) - May, we should hang out sometime and, I don't
know.... eat some melons
>
Doctor - Haha Thats good. Kitty live now
>
May: You have beautiful legs
Ambrosia: (Snaps) I thought they were gams
May: Wheels, stems, gams, whatever
(Pause)
May: Give us a spin...doll
Ambrosia: You are so fuckin' wierd, I dont know what Polly sees in
you.
May: Polly doesnt see anything. Now turn around.
(Ambrosia does a sensual spin)
Ambrosia: How was that?
May: Mmm - Perfect
(Stabs her in the head with 2 scapels)
18474
From: Paul Gallagher
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:19pm
Subject: Tibet (OT) (Re: Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> Thank you for the additional information. I was relying on the 6
> million total population figure for ethnic Tibetans living in the
TAR
> and the PRC as cited in the "Tibetan Review." The figure may have
> been arrived at by including territory claimed by Tibet in 1914.
My impression was that the Lhasa government compromised at the Simla,
India conference in 1914 and claimed autonomy only in Outer Tibet,
with the boundary between the Yangtse and Mekong rivers. China was
given symbolic suzerainty and control of Tibet's foreign affairs;
Britain was given control of Tibet's communications, a veto on
tariffs and dues, as well as unrestricted access to trade. Lhasa
retained control of the monasteries in Inner Tibet. The Tibet
Government in Exile now defines Tibet as Kham, Amdo, and U-Tsang,
except that they accept the current borders with India, Bhutan, and
Nepal and do not claim what is now Arunachal Pradesh in India. The
original Tibet position paper at Simla described Tibet as bound "on
the North-east by the stone pillar at Miruganng in Zilling, thence to
the East along the course of the river coming from Mar-chen Pomra
mountain until it comes to its first big bend and thence to the
South-east at a place called Chorten Karpo in Jintang."
The TGIE's web site claim of 6 million Tibetans around 1960 cites a
People's Daily article from Nov. 10, 1959, that claims that there were
3,381,064 Tibetans in Kham and 1,675,534 in Qinghai in addition to the
Tibetans in Outer Tibet. Someone should check the reference.
According to the Chinese census:
Tibetan Population (in millions)
Year All Ethnic Tibetans Central Tibet (TAR)
--------------------------------------------------
1268 1.0 --
1737 0.316 (monks)
0.127 (lay families)
1900 1.0 --
1953 2.776 1.274
1964 2.501 1.251
1982 3.870 1.892
1990 4.593 2.196
1995 -- 2.389
(Source: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/tibet-faq/ )
(The 1953 data was based on administrative estimates. The 1964 TAR
data includes only ethnic Tibetans and also seems to be an estimate.)
I don't think any academic source would accept the TGE's 6 million
figure for 1950.
I'll note this comment by Brian Turner: "The Tibetan
government-in-exile has always said there were 6 million Tibetans.
[T]his estimate has remained unchanged over the decades, as if the
population of Tibetans could remain entirely unchanged. This is
ridiculous... There's virtual uniformity that the population was about
25-30% of what the Tibet Government in Exile said it was... About the
deaths, neutral parties have examined the evidence. Not a single
scholar in the west I've ever seen, even totally hostile to PRC ones,
accepts the TGE claims of 1.2 million. It's not like there are splits
here. The whole issue rides on the population. If you believe that
the population was 2-3 million in 1949, like every scholar I've seen
does, the TGE figure is demographically impossible, not a single shred
of further evidence needed."
> Also, the deaths were attributed to famine as well as military
> action, and the famine is said to have coincided with the famine
that
> occurred in the PRC proper in the 1960s.
The claim is that "No other group in China suffered more bitterly from
the famine than the Tibetans" (Jasper Becker). There's also a claim
of famine throughout 1968-1973. But apparently there's no evidence of
a famine in Outer Tibet. Sichuan Province in fact was where the 1960
famine was by far the worst, which would affect the Tibetans there,
but the TGE claims as starvation deaths a proportion of the
Tibetan population several times greater than the highest overall
excess mortality rate estimates for the province as a whole (most of
which would not be starvation deaths, but earlier deaths by the
elderly and deaths caused by disease brought on by malnutrition and
rises in infant mortality). And to be polemical I'll note lack the
TGE's lack of concern for Tibet's mortality rate pre-1950 when the
average life expectancy was around 36 -- or for the Tibetans in
Nepal, where, as the Chinese point out, the infant mortality rate is
reportedly three times greater than in Tibet.
> Pace Michael Parenti, there
> is credible evidence of a fairly vast prison system and some
prisons
> may have functioned as death camps.
>
> The question of how many Tibetans perished as a result of the PRC
> invasion is reminiscent of debates that took place 25 years ago
over
> the number of Cambodians who died as a result of the Pol Pot
> revolution. Maybe we'll get a more reliable figure when the PRC
> allows a truth and reconciliation commission to be established.
Well, we'll wait for that. Some more balanced sources on Tibet might
include "A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the
Lamaist State" by Melvyn Goldstein, "The Making of Modern Tibet" by A.
Tom Grunfeld, and http://www.faqs.org/faqs/tibet-faq/
Barry Sautman intends to address these issues in a forthcoming book,
"Contemporary Tibet: Politics, Development, and Society in a Disputed
Region," edited by Barry Sautman and June Teufel Dreyer.
"The émigré discourse of Tibetan culture is framed in the
starkest terms in order to force the hand of international elites...
[t]he émigré leaders try to foreclose any response to their
charges by
dismissing those who disagree as 'pro-Chinese' or dupes of 'Chinese
propaganda.' Gabriel Lafitte, a pro-Tibet independence scholar and
activist, observes that for the émigré leaders: 'The picture is
black and white, without ambiguities. China is often viewed
monolithically, so the multivocality of Chinese elite contestation
goes unheard. Chinese data is dismissed wholesale as propaganda --
even the data used by China's still enormous machinery of central
planning'... There has never been a credible showing that physical
genocide has been committed in Tibet. Claims that a fifth of the
Tibetan population was annihilated from 1959 to 1979 through
executions, famines, imprisonment, and other means are without any
evidentiary basis; indeed, the émigré leadership has never
revealed
its sources for the numbers of Tibetans whom it claims died
state-caused, unnatural deaths. In fact, '[f]ar from being decimated
by a demographic catastrophe, the Tibetan population of the PRC has
likely doubled in a half-century.' (See generally Barry Sautman, Is
Tibet China's Colony?: The Claim of Demographic Catastrophe, 15
COLUM. J. ASIAN L. 81 (2001) (discussing so-called demographic
annihilation of the Tibetan population in the PRC); Yan Hao,
Tibetan Population in China: Myths and Facts Re-Examined, 1
ASIAN ETHNICITY 11 (2000) (reexamining myths about the Tibetan
population in China).) The 1953 PRC census estimated that there
were 2.75 million Tibetans; by 1990, the number had increased to 4.6
million, and there are more than 5.2 million today.
(ZHONGGUO MINZU TONGJI NIANJIAN [CHINA ETHNIC STATISTICS YEARBOOK]
431 (2000).) The still-large Tibetan families--averaging 5.25
members in 1999, as compared to 3.63 members
in China as a whole (ZHONGGUO RENKOU TONGJI NIANJIAN 2000 [CHINA
POPULATION STATISTICS YEARBOOK] 473 (2000)) --have caused a few
advocates of Tibetan independence to repudiate the conspiracism that
characterizes the émigré discourse of 'demographic annihilation.'
U.S. academic journalist Barbara Erickson, for example,
concludes, 'Tibetans are more numerous today than at any time in
recent history. Population growth has been rapid and continuous and
there is no sign that China wants to wipe out the Tibetan race.'"
(Barry Sautman "Cultural Genocide and Tibet," Texas International Law
Journal 38(2), Spring 2003).
I suppose this has little to do with movies, even with "Kundun."
18475
From:
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 2:34pm
Subject: Re: Curtis Harrington's USHER
David Ehrenstein wrote:
"Nice review."
Thank you, David.
"Have you seen any of his early short
films like "Fragment of Seeking" ?"
Unfortunately, I haven't. I've seen most of his narrative features, but none
of the experimental work (for what it's worth, I wouldn't at all call "Usher"
avant-garde; it's simply a short film with a narrative.)
Peter
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18476
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:06pm
Subject: Tibet (OT) (Re: Aviator)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Gallagher"
wrote:
" suppose this has little to do with movies, even with 'Kundun.'"
True, but very informative and useful to Asia watchers like myself.
Over and out (and back to topic.)
Richard
18477
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:07pm
Subject: Re: Bitchun Flick Alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> May, wr. and dir. by Lucky McKee, starring Angela Bettis. Bettis is
> aamzing. McKee co-directed the doc. Toolbox Murders: As It Was,
which
> I presume is about the making of the Hooper remake -- in which
Bettis
> starred. He has also co/wr-dir All Cheerleaders Die (direct to
video)
> and upcoming The Woods, Brew and Red.
I thought this was going to acquire cult appeal, much as the lesser
deserving DONNIE DARKO has, but I don't believe it has. It's been
sometime since I've seen it, but recall that Angela Bettis gave an
wonderful performance and the film had some fresh takes on the
Frankenstein themes. Bettis reminded me of a young Sissy Spacek in
MAY, and I was shocked to find out that she actually played Carrie in
a television remake not too long ago.
-Aaron
18478
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 11:29pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> >
> Tony Bennett is a humanist. Abel Ferrara thinks he's
> Lester Young.
>
>
> Can you elaborate, David? (don't bother about Tony Bennett).
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com
18479
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:03am
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can you elaborate, David? (don't bother about
> Tony Bennett).
> >
> > __________________________________
Well of you get the Tony Bennett reference there's no
need for elaboration. But to get down to brass tacks I
don't find "Bad Lieutenant" or "The Addiction" (to
mention my two favorite Ferraras) to be the work of a
humanist of any recognizable stripe. They are the
"apologia pro vita sua" of a hardcore heroin addict --
the latter especially. That he is wracked with
catholic guilt not (especially in "abd Lietenant")
doesn't alter the situation. A fortiori it underscores
the depressive masochism of it -- reaching towards but
not quite achieving suicide. Ferrara's incipient
narcissism keeps him from "going all the way" as it
were.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
18480
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:34am
Subject: Re: Aviator
> Well of you get the Tony Bennett reference there's no
> need for elaboration. But to get down to brass tacks I
> don't find "Bad Lieutenant" or "The Addiction" (to
> mention my two favorite Ferraras) to be the work of a
> humanist of any recognizable stripe. They are the
> "apologia pro vita sua" of a hardcore heroin addict --
> the latter especially. That he is wracked with
> catholic guilt not (especially in "abd Lietenant")
> doesn't alter the situation. A fortiori it underscores
> the depressive masochism of it -- reaching towards but
> not quite achieving suicide. Ferrara's incipient
> narcissism keeps him from "going all the way" as it
> were.
It's not narcissism. For me, Ferrara's film are among the most
genuinely optimistic in American cinema. He repeatedly confronts the
worst that human experience has to offer, and somehow emerges with
his optimism intact. (This optimism is visible everywhere, but is
perhaps most obvious in the way that every character - including the
most insignificant extra - is filmed with an absolute and
uncompromised love). The sense of anguish that these films convey is
really all the 'proof' that's needed - Ferrara is anguished because
everything is important to him, everything matters. He exists at the
opposite end of the scale from those those 'cool' directors (the
Coens, Soderbergh, Paul Thomas Anderson, Wes Anderson, Hartley,
Jarmusch) to whom nothing matters, so there's really nothing for them
to get worked up about.
18481
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:02am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate, David? (don't bother about
> > Tony Bennett).
> > >
> > > __________________________________
>
> Well of you get the Tony Bennett reference there's no
> need for elaboration. But to get down to brass tacks I
> don't find "Bad Lieutenant" or "The Addiction" (to
> mention my two favorite Ferraras) to be the work of a
> humanist of any recognizable stripe. They are the
> "apologia pro vita sua" of a hardcore heroin addict --
> the latter especially. That he is wracked with
> catholic guilt not (especially in "abd Lietenant")
> doesn't alter the situation. A fortiori it underscores
> the depressive masochism of it -- reaching towards but
> not quite achieving suicide. Ferrara's incipient
> narcissism keeps him from "going all the way" as it
> were.
>
> I pretty much agree with the above, but I was just curious to know
why you dragged Lester Young in. He is one of my idols, you know.
And I'm sure you were speaking metaphorically (as we most always do,
don't we?) because I doubt that Ferrara ever heard (or even heard
of) Lester or am I mistaken?
JPC
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
> http://my.yahoo.com
18482
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:13am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
> It's not narcissism. For me, Ferrara's film are among the most
> genuinely optimistic in American cinema. He repeatedly confronts
the
> worst that human experience has to offer, and somehow emerges with
> his optimism intact. (This optimism is visible everywhere, but is
> perhaps most obvious in the way that every character - including
the
> most insignificant extra - is filmed with an absolute and
> uncompromised love). The sense of anguish that these films convey
is
> really all the 'proof' that's needed - Ferrara is anguished
because
> everything is important to him, everything matters. He exists at
the
> opposite end of the scale from those those 'cool' directors (the
> Coens, Soderbergh, Paul Thomas Anderson, Wes Anderson, Hartley,
> Jarmusch) to whom nothing matters, so there's really nothing for
them
> to get worked up about.
Far from me the intention of distracting a Ferrara worshipper from
his worshipping, but how do you tell that the most insignificant
extra is filmed with an absolute and uncompromising love? I guess
you don't have to explain it, it's the old Rivette "evidence" claim
for Hawks. But mightn't one who isn't an unconditional worshipper be
entitled to a little bit more justification?
If "nothing matters" to all those filmmakers you mention, why then
do they go to the immense trouble of making their films?
JPC
18483
From: Damien Bona
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 3:48am
Subject: Re: Aviator
> > I pretty much agree with the above, but I was just curious to
know
> why you dragged Lester Young in. He is one of my idols, you know.
> And I'm sure you were speaking metaphorically (as we most always
do,
> don't we?) because I doubt that Ferrara ever heard (or even heard
> of) Lester or am I mistaken?
>
> JPC
I never would have paired Lester Young with Ferrara. Ferrara seems
more Illinois Jacquet to me. But it does suggest an interesting
patlor game: equating musicians and filmmakers. Such as Dave
Brubeck = Mike Nichols. Charlie Haden = Peter Bogdanovich. Andre
Kostelanetz = Henry Koster. Coltrane = Tarkovsky.
18484
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:13am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
>>
> I never would have paired Lester Young with Ferrara. Ferrara
seems
> more Illinois Jacquet to me.
But beyond the JATP grandstanding, Jacquet is really quite close
to Young...
But it does suggest an interesting
> patlor game: equating musicians and filmmakers. Such as Dave
> Brubeck = Mike Nichols. Charlie Haden = Peter Bogdanovich.
Andre
> Kostelanetz = Henry Koster. Coltrane = Tarkovsky.
Yes, exciting. Monk= Brackage? Wardell Gray= Henry Hathaway? The
mind reels at the possibilities.
18485
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:43am
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
> > I pretty much agree with the above, but I was just
> curious to know
> why you dragged Lester Young in. He is one of my
> idols, you know.
> And I'm sure you were speaking metaphorically (as we
> most always do,
> don't we?) because I doubt that Ferrara ever heard
> (or even heard
> of) Lester or am I mistaken?
>
Oh I doubt that he has, but I was just thinking of
drug addict artists.
On reflecting I should have mentioned Alexander
Trocchi.
(But not Nico, for obvious reasons.)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
18486
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:35am
Subject: Re: Bitchun Flick Alert
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Graham"
wrote:
> I thought this was going to acquire cult appeal, much as the lesser
> deserving DONNIE DARKO has, but I don't believe it has. It's been
> sometime since I've seen it, but recall that Angela Bettis gave an
> wonderful performance and the film had some fresh takes on the
> Frankenstein themes. Bettis reminded me of a young Sissy Spacek in
> MAY, and I was shocked to find out that she actually played Carrie
in a television remake not too long ago.
>
> -Aaron
I think the cult is there - it just doesn't include any critics.
Maltin acknowledges the remarkable performance by Bettis, but
downgrades the film to 2 stars for predictable reasons. Actually, I
think of May as a female version of Martin, probably my favorite
Romero film. Martin is Dracula; May is Dr. Frankenstein. (The copy
line is "If you don't have any friends, make one.") Not for the
squeamish, by the way.
18487
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:50am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> Far from me the intention of distracting a Ferrara worshipper from
> his worshipping, but how do you tell that the most insignificant
> extra is filmed with an absolute and uncompromising love?
I'd say he cares about them as characters, and that does show in how
he films them. Also, it's much rarer than you might think.
>
> If "nothing matters" to all those filmmakers you mention, why then
> do they go to the immense trouble of making their films?
That's not how I would describe the shortcomings of the filmmakers
Brad listed in comparison with Ferrara. For me it's an esthetic
judgement, linked to the visual treatment of characters in film. A
lot of our mannered modern directors are way too in love with their
own styles to do that well, except very intermittently.
And since we're on The Aviator, I think that Scorsese's mise en scene
of Howard Hughes is better than his mise en scene of Amsterdam in
Gangs of New York. Again, that's an esthetic judgement, although I
know that for some it is also a moral judgement, and as John Kerry
said to the anti-abortion loon during the "Town Hall" debate, I
respect that.
By the way, did you know (OT) that there is no debate about abortion
in Italy, where it is also legal and readily available, and where the
Pope, after all, makes his home? Berlusconi tried to whip up voter
interest in it, I'm told, but got nowhere with the tactic. Says
something about us...
18488
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:51am
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Damien Bona"
wrote:
Dave Brubeck = Mike Nichols
Bite your tongue!
18489
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 11:52am
Subject: Re: Aviator
"how do you tell that the most insignificant extra is filmed with an
absolute and uncompromising love? I guess you don't have to explain
it, it's the old Rivette "evidence" claim for Hawks."
Well, this is why I've always been a supporter of Rivette's claim.
Because in a situation such as this, I really feel one need do no
more than point to the evidence on the screen. Look at the scene with
the airline stewardess in SNAKE EYES - she tells Eddie (Harvey
Keitel) she loves his work, and ends up in bed with him. She's only
in the film for 4 shots - but Ferrara conveys to us the sense that we
are looking at a fully rounded human being who is as complex and
mysterious, as incapable of being summed up, as any of the film's
central characters. Coen and friends do the opposite - even their
protagonists can be casually dismissed, presented as objects of
condescending laughter.
"If "nothing matters" to all those filmmakers you mention, why then
do they go to the immense trouble of making their films?"
One thing matters to them. And only one thing. But it matters a lot.
They are all desperate to maintain a fashionable stance of 'cool'
detachment. They make films so that people can see how 'hip' they
are. To be caught out actually caring about something, liking someone
in an unironic way, or even saying something that isn't ironic, would
mean being defined as terminally unhip. Ferrara's films are all about
the kinds of people who, like Coen and the Andersons, use a facade of
cool detachment to protect themselves from the world. There are no
real villains in Ferrara's film, but the characters who come the
closest to being villains are the ones who successfully withdraw
behind a barrier of 'cool' behaviour: Tony Coca-Cola in THE DRILLER
KILLER, Dennis Hopper in THE BLACKOUT, Benicio Del Toro in THE
FUNERAL, Luca in CRIME STORY, the alien invaders of BODY SNATCHERS,
etc. These characters would be the heroes (or at least ironic heroes)
of a Joel Coen film - for Ferrara, they are representatives of the
death force.
18490
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:15pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
> That's not how I would describe the
shortcomings of the filmmakers
> Brad listed in comparison with
Ferrara. For me it's an esthetic
> judgement, linked to the visual
treatment of characters in film. A
> lot of our mannered modern directors
are way too in love with their
> own styles to do that well, except
very intermittently.
>
I agree. In these filmmakers Brad
mention, both among those I like (Wes
Anderson, Jamursch) and those I dont
(Coen), the effort is on building a
private from their style. I guess the
better way to describ the different
approaches is comparing how they work
with actors. To work with Jamursch and
Anderson, an actor must adapt himself
to their very mannered style, while
Ferrara seems very open to whatever
even the less important bit player can
bring to his film. Liking one more
than other is an esthetic judgement as
I could say on the other hand that The
Funeral is the weakest of Ferrara's
mature films because he deals with
period detail very badly (he is
clearly uncomfortable about rebuilding
a particular time and place in a
studio) which results in making the
ideas in Nicholas St. John scripts
somewhat abstracts in a way they
aren't in none of their previous
collaborations. Jamursch has no such
problem in Dead Man, a film as great
as King of New York, Snake Eyes,
Blackout, New Rose Hotel and R X Mas.
I really don't get how one can see Bad
Lietenaunt as nihilistic film or as
"heroin addict apologia" as so much of
the film is about how much Ferrara's
likes the world that is on screen and
the intensity of his desire to embrace
it. But I guess that has a lot to do
with how you experience Ferara's film
and connect with them or not (so I
guess I gonna agree with Brad on
Rivette's phrase).
Filipe
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
18491
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:20pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
Now I got curious:
Charles Mingus = ?
And that was unfair to Brubeck and
Coltrane.
Filipe
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo!
Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads.
Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for
free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/b5IolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/
>
>
a_film_by-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
18492
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:46pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
Although I agree that Scorsese is no
Ferrara, I'm impressed by the overall
reaction against his recent films. I'm
really a big fan of Bringing out the
Dead; and Kundun, The Age of Innocence
and Gangs of NY are all quite good if
compromised. His recent output is more
uneven than his 70's and 80's work
(which aren't all that good) mostly
because after Last Templation of
Christ the scale of his films have
become more and more large (even the
his docs on film history have a epic
feeling) and with that his position as
a insider/outsider has become harder
and harder to keep, driving him to
more compromises (I don't think Gangs
of NY would be any masterpice with
another hour - but then the only one
of his films that I'd call one is King
of Comedy - but I'm quite sure it
would be a better film). The other
problem is that the larger scope has
not always paid off. His remake of
Cape Fear seems a perfect example of
this (every time someone talks as if
the guy was the greatest filmmaker who
ever lived, I'd like to remember that
he remade J Lee Thompson film without
improving on it): he takes Thompson
dumb almost B-thriller, try to give it
a lot of weight without making it more
insightful than the original and in
the process ends with an equally
hollow but bloated dumb almost
B-thriller who actually doesen't even
manage to be as thrilling as the
actually not much thrilling original
even though Scorsese can make a
thriller set piece better than Thompson.
Filipe
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
18493
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:13pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- filipefurtado wrote:
> I really don't get how one can see Bad
> Lietenaunt as nihilistic film or as
> "heroin addict apologia" as so much of
> the film is about how much Ferrara's
> likes the world that is on screen and
> the intensity of his desire to embrace
> it. But I guess that has a lot to do
> with how you experience Ferara's film
> and connect with them or not (so I
> guess I gonna agree with Brad on
> Rivette's phrase).
>
You've justdefined the terms on which he wants us to
embrace his nihilism.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
18494
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:19pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- filipefurtado wrote:
(I don't think Gangs
> of NY would be any masterpice with
> another hour - but then the only one
> of his films that I'd call one is King
> of Comedy - but I'm quite sure it
> would be a better film).
With another hour? I don't see how. It's a perfect
film, as are "Raging Bull" and (my favorite) "Casino."
The other
> problem is that the larger scope has
> not always paid off. His remake of
> Cape Fear seems a perfect example of
> this (every time someone talks as if
> the guy was the greatest filmmaker who
> ever lived, I'd like to remember that
> he remade J Lee Thompson film without
> improving on it): he takes Thompson
> dumb almost B-thriller, try to give it
> a lot of weight without making it more
> insightful than the original and in
> the process ends with an equally
> hollow but bloated dumb almost
> B-thriller who actually doesen't even
> manage to be as thrilling as the
> actually not much thrilling original
> even though Scorsese can make a
> thriller set piece better than Thompson.
>
I beg to differ. It's a minor film whose real subject
is Bernard Herrmann.
In that sense Elmer is the autuer.
http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/bride/g001/b_elmerbernstein.shtml
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
18495
From: Jonathan Takagi
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:16pm
Subject: An Oliveira Video Surprise
As much as I want Gemini to release "Saltimbank" on video, they have
come out with a nice surprise. Besides Pedro Costa's "Ossos" (which I
think will come together with "Casa de lava") and Akerman's "Demain on
déménage", Gemini has announced a DVD release for Oliveira's "The
Satin Slipper"!!
Jonathan Takagi
18496
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:35pm
Subject: Re: An Oliveira Video Surprise
Good grief! Complete?
As some of us may remember part of it was shown at the
NYFF several years back -- though a complete version
was advertised.
It's a play by Paul Claudel that when performed is
about 5 - 6 hours long.
--- Jonathan Takagi wrote:
> As much as I want Gemini to release "Saltimbank" on
> video, they have
> come out with a nice surprise. Besides Pedro
> Costa's "Ossos" (which I
> think will come together with "Casa de lava") and
> Akerman's "Demain on
> déménage", Gemini has announced a DVD release for
> Oliveira's "The
> Satin Slipper"!!
>
> Jonathan Takagi
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
18497
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:25pm
Subject: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
>
> One thing matters to them. And only one thing. But it matters a
lot.
> They are all desperate to maintain a fashionable stance of 'cool'
> detachment. They make films so that people can see how 'hip' they
> are. To be caught out actually caring about something, liking
someone
> in an unironic way, or even saying something that isn't ironic,
would
> mean being defined as terminally unhip. Ferrara's films are all
about
> the kinds of people who, like Coen and the Andersons, use a facade
of
> cool detachment to protect themselves from the world.
This may be largely true of the Coens (although there's also a
positive, non-judgemental way of looking at their stuff) but
certainly not of Paul Thomas Anderson or Todd Solondz. If you
experience their films that way, then you receive them in a very
different way from mine -- and from the way I believe they are meant
to be received. I suspect both men would be shocked and saddened to
hear that they are viewed as not caring about anything except being
cool and hip and terminally "ironic". I see a lot of affection
and/or compassion for many of the characters in films
like "Magnolia" or "Happiness" -- even though Lara Flynn Boyle
in "Happiness" declares: "I live in a state of irony." (the state is
unhip, uncool New Jersey.)
JPC
18498
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:37pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "filipefurtado"
wrote:
> Now I got curious:
>
> Charles Mingus = ? what about John Cassavetes?
>
> And that was unfair to Brubeck
or perhaps to Mike Nichols? The "greatness" of Brubeck -- one of
the most heavy-handed pianists in jazz history -- lies entirely in
the immense talent of the wonderful Paul Desmond.
and
> Coltrane.
>
> Armstrong = Griffith
> > Ellington = Ford
Hawkins = Hawks
Young = Ophuls
Parker = Welles
Kenny G. = R.G. Springsteen
JPC
18499
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 9:51pm
Subject: Re: Re: Aviator
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
I suspect both men would be shocked
> and saddened to
> hear that they are viewed as not caring about
> anything except being
> cool and hip and terminally "ironic".
Anderson yes. Todd Solondz, no,
He'd feign distress.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
18500
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:50pm
Subject: Re: Re: Bitchun Flick Alert
> Actually, I
> think of May as a female version of Martin, probably my favorite
> Romero film. Martin is Dracula; May is Dr. Frankenstein. (The copy
> line is "If you don't have any friends, make one.") Not for the
> squeamish, by the way.
I'm on the squeamish side, but MARTIN is my favorite Romero film too - I
can brace myself for the squeamish stuff because the film is aware of the
horror of it. When I feel as if a film is having fun with things that
make me squeamish, I often flee - I don't have a moral issue with that
approach, but it's a painful way to be out of sync with a filmmaker's
desires. How does MAY compare to MARTIN in that regard? The trailer
would scare me off without your recommendation. - Dan
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact