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.
20601
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:38am
Subject: Sade (Re: Fred's post #20259 NOOOO!)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 05-01-06 18:14:31 EST, Bill Krohn writes:
>
> << However, it's interesting that Larry Clark's sex films aren't
sadistic.
> Neither, as I
> recall, is a film Andy (our Andy) didn't care for, Georges
Bataille's Story
> of the
> Eye (ironically). >>
>
> These sound fascinating. I will try to watch for them.
> Thanks!
> Mike Grost
Mike, I'd hate to be responsible for your seeing any of the above
films. They are definitely not up your alley.
20602
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:40am
Subject: Re: Sarris's 10 Best(s) - sigh
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> Then he got old - real fast!
>
> "Vieillesse du meme" (to quote your friend Daney).
Not like us, JP, right? No siree bob...
20603
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:43am
Subject: Re: Sarris's 10 Best(s) - sigh
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Peter Henne wrote:
> They're products of their culture--they choose money over their
memory, because somewhere down the pike they had to have sampled the
avant-garde '60s cinema (Godard, Resnais, Bergman, Antonioni, etc.)
to which you refer. So they are not ignorant of this aesthetic
heritage.
On a somewhat higher level, I was surprised to see Andy Klein talking
about how he turned to HK because he was fed up w. Antonioni. This
led him to undervalue early Wong Kar Wai - he basically re-reviewed
Says of Being Wild today (in City Beat) saying he likes it now.
I'd have to do a title-by-title comparison, but I think Len Klady's
10 best (in the same pub) are frighteningly close to Sarris's.
20604
From: Michael E. Kerpan, Jr.
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:51am
Subject: OT: Sade (Re: Fred's post #20259 NOOOO!)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" wrote:
>
> I thought Salieri sucked! No?
Don't believe ANYTHING you see or hear in "Amadeus". Factually, bogus
from start to finish.
Salieri was a very good composer, who wrote some nice music. Not the
equal of Mozart or Haydn, but then who is. Apparently, he was
typically pretty kind to upcoming artists, too.
MEK
20605
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:51am
Subject: OT: Sade (Re: Fred's post #20259 NOOOO!)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Rector"
wrote:
>
The pieces on Notre
> Musique were no blessing, one even inverted the names and actions
of
> the two main characters. The space accorded to Dargis's interview
is
> insulting and her review is good up until a typically Timesian
> threat ("Mr. Godard treads on dangerous ground by linking the
> historical suffering of Jews and the Palestinians").
Same thing in CdC.
I hate
> being a "cinephile", the obscurity of it, roaming around for shit
> copies, running after the what the distributors decide to release
or
> what the major studios decide to rerelease, like tablescraps.
Whoooah there, Andy. DVDs have changed all that - it's good to be a
cinephile now, if you live near Cinefile. If not, you can get way
more online than we could've 10 yrs ago on tape or in theatres.
Nope, I'm a happy fellow. Because this afternoon I took a deep,
satisfying crap, and what came out was the Democratic party and all
its works. Call me an ABD - "all but dissertation" (my academic
degree) and "Anything But a Democrat" (my new political affiliation).
Should leave lots of time for enjoying this wondrous wave of great
filmmaking, when I'm not listenin' to them hellfar preachers and
doin' target practice down at the gun club. (If you can't lick 'em...)
20606
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 5:39am
Subject: les inrockuptibles' best films of 2004
1 Rois et Reine (Arnaud DESPLECHIN)
2 Gerry (Gus VAN SANT)
3 Tropical Malady ()Apichatpong WEERASETHAKUL)
4 Shara (Naomi KAWASE)
5 Sarabande (Ingmar BERGMAN)
6 L'Esquive (Abdellatif KECHICHE)
7 Stuck on You (Peter & Bobby FARRELLY)
8 2046 (WONG Kar-wai)
9 The Brown Bunny (Vincent GALLO)
10 A L'Ouest des rails (WANG Bing)
11 Spider-man 2 (Sam RAIMI)
12 Big Fish (Tim BURTON)
13 Le Pont des arts (Eugène GREEN)
14 Tarnation (Jonathan CAOUETTE)
15 Les Temps qui changent (André TECHINÉ)
16 Whisky (Pablo STOLL, Juan Pablo REBELLA)
17 Le Dermier des immobiles (Nicola SORNAGA)
18 The Woman Is the Future of the Man (HONG Sang-Soo)
19 La Demoiselle d'honeur (Claude CHABROL)
20 Clean (Olivier ASSAYAS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20607
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:03am
Subject: re: Daney
Bill and/or Jean-Pierre, what DOES "vieillesse du meme" mean ?? And what did
Daney mean it to mean in relation to Hawks? (I haven't read that piece.)
forever young, Adrian
20608
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:05am
Subject: Marker's latest, where to get it?
Someone - can't remember who - said on this list that the latest Chris
Marker film, which had its TV debut just recently, is already available to
buy. Where?
thanks, Adrian
20609
From: Samuel Bréan
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 6:18am
Subject: RE: Marker's latest, where to get it?
>From: Adrian Martin
>Someone - can't remember who - said on this list that the latest Chris
>Marker film, which had its TV debut just recently, is already available to
>buy. Where?
It was me, and here is where it can be bought:
http://www.artefrance.fr/boutique/produit/fiche_produit.cfm?id_article=1959139
Samuel
20610
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:27am
Subject: re: Bob Ellis
Yes, WARM NIGHTS ON A SLOW MOVING TRAIN is one of three films directed so
far by Bob Ellis. UNFINISHED BUSINESS is another. He has threatened to turn
NOSTRADAMUS KID into an ongoing Doinel-like autobiographical series - his
colourful life-story is already well-known to many Australians. (Part 2 of
his story covers the birth of a LIBERATION-style radical 70s newspaper in
Australia called NATION REVIEW.)
You'll never see him on this list, that's for sure. He likes to rant in
public that the director is merely the "tenth most important person" in the
creation of a film - well below the writer, actors, cinematographer, editor,
etc.
He once launched this very rant at the end of a talk on mise en scène I gave
in the presence of many Australian film directors. Referring to my
discussion of Michael Powell's colour schemes - in particular a blue wall -
he exploded: "What the fuck was that about the blue wall? You show up with
your actors, the wall is blue, you turn on the camera, that's all there is
to it! If the wall is already blue there's nothing I as a director can do
about it!" To which I drolly replied: "Well, Bob, you could paint it another
colour". I think I won that argument!!
Sadly, the worst moments of Ellis' films illustrate how little importance he
places on the art and craft of direction. But still, as I originally posted,
there is something endearingly 'larrikin' (as we say in Australia) about his
sensibility.
Adrian
20611
From: Charles Leary
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:21am
Subject: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
On Jan 5, 2005, at 3:42 AM, Adrian Martin wrote:
>
> The ROUGE 'Image Issue' is in fact a continuation of this experiment
> in
> another way - using mainly images
What I also like about the latest ROUGE issue is that it harkens back
in a way to an earlier mode of cinephilia of the 50s and 60s that
enjoyed the consumption and dissemination of the film still,
particularly as a means of access to world cinema not as easily
available I suppose in some respects as it may be now with video. I say
"it" in reference to world cinema because that often becomes a singular
object (rather than a rubric for various national cinemas) -- I'm
thinking for example of a number of big glossy books like A PICTORIAL
HISTORY OF WORLD CINEMA, William K. Everson's numerous film still
collections in his various PICTORIAL HISTORY OF... books, or Parker
Tyler's CLASSICS OF THE FOREIGN FILM. David Bordell's insistence on
using frame enlargements instead of stills for his books is an
interesting sidenote - of course he explains this because of the
scientific nature of his analysis while I think it might also be some
kind of a symptom of his cinephilia as well.
The ROUGE issue is certainly international in scope, while also
bringing the life of the still/frame enlargement into the era of DVD
and consumer access to image software, with the image capture.
"Capture" being an appropriate word - ever since I figured out how to
do this on my computer I do it all the time now when I rent DVDs, and
it has made me pay a lot more attention to mise-en-scene and
composition. I'm not sure about the copyright restrictions when I do
this but my conscience is clear, even though some glimpses of moving
images are now captured and imprisoned in my hard drive.
Charley
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20612
From: Jack Angstreich
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:48am
Subject: Re: OT: Sade (Re: Fred's post #20259 NOOOO!)
Although there were times when Eugene Archer and Roger Greenspun wrote
for the "New York Times" . . .
Jack Angstreich
On Jan 6, 2005, at 7:14 PM, Craig Keller wrote:
Viewing the Times alone, the replacement of
Mitchell with Dargis is one manifestation of this; the popularity of
Dave Kehr's columns is another; and A.O. Scott's adoption of the word
"cinephile" in place of "cineaste" is yet another signal -- maybe
minor, but still poignant. It seems to me the paper's movie pages as
they now tend to exist are an improvement over their content at any
other point in time I can remember. And I wouldn't be surprised to
find an alternative voice to the Denby-Lane Continuum pop up sometime
in the near future in The New Yorker.
craig.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20613
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 9:29am
Subject: Re: les inrockuptibles' best films of 2004
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> > 6 L'Esquive (Abdellatif KECHICHE)
> 7 Stuck on You (Peter & Bobby FARRELLY)
I haven't seen L'Esquive, but I'm glad Kechiche is on there, and high
up - just before the Farrellys!
20614
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 9:31am
Subject: Re: Daney
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
> Bill and/or Jean-Pierre, what DOES "vieillesse du meme" mean ?? And
what did
> Daney mean it to mean in relation to Hawks? (I haven't read that
piece.)
>
> forever young, Adrian
My translation is Rio Lobo: The One Grows Old (full title) - as in
the One and the Other. I don't commit barbarisms like The Same Grows
Old when I translate. The One Grows Old also contains a wistful hint
of One Grows Old.
20615
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 9:34am
Subject: OT: Sade (Re: Fred's post #20259 NOOOO!)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Jack Angstreich >
> It seems to me the paper's movie pages as
> they now tend to exist are an improvement over their content at
any
> other point in time I can remember>
wrote:
> Although there were times when Eugene Archer and Roger Greenspun
wrote
> for the "New York Times" . . .
So soon we forget. Also, does Scott LIKE cinephilia? I'm glad he got
the word right, of course, but...
20616
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 8:18am
Subject: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
The new Rouge is fascinating. Very interesting images.
Charles Leary brought up the differences between film stills and frame
enlargements. In old Hollywood, stills were made by professional photographers on
the set. They could be quite different from the actual movie.
When I wrote my article on "Kiss Me Deadly", had to be careful that it
reflected the actual movie, not the stills. The gorgeous stills made to publicize
the film are quite different in tone. They frequently show a grinning Ralph
Meeker (as detective Mike Hammer) flirting happily with all the gorgeous "babes"
in the film. They are much more light hearted, glamorous, and (even though
everybody keeps their clothes on) downright erotic, than anything in the quite
grim film.
In general, I suspect the light, glamorous touch of traditional commercial
narrative movies and music videos, have launched a million more romantic
evenings than anything in Sade (who I've never read). In Eros, less definitely can be
more!
Mike Grost
20617
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 2:26pm
Subject: Kaul (Was: Kurosawa)
> I don't imagine there is any adequate subtitled (home video) version
> of the Indian version of "Idiot" floating about, is there?
Don't know. A subtitled version of the theatrical release (which is a
little shorter than the original miniseries) showed at one of the NYC
festivals in the early 90s. Unlike most Indian art film directors, Kaul's
films are mostly in Hindi, I believe. He's a good filmmaker - I wonder
who's been giving him money to make films all these years. - Dan
20618
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 3:24pm
Subject: Re: Daney
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin
wrote:
> > Bill and/or Jean-Pierre, what DOES "vieillesse du meme" mean ??
And
> what did
> > Daney mean it to mean in relation to Hawks? (I haven't read that
> piece.)
> >
> > forever young, Adrian
>
> My translation is Rio Lobo: The One Grows Old (full title) - as in
> the One and the Other. I don't commit barbarisms like The Same
Grows
> Old when I translate. The One Grows Old also contains a wistful
hint
> of One Grows Old.
To simplify enormously a very complex (and sometimes confusing)
article, Daney was commenting upon Hawks'reluctance to acknowledge
any kind of "passage" (from one thing to another), therefore his
refusal of change -- especially old age ("vieillesse"). "Le Meme"
("Hawks's "little world") "must perpetually replace itself" when it
is about to become "autre" -- which can also be called "old age."
But Bill and I were just exchanging a little joke about Sarris in
the September (or is it November) of his years... JPC (still the
same after all these years).
20619
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 3:30pm
Subject: Re: les inrockuptibles' best films of 2004
Is this list adventurous enough for you, Bill?
20620
From: acquarello2000
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 4:11pm
Subject: Re: Kaul (Was: Kurosawa)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
>Unlike most Indian art film directors, Kaul's films are
>mostly in Hindi, I believe. He's a good filmmaker - I wonder
>who's been giving him money to make films all these years. - Dan
I'd say that the Bengali: Hindi parallel cinema ratio is probably more
even now than during the golden age of Ray, Ghatak and Sen though.
Buddhadeb Dasgupta, Aparna Sen, and Goutam Ghose still make films in
Bengali, but Shyam Benegal, Govind Nihalani, and Adoor
Gopalakrishnan's films are in Hindi (Mrinal Sen's EK DIN ACHANAK and
GENESIS are also in Hindi).
acquarello
20621
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 5:55pm
Subject: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
They could be quite different from the actual movie.
I found (at USC's Warners collection) stacks of "special shoot"
photos from I CONFESS w. Montgomery Clift (in a collar) turning away
ambivalently from a nighty-clad "babe" (unidentified) who was
pleadingly wrapped around his legs. Don't know if they were ever
used, but the movie turned a tidy profit, so I suspect they were.
20622
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 5:58pm
Subject: Re: les inrockuptibles' best films of 2004
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> Is this list adventurous enough for you, Bill?
Except for Spiderman 2 (zzzzz).
Of course, they're in Paris - not fair to compare with what Sarris
sees. But I suspect he'd be just as boring there.
20623
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 6:12pm
Subject: Kechiche
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
> wrote:
> > > 6 L'Esquive (Abdellatif KECHICHE)
> > 7 Stuck on You (Peter & Bobby FARRELLY)
>
> I haven't seen L'Esquive, but I'm glad Kechiche is on there, and
high
> up - just before the Farrellys!
Bill, I take you've seen LA FAUTE A VOLTAIRE...?
L'ESQUIVE is tremendous, the best new film I saw last year.
Kechiche is going places (Desplechin likes him a lot, and even
borrowed one of the young actors from L'ESQUIVE in ROIS ET
REINE).
If I'm not mistaken it's one of the few films that both the Cahiers
and Positif agreed on in 2004. I'm surprised there's been no
interest to distribute the film in North America. A reviewer from
Variety that I spoke to shortly after I saw it said she could have
sworn it was swept up by some distrib.... haven't heard anything,
but it's a shame this isn't even at festivals!
The problem certainly isn't with the French, which is fast and
slangy. I saw the film twice, once with no subtitles, and once with
German subtitles, and both times it worked splendidly without
being able to understand a word. Kechiche is an extremely
articulate filmmaker, you don't need dialogue in L'ESQUIVE, just
some idea that these kids are passionate and confused.
Gabe
20624
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 6:21pm
Subject: Re: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
Here's an expert on Monty's 'ambivalence:
http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g012/jacklarson.html
Jack's one of the 'extras" on the new DVD.
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> They could be quite different from the actual movie.
>
>
> I found (at USC's Warners collection) stacks of
> "special shoot"
> photos from I CONFESS w. Montgomery Clift (in a
> collar) turning away
> ambivalently from a nighty-clad "babe"
> (unidentified) who was
> pleadingly wrapped around his legs. Don't know if
> they were ever
> used, but the movie turned a tidy profit, so I
> suspect they were.
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
20625
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:03pm
Subject: Bengali vs. Hindi (Was: Kaul)
> I'd say that the Bengali: Hindi parallel cinema ratio is probably more
> even now than during the golden age of Ray, Ghatak and Sen though.
> Buddhadeb Dasgupta, Aparna Sen, and Goutam Ghose still make films in
> Bengali, but Shyam Benegal, Govind Nihalani, and Adoor
> Gopalakrishnan's films are in Hindi (Mrinal Sen's EK DIN ACHANAK and
> GENESIS are also in Hindi).
Somehow all these years I've thought that Benegal was Bengali - maybe just
because his last name sounds like Bengal.
The new Bengali kid on the block, Rituparnu Ghosh (CHOKHER BALI, THE LASY
OF THE HOUSE), is quite good, I think. - Dan
20626
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 2:06pm
Subject: Sallitt on not showing (Was: OT: Sade)
In a message dated 01/06/2005 3:10:09 PM, sallitt@p... writes:
<< There's usually something lame about pointedly
not showing the thing that you're making the movie about. >>
Dan, can you think of a film that is lame this reason? And you were saying
Fuller escaped this lameness with RUN OF THE ARROW, right?
Kevin John
20627
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 8:02pm
Subject: Re: Kechiche
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Gabe Klinger"
wrote:
> Bill, I take you've seen LA FAUTE A VOLTAIRE...?
I was on the jury that gave it the (cash) prize for Best First Film
at Venice. I fought hard for it against those on the jury who thought
it was conventional filmmaking or inaccurate in its portrayal of
certain things.
20628
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 8:04pm
Subject: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Here's an expert on Monty's 'ambivalence:
>
> http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g012/jacklarson.html
>
> Jack's one of the 'extras" on the new DVD.
So am I, but Larson is much more interesting.
20629
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 8:30pm
Subject: Re: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> So am I, but Larson is much more interesting.
>
>
>
>
is he ever! I keep bugging him to write his memoirs.
Just think of ti. He was part of Frank O'Hara's poet
circle but wanted to act. So he's put under contract
by Raoul Walsh and gets cast in a Robert Stack vehicle
called "Fighter Squadron" along with. . . .Rock
Hudson.
But Jack ended up with the larhger part becaue Rock
couldn't handle any of his lines!
Then Jack gets iconographic immortality when he's cas
as Jimmy Olson, boy reporter on "Superman."
And this is still while he's writing opera librettos
for Virgil Thompson!
Jack says everybody confuses pre-accident Monty with
post-accident Monty. Pre-accident he was quite a
different person. Blithe and goofy. Jack says he was
like Jerry Lewis. They had a fairly untroubled affair.
But Monty's drinking increased and Jack fell in love
with James Bridges -- and the rest is movie history.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20630
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 9:36pm
Subject: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> But Monty's drinking increased and Jack fell in love
> with James Bridges -- and the rest is movie history.
You mean the successful director of Urban Cowboy who they named the
James Bridges Auditorium at UCLA where they will soon being showing
all of Pialat after? That James Bridges?
20631
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 9:52pm
Subject: Re: Re: new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> You mean the successful director of Urban Cowboy
> who they named the
> James Bridges Auditorium at UCLA where they will
> soon being showing
> all of Pialat after? That James Bridges?
>
And don't forget his best film, "Mike's Murder."
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20632
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 6:11pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
Jack Larson was so popular as Jimmy Olsen, on the Superman TV show, that it
allowed DC comics to launch a whole comic book about Jimmy - "Superman's Pal,
Jimmy Olsen" is the official title. This was right in the initial issues of the
comic book (started 1954). Kids & teenagers especially were crazy about
Larson's performance.
The comic book is quite unusual. It is about a character with no super
powers, who lives on Earth, wears suits, and has a job!
See my web site article on the comic book for lots of critical commentary:
http://members.aol.com/MG4273/jimmy.htm
Mike Grost
20633
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 11:33pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Jack Larson was so popular as Jimmy Olsen, on the Superman TV show,
that it
> allowed DC comics to launch a whole comic book about Jimmy -
"Superman's Pal,
> Jimmy Olsen" is the official title. This was right in the initial
issues of the
> comic book (started 1954). Kids & teenagers especially were crazy
about
> Larson's performance.
> The comic book is quite unusual. It is about a character with no
super
> powers, who lives on Earth, wears suits, and has a job!
> See my web site article on the comic book for lots of critical
commentary:
> http://members.aol.com/MG4273/jimmy.htm
>
> Mike Grost
The Amazing Mike Grost!
20634
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 6:51pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
Thank you, Bill!
I keep trying.
Jimmy Olsen, both on TV and in the comics, is unusual in that he is a young
man who is not judged on standards of hipness. He does not try to be hip, but
he is not comically unhip or a nerd, either. He is just a human being trying to
do his best. Perhaps this is a main reason why young people like him so much.
He is one of the "for real" portraits of a teenager in US pop culture.
I loved the Jimmy Olsen comics as a kid. And found that they had really stood
the test of time as a grown-up, when I re-read them in 1999. Some of the
tales, such as "How Jimmy Olsen First Met Superman" and "The World of Doomed
Olsens", are just staggeringly imaginative.
MIke Grost
20635
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:05am
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
--- MG4273@a... wrote:
> Jimmy Olsen, both on TV and in the comics, is
> unusual in that he is a young
> man who is not judged on standards of hipness. He
> does not try to be hip, but
> he is not comically unhip or a nerd, either.
And what's ironic is the fact that Jack Larson was --
and is -- mind-bogglingly hip!
Good grief -- he lives in a Frank Lloyd Wright house!
He wrote librettos for Virgil Thompson's operas! he
hung with Frank O'Hara and Christopher Isherwood!
And yet -- he's the All-American boy.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
20636
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:23am
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLITO'S WAY symposium)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
"Jack Larson was so popular as Jimmy Olsen, on the Superman TV show,
that it allowed DC comics to launch a whole comic book about Jimmy -
'Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen' is the official title. It is about a
character with no super powers, who lives on Earth, wears suits, and
has a job!"
I recall an issue where Jimmy goes to Hollywood and investigates a
crime committed on a sound stage. The villain tosses Jimmy into
quicksand he's rescued by Boris Karloff. I also remeber that
Superman only made token appearences in that book.
Richard
20637
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:23am
Subject: Their last film
I'm not that obsessed by the last work of great directors. As if
something exceptional had to be expected from a film that nothing,
in most of cases, predestined to be the very last. But... I was a
little excited in reading the new program of the Cinematheque: "Leur
dernier film". For the last program before a long closing (reopening
in a new location in several months), they decided to show the last
film made by about fifty famous directors. To name only a few of
them, among my true favorites: Street of shame, The Cavern, Most
dangerous man alive, All the marbles... A program I dreamed about, I
guess. There is actually some obsession here, which I cannot
explain. Incidentally, I discovered both Ulmer and Dwan trough these
very last films, and, moreover, during the same week... I barely
exaggerate in telling that these movies really left their mark on
me. I don't know if it is the recollection of a story that had to be
read backward. I don't know if it is this strange atmosphere of
ending worlds (also a genesis in Ulmer's), when every sentence
reaches us as the ultimate cry, when the walls and stones seem to be
burning before collapsing. But this program is a celebration for me.
Maxime
20638
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:26pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
In a message dated 05-01-07 19:08:29 EST, David Ehrenstein writes:
<< And what's ironic is the fact that Jack Larson was --
and is -- mind-bogglingly hip!
Good grief -- he lives in a Frank Lloyd Wright house!
He wrote librettos for Virgil Thompson's operas! he
hung with Frank O'Hara and Christopher Isherwood!
And yet -- he's the All-American boy.
>>
All this does not make Jack Larson "hip". It makes him fabulously talented
and creative, which is infinitely better!
I was talking about - and lamenting - something far more superficial. Lots of
teenagers in pop culture are defined about how hip they are. Take the Fonz,
on "Happy Days". The most important thing about the Fonz is how "cool" he is.
Otherwise, he barely has a personality. Lots of teenagers are shown this way on
TV and the movies. All that is supposedly important to them is that they seem
"cool", wear the right clothes, have a hip attitude, act real cool, are
experts on Patti Page records (oops - scratch this last!).
Jimmy Olsen was completely different from this. He has a job, as a cub
reporter on the Daily Planet, and mainly wants to be a good reporter. He tries to
help his friends, and anyone in trouble. He is polylingual, and speaks
Kryptonian (The language of Superman's home planet), Latin & Old Norse, which is really
helpful when he time travels back into the past! He never tries to be cool.
And more importantly, the moral universe of the works that surrounds him never
judges him on how cool or hip he is.
This is all actually very unusual in the media!
I'm embarrassed that I've never heard the Virgil Thomson - Jack Larson
operas, or even knew about their existance. Am most familiar with "Four Saints in
Three Acts", the Thomson - Gertrude Stein extravaganza.
Mike Grost
20639
From: Doug Dillaman
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:37am
Subject: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
>> From: Adrian Martin
>> Someone - can't remember who - said on this list that the latest Chris
>> Marker film, which had its TV debut just recently, is already
>> available to
>> buy. Where?
>
>
> It was me, and here is where it can be bought:
> http://www.artefrance.fr/boutique/produit/fiche_produit.cfm?
> id_article=1959139
>
> Samuel
Am I right in assuming that this is French with no subtitles?
Also, am I right that the extant subbed or dubbed Marker on DVD is
pretty much SANS SOLEIL, LA JETEE, and AK (on the RAN DVD)? Or is there
more out there that I'm not aware of? I'd love a copy of LETTER FROM
SIBERIA on DVD ...
Doug
20640
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:38am
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
--- MG4273@a... wrote:
> I'm embarrassed that I've never heard the Virgil
> Thomson - Jack Larson
> operas, or even knew about their existance. Am most
> familiar with "Four Saints in
> Three Acts", the Thomson - Gertrude Stein
> extravaganza.
>
Here are some key links about Jack :
http://www.celebhost.net/georgereeves/cast1.html
http://www.isherwoodfoundation.org/advisory_board.htm
http://www.stevenkwagner.com/olsen.htm
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20641
From:
Date: Fri Jan 7, 2005 7:42pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
In a message dated 05-01-07 19:25:25 EST, Richard Modiano writes:
<< I recall an issue where Jimmy goes to Hollywood and investigates a
crime committed on a sound stage. The villain tosses Jimmy into
quicksand he's rescued by Boris Karloff. I also remember that
Superman only made token appearences in that book. >>
This might be:
"Jimmy Olsen, Hollywood Star" (Jimmy Olsen #64, October 1962).
Just about everyone who saw the TV series with Jack Larson as a kid, or read
the comic book, remembers how much they liked Jimmy OIsen. It's a landmark of
popular culture, now unfortunately hidden from view.
Mike Grost
20642
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 1:37am
Subject: Re: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
On Friday, January 7, 2005, at 07:37 PM, Doug Dillaman wrote:
>
> Am I right in assuming that this is French with no subtitles?
Yep.
> Also, am I right that the extant subbed or dubbed Marker on DVD is
> pretty much SANS SOLEIL, LA JETEE, and AK (on the RAN DVD)? Or is there
> more out there that I'm not aware of? I'd love a copy of LETTER FROM
> SIBERIA on DVD ...
The entirety of Marker on DVD right now, including non-subbed or
English-language-versions of the film consists only of 'La Jetée,'
'Sans soleil,' 'AK,' and 'Chats perchés.' This dearth can't last
forever though -- and, reflecting upon digital-Marker, don't forget his
'Immemory' CD-ROM! Still available, Mac only.
craig.
20643
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 1:45am
Subject: Re: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- Craig Keller wrote:
>
> The entirety of Marker on DVD right now, including
> non-subbed or
> English-language-versions of the film consists only
> of 'La Jetée,'
> 'Sans soleil,' 'AK,' and 'Chats perchés.' This
> dearth can't last
> forever though -- and, reflecting upon
> digital-Marker, don't forget his
> 'Immemory' CD-ROM! Still available, Mac only.
>
I long for DVDs of "Le Joli Mai" and "The Koumiko Mystery"
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
20644
From: Tom Sutpen
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 6:44am
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> And what's ironic is the fact that Jack Larson was --
> and is -- mind-bogglingly hip!
>
> Good grief -- he lives in a Frank Lloyd Wright house!
> He wrote librettos for Virgil Thompson's operas! he
> hung with Frank O'Hara and Christopher Isherwood!
>
> And yet -- he's the All-American boy.
*****
But then, wasn't Denham Fouts as well?
Tom "Not The There's Anything Wrong With That" Sutpen
20645
From: Saul Symonds
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 11:28am
Subject: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> I long for DVDs of "Le Joli Mai" and "The Koumiko Mystery"
David, I'm not quite sure if this is what you had in mind, but you can
get a copy of "La Joli Mai" at the link below. From what I remember of
this place, most of their films they list can be gotten on dvd-r,
(though a few are only available on vhs).
http://www.francesfarmersrevenge.com/antinomyfilms/directors2.htm
And "The Koumiko Mystery" is on dvd here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=617&item=6355570008&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW
Or do these places not count? I'm not sure?
-- Saul.
20646
From: Saul Symonds
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 11:59am
Subject: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller wrote:
and, reflecting upon digital-Marker, don't forget his
> 'Immemory' CD-ROM! Still available, Mac only.
Craig, if the below listed article on 'Understanding Immemory' is to
be believed, then it is avaialable on Windows PC as well as Mac.
http://www.silcom.com/~dlp/cm/cm_immemory.htm
-- Saul.
20647
From: Saul Symonds
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 0:08pm
Subject: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Saul Symonds" wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller wrote:
> and, reflecting upon digital-Marker, don't forget his
> > 'Immemory' CD-ROM! Still available, Mac only.
You can buy a hybrid disc from the Centre Pompidou website that's
fromatted for both Mac and PC for 45 Euro.
-- Saul.
20648
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 2:27pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
--- Tom Sutpen wrote:
> *****
> But then, wasn't Denham Fouts as well?
>
He didn't have a TV series or a comic book.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20649
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 2:31pm
Subject: Re: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- Saul Symonds wrote:
>
> Or do these places not count? I'm not sure?
>
I'm not sure either because you can't be sure of what
you're getting.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
20650
From: Saul Symonds
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 3:54pm
Subject: Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
>
> --- Saul Symonds wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Or do these places not count? I'm not sure?
> >
>
> I'm not sure either because you can't be sure of what
> you're getting.
All this has given me an idea. Why should we, as critics or film
lovers, say that we wish Marker's films would all be put on DVD, or
some such thing? We should fix this void ourselves, as no-one else
probably will. I'm going to find out who owns copyright to some of
these films, (If anyone knows how to do something like this, raise
your hand now...as I don't have a clue......), and I'm going to try
buy domestic DVD rights, and release some of the movies myself onto
DVD, and sell them through an online store. A guy I know who does this
sort of thing was telling me all about it a few weeks ago - he made it
all sound rather easy....... :|
I'll let all Marker fans here know if and when I have success in this
venture.............
-- Saul.
20651
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 5:15pm
Subject: copyright (was Re: Marker's latest and other Marker on DVD)
>
> All this has given me an idea. Why should we, as critics or film
> lovers, say that we wish Marker's films would all be put on DVD, or
> some such thing? We should fix this void ourselves, as no-one else
> probably will. I'm going to find out who owns copyright to some of
> these films, (If anyone knows how to do something like this, raise
> your hand now...as I don't have a clue......), and I'm going to try
> buy domestic DVD rights, and release some of the movies myself onto
> DVD, and sell them through an online store. A guy I know who does
this
> sort of thing was telling me all about it a few weeks ago - he made
it
> all sound rather easy....... :|
>
> I'll let all Marker fans here know if and when I have success in
this
> venture.............
There's a wealth of material out there which is in the public domain.
There's even a way of interpreting American copyright law
(specifically The Berne Act) which indicates that it is entirely
legal to sell copies of films which are not otherwise available,
since their very lack of availability casts them into an area which
can be viewed as 'public domain'. This is how companies like
SuperHappyFun and Video Search of Miami can make such a wide range of
rare films available.
20652
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 7:15pm
Subject: Re: Their last film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Maxime Renaudin"
wrote:
>
> I'm not that obsessed by the last work of great directors. As if
> something exceptional had to be expected from a film that nothing,
> in most of cases, predestined to be the very last. But... I was a
> little excited in reading the new program of the
Cinematheque: "Leur
> dernier film".
Lyons did a "last films" retrospective, and there was an interesting
catalogue of articles. I'll send it along if I can find it. For me,
arriving late, the first films I saw of great directors were often
the last ones, or the late ones. I bought my first tv set to see The
Amazing Transparent Man, based on what Sarris had written about Ulmer
in The American Cinema.
I had become a "buff" by seeing Red Line 7000 in its first release
and then, after catching up with Rio Bravo on Times Square, watching
the amazing "end game" of Hawks' last works as they appeared: El
Dorado, Rio Lobo (seen on psilocybin). My subsequent discovery of the
rest of Hawks (working backwards by seeing other recent works at my
college film society: Man's, Hatari) was very much affected by this
wrong-end-of-the-telescope approach - when I looked at the earlier
works I had the endgame in mind, and Daney's Rio Lobo: Viellese du
Meme in hand.
There is simply no doubt that late works are very, very different,
and my genre film cinephilia has been marked by that difference
(whereas my discovery of arthouse films was more or less contemporary
with the FIRST films of the NV). The other thing you may have been
reacting to, as I was, is the fact that in the late 50s7 (The Cavern,
Rio Bravo were made that year, as I recall) classical cinema itself
was coming to an end.
You mention Aldrich: In a sense, all his 60s and 70s work was one
long Farewell Symphony, with films like Ulzana's Raid or The Grissom
Gang self-consciously posited as The Last Western or The Last
Gangster Film. That can certainly be felt in All The Marbles - but
after all, what dores one expect from a man who started his career as
assistant director on Limelight? The same remarks apply to the last -
and best - period of Billy Wilder's work. Some directors did not do
well during this period at all - I was never enamored of the
monumentally self-conscious The Shootist, for example, or of most
late Seigel.
Often a last film is notable for reversing the premises of the
oeuvre: Seven Women with its all-woman ensemble, Family Plot being
made "against its own storyboards" as I have written elsewhere, with
Hitchcock working out the blocking with the actors and then filming
it. Ford had one more last film up his sleeve - about a black
cavalryman who becomes an Indian - and so did Hitchcock and Hawks ("a
peculiar little western," as he described it to CdC) - these works
and the ones before them were conceived in the shadow of death, and
each is the negative image of the oeuvre that preceded it.
Another historical feature of these works is that they were much
misunderstood by mainstream critics at the time, and passionately
defended by us.
20653
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 7:21pm
Subject: Re: Jack Larson / Jimmy Olsen new ROUGE issue (was re: CARLIT...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 05-01-07 19:08:29 EST, David Ehrenstein writes:
> Jimmy Olsen was completely different from this. He has a job, as a
cub
> reporter on the Daily Planet, and mainly wants to be a good
reporter. He tries to
> help his friends, and anyone in trouble. He is polylingual, and
speaks
> Kryptonian (The language of Superman's home planet), Latin & Old
Norse, which is really
> helpful when he time travels back into the past!
A very good editorial in this week's LA Alternate Press about
Ahnuld's copycatting of Bush's "standards and testing" as a solution
to Calif's miserable record in public education made the simple point
that a major cause of bad students is the pervasive anti-
intellectualism of American culture, embodied in "dum teen" movies
(as distinct from "dumb teenmovies"), Ahnuld or - at the top of the
Tomtempole of Evil - Bush himself.
20654
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 10:12pm
Subject: Re: Re: Kechiche
>> Bill, I take you've seen LA FAUTE A VOLTAIRE...?
>
> I was on the jury that gave it the (cash) prize for Best First Film
> at Venice. I fought hard for it against those on the jury who thought
> it was conventional filmmaking or inaccurate in its portrayal of
> certain things.
Hmmm. For some reason I really didn't like LA FAUTE A VOLTAIRE. Can't
remember too much about it except for Elodie Bouchez (not a favorite of
mine) walking around like a Romero zombie. - Dan
20655
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 10:34pm
Subject: Re: Kechiche
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> Hmmm. For some reason I really didn't like LA FAUTE A VOLTAIRE.
Can't
> remember too much about it except for Elodie Bouchez (not a
favorite of
> mine) walking around like a Romero zombie. - Dan
Weird description! Her appearance - which is quite vivacious - sends
the film into a third act 180 that runs smack into a brick wall in
the last shot.
20656
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 10:35pm
Subject: Re: Sallitt on not showing (Was: OT: Sade)
> << There's usually something lame about pointedly
> not showing the thing that you're making the movie about. >>
>
> Dan, can you think of a film that is lame this reason? And you were saying
> Fuller escaped this lameness with RUN OF THE ARROW, right?
I wish I could think of some particular good example of foregrounding
something (sexual or otherwise) but deciding not to show it. It sounds
like a valid artistic approach, and maybe it is sometimes, but I usually
wind up thinking, as Truffaut used to like to say, that film is about
showing things.
Censorship complicates this, of course, because sometimes filmmakers
aren't permitted to show what they are making the film about. In such
cases, I usually get a feeling anyway: either a feeling that the filmmaker
is trying to get at the thing despite the censorship, or that he or she is
shy or squeamish.
With RUN OF THE ARROW, I guess you could call Fuller out for being
fascinated with something that can't be shown in mainstream cinema. Who
knows, maybe I'm cutting him some slack just because I'm a little
squeamish. But he does manage to find indirect ways of putting the
atrocity in front of our mind's eye. It's not like, say, using one of
those Muzak sex scenes with nice music and dissolves and golden lighting
and body-part closeups to de-sex a sex scene.
If I think of a good example of the kind of evasion I'm talking about,
I'll mention it. - Dan
20657
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 10:39pm
Subject: re: Their Last Film
I find this thread begun by Maxime and continued by Bill to be
fascinating, Quite simply, I wonder whether the 'wrong end of the
telescope' entry into cinephilia is not an almost universal experience?
One that has a particularly 'ritual' intensity, too, in that one often
encounters these strange, charged last works already 'primed' on
whatever auteurist writing one has read - and so you get - and partly
no doubt hallucinate! - in one almighty hit, the vision/sensibility of
that director in its compacted, 'testament' form. (For how long has the
trope of the 'testament film' reigned in film criticism, I wonder?)
I think this process tends always to be the same but simply 'shifts
along' in time. Bill mentioned how in the early-to-mid the last Hawks
and Ford fascinated him, but not Siegel. However, I can tell you - even
though I am not a Siegel aficionado now – to be a budding teen
cinephile in 1975 in Australia meant getting the first significant
'hit' from CHARLEY VARRICK and THE BLACK WINDMILL in glorious 35 mill
at the cinema, and THE BEGUILED, MADIGAN and COOGAN'S BLUFF on TV ... I
remember in 1980, when I was 19, attending my first academic film
conference: Rick Thompson (of the Farber-Patterson interview fame) led
a group of us eager young-un's on a slightly transgressive 'afternoon
off' to see and then earnestly dissect back in our scummy rented dorm
rooms ROUGH CUT, a film nobody remembers today !!!! ... and a lot of
the local Clint Eastwood/Burt Reynolds cultism to follow came from
those 'initiatory' experiences ... Same for Aldrich (as Bill mentions);
EMPEROR OF THE NORTH, TWILIGHT'S LAST GLEAMING, ALL THE MARBLES (shown
here as CALIFORNIA DOLLS) at the cinema doubled on TV by LYLAH CLARE,
ULZANA'S RAID, GRISSOM GANG: well, the intellectual fruit of all that
came much later in the SCREENING THE PAST issue devoted to Aldrich
(co-edited by Rick T - where Bill also appears!) ... and one of my
first long texts was on THE BIG RED ONE! I even vividly recall
discovering Corman through GAS and RICHTOFEN AND BROWN (later
celebrated by Chris Marker!!), with a copy of Paul Willemen's zany
early 70s Edinburgh Film Festival book - just about my first film book
purchase, for $1 - virtually glued to my hand!!! (In there, David Wills
was already talking passionately about 'testament' works, as he would
right up to his discussion of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA in the pages
of FRAMEWORK.) So for me proto-SCREEN-magazine structuralism came in
that first 'hit' too, just as Daney and others accompanied Bill's
explorations.
I am sure many members will have stories like this, but fixed on
different 'twilight' works and directors (and theories) 'of their
time'.
Adrian
20658
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 10:58pm
Subject: Re: Sallitt on not showing (Was: OT: Sade)
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
> I wish I could think of some particular good example
> of foregrounding
> something (sexual or otherwise) but deciding not to
> show it.
In "The Big Combo" one of the victims wears a hearing
aide. it's taken off before the killers gun him down
-- a shot of guns firing in complete silence.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
20659
From:
Date: Sat Jan 8, 2005 7:38pm
Subject: Re: re: Their Last Film
Adrian Martin wrote:
>I am sure many members will have stories like this, but fixed on
>different 'twilight' works and directors (and theories) 'of their
>time'.
As far as I can remember, seeing the Rick Schmidlin 'reconstruction' of
"Touch of Evil" in theatres was my first experience with Welles, followed in close
succession by "Chimes at Midnight." This has certainly influenced how I rank
Welles's films, I think! I, too, remember seeing three late Hawks films -
"Red Line 7000," "El Dorado," and "Rio Lobo" - near the beginning of my discovery
of his work. I remain partial to all three (while another late Hawks,
"Hatari!," has supplanted them as my favorite Hawks.) "They All Laughed" was one of
my first Bogdanovich films seen, while "The Searchers" was my very first
Ford, I'm almost certain. I could think of other examples. In fact, it just
occurs to me that I saw "Topaz" and "Frenzy" during my first wave of appreciation
for Hitchcock! I remember being astounded by the ceramics sequence in "Topaz"
and thinking that this was a definitive Hitchcock sequence.
But it's important to note that in my case, I pursued late films consciously;
it wasn't by accident, in most cases, that I sought them out. I guess
somewhere along the line I got the idea that they were often greater than the early
stuff and I knew from seeing them that I enjoyed their self-consciousness (or
whatever you want to call it) and other "late period" attributes, much
discussed by our group's members over the almost-two-years of our existence.
Peter
20660
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:47am
Subject: Re: Sarris's 10 Best(s) - sigh
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> On Andrew Sarris in the 60's versus now:
[...]
> Genre films are still being made, eg. "Torque" (Joseph Kahn) or "A Boyfriend
> for Christmas" (Kevin Connor). But they are are critically ignored in today's
> realism-centered climate. Films like this were at the center of "The American
> Cinema". Today they are marginalized to the point of invisibility.
> Sarris' "The American Cinema" largely centered on genre films
I came across an interesting quote in a 2001 Times article on Sarris I'd clipped, "The Rewards of Obsessing About Film" by Janet Maslin:
''"What I was doing then was a kind of revisionism," Mr. Sarris said of the kind of attention he once paid to every film noir and B-movie career overlooked
by the studio system. Now, he said, "Everything is noir -- try finding something blanc! -- and the revisionists have taken over. There's no such thing as
being overlooked. Everything is a genre film. Every film is a film noir now, even the ones that start out being about happy families. If you find a director
like John Dahl ["The Last Seduction"], you can look on the Internet and see that he has a fan club! So there aren't things to find in the way that there
were."''
While I haven't followed his reviews regularly in recent years, I've noticed, when I've checked them, how often he seems to be prioritizing films I've never
heard of, films that aren't played up in cinephile circles (Film Comment, the Voice, online discussions). Or this might be my own ignorance; in any case, the
reviews seem heavy on plot synopsis and I've seldom gotten much sense of what the films are actually like. Any comments on his weekly reviewing these days,
beyond the lists?
> Is this a change in Mr. Sarris as a person - or is it a change in aesthetics?
After his extended bout with a debilitating illness some years ago (harrowingly described by Molly Haskell in her book on the subject) it may be a miracle
that he can count to ten! (In fairness, the basic change you describe probably preceded his illness.)
20661
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:52am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin
wrote:
Same for Aldrich (as Bill mentions);
> EMPEROR OF THE NORTH, TWILIGHT'S LAST GLEAMING, ALL THE MARBLES
(shown
> here as CALIFORNIA DOLLS) at the cinema doubled on TV by LYLAH
CLARE,
> ULZANA'S RAID, GRISSOM GANG: well, the intellectual fruit of all
that
> came much later in the SCREENING THE PAST issue devoted to Aldrich
> (co-edited by Rick T - where Bill also appears!)
Each one of us may have a different experience based on age (both
age of the viewer and age of the filmmaker)as well as on place
(where you lived was important). I saw all of Aldrich in
chronological order. Saw his three early masterpieces --
"Apache," "Vera Cruz" and "Kiss Me Deadly" -- over a period of less
than a year, in Paris in 1955-56. (only his first two films -- the
minor World for Ransom and Big Leaguer, which was not released in
France -- I saw much later).
On the other hand I largely "discovered" Hawks with his late
forties and fifties films -- "Scarface" was legendary but
impossible to see , his thirties films were largely unknown in
France except for "Bringing Up baby" and "Only Angels Have Wings"
and no one seemed to have seen "His Girl Friday" (Rivette doesn't
even mention it in his famous "Genie de Howard Hawks" Cahiers
article). Of course all the Paris cinephiles had seen "A Girl in
Every Port" at the Cinematheque, but that was the extent of our
knowledge of "early" Hawks. The auteurist glorifying of Hawks in
France was largely based on "The Big Sky," "Monkey
Business," "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes," "Pharaohs" and "Rio Bravo."
With Ford it was worse because there was very little cinephilic
interest in him in the fifties and sixties, his only thirties film
circulating in French cine-clubs was "Stagecoach" and most of his
late forties-fifties films were neglected or underrated (except "The
Quiet Man" which was preobably overrated -- but not by cinephiles).
I even missed "The Searchers" when it came out (wasn't it panned by
Truffaut in Cahiers?) Practically all of Ford's thirties films I saw
in New York (MOMA, New School and other venues) in the seventies.
20662
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:53am
Subject: Re: Their last film
I find this a fascinating thread. Bill and Adrian's posts have gotten
me to think of my own roots of cinephilia. Being born in 1983 (and
nowhere near any repertory theatres when I was old enough to attend)
prohibited me from experiencing director's final films theatrically
firsthand. But these final films were always the ones readily
available on video, laserdisc and dvd and so they were always the
films I'd catch up with first in a director's career.
I'd seen Aldrich's "The Longest Yard" and "Hustle" before getting a
chance to develop my appreciation with "Kiss Me Deadly" and "Attack!"
This also happened with Hawks, Ford, Minnelli and others. Certainly
with Ulmer: I attribute seeing "The Cavern" during a rare television
broadcast when I was sixteen as one of the more important
developments in becoming an auteurist. On the surface, this was just
an ordinary picture, but below that surface, I could sense a real
style or "voice" coming from the director of the piece. I quickly
read everything I could find on Ulmer (very little, but Bogdanovich's
interview in "Who The Devil Made It" was crucial) and seeing all of
the films of his that I could find.
What I see in these final films is a talent fully formed and refined.
The filmmaker at the top of his/her game.
-Aaron
20663
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 1:06am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, ptonguette@a... wrote:
>.
>
> As far as I can remember, seeing the Rick
Schmidlin 'reconstruction' of
> "Touch of Evil" in theatres was my first experience with Welles,
followed in close
> succession by "Chimes at Midnight."
This is a perfect exemple of what i was saying in my previous post
about age. MY first Welles was "Ambersons" followed by "Kane"
and "Lady from Shanghai" -- but I saw "Chimes" 25 or 30 years later!
Unlike Peter I must say I have never had the auteurist fetishism
of the late work, of the 'testament" film. Yes, "7 Women" is a great
movie, but I really don't care for late Hawks (which probably
disqualifies me as a true auteurist). And I dislike Frenzy and
Family Plot.
This has certainly influenced how I rank
> Welles's films, I think! I, too, remember seeing three late Hawks
films -
> "Red Line 7000," "El Dorado," and "Rio Lobo" - near the beginning
of my discovery
> of his work. I remain partial to all three (while another late
Hawks,
> "Hatari!," has supplanted them as my favorite Hawks.) "They All
Laughed" was one of
> my first Bogdanovich films seen, while "The Searchers" was my very
first
> Ford, I'm almost certain. I could think of other examples. In
fact, it just
> occurs to me that I saw "Topaz" and "Frenzy" during my first wave
of appreciation
> for Hitchcock! I remember being astounded by the ceramics
sequence in "Topaz"
> and thinking that this was a definitive Hitchcock sequence.
>
> But it's important to note that in my case, I pursued late films
consciously;
> it wasn't by accident, in most cases, that I sought them out. I
guess
> somewhere along the line I got the idea that they were often
greater than the early
> stuff and I knew from seeing them that I enjoyed their self-
consciousness (or
> whatever you want to call it) and other "late period" attributes,
much
> discussed by our group's members over the almost-two-years of our
existence.
>
> Peter
It would be interesting to know why/where/how you got the idea
that the late films had to be "greater" -- was it the influence of
auteurist writings or just a personal instinct? JPC
20664
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 1:26am
Subject: Re: Sarris's 10 Best(s) - sigh
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
wrote:
>
> While I haven't followed his reviews regularly in recent years,
I've noticed, when I've checked them, how often he seems to be
prioritizing films I've never heard of, films that aren't played up
in cinephile circles (Film Comment, the Voice, online discussions).
Or this might be my own ignorance; in any case, the reviews seem
heavy on plot synopsis and I've seldom gotten much sense of what the
films are actually like. Any comments on his weekly reviewing these
days, beyond the lists?
>
>
> > Is this a change in Mr. Sarris as a person - or is it a change
in aesthetics?
>
> After his extended bout with a debilitating illness some years ago
(harrowingly described by Molly Haskell in her book on the subject)
it may be a miracle that he can count to ten! (In fairness, the
basic change you describe probably preceded his illness.)
He definitely can count to ten, perhaps even to twenty and more,
but it is true that his film reviews in the New York Observer are a
bit on the lazy side, and rely a lot on plot summary -- exactly the
kind of criticism you wouldn't expect from the father of American
auteurism. But then why should he be taken to task for not feeling
and writing the way he did forty years ago? Personally, I liked some
of his "Ten best" (and even reviewed a couple of them).
Again: "Vieillesse du meme". JPC
20665
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 1:35am
Subject: Re: Re: Sarris's 10 Best(s) - sigh
--- jess_l_amortell wrote:
>
> While I haven't followed his reviews regularly in
> recent years, I've noticed, when I've checked them,
> how often he seems to be prioritizing films I've
> never heard of, films that aren't played up in
> cinephile circles (Film Comment, the Voice, online
> discussions). Or this might be my own ignorance; in
> any case, the reviews seem heavy on plot synopsis
> and I've seldom gotten much sense of what the films
> are actually like. Any comments on his weekly
> reviewing these days, beyond the lists?
>
>
Well it should always be remembered that Sarris began
his career writing about establisment figures like
CarolReed. I keep up with his "Observer"column and his
work as a critic has altered in direct relation to the
films he has to review. Sarris is right about genre
films not requiring any sort of 'defense" anymore.
"Hero" and "House of Flying Daggers" are genre films
-- embraced by the "mainstream" wholeheartedly. His
interest in plot and character reflect a search for
value on his part -- though I seldom agree with what
he values these days.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
20666
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 1:50am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> With Ford it was worse because there was very
> little cinephilic
> interest in him in the fifties and sixties, his only
> thirties film
> circulating in French cine-clubs was "Stagecoach"
> and most of his
> late forties-fifties films were neglected or
> underrated (except "The
> Quiet Man" which was preobably overrated -- but not
> by cinephiles).
> I even missed "The Searchers" when it came out
> (wasn't it panned by
> Truffaut in Cahiers?) Practically all of Ford's
> thirties films I saw
> in New York (MOMA, New School and other venues) in
> the seventies.
>
>
I discovered Ford through his last film, "Seven Women"
-- whcih I saw on 42nd street when it premiered in
1966. It was the subject of my first lengthy article,
published in "December" the following year.
I was primed for it due to my exposure in 1965 to
Dreyer's "Gertrud" -- the locus classicus of "Last"
films.
Other "Last" films of note:
"The Saga of Anatahan"
"The Thousand Eyes of Dr. Mabuse"
"A Countess From Hong Kong" (a classic "film maudit")
"L'Argent" (with its great 3-D finale)
"Romance of a Horse Thief"
"Un Flic"
"Eyes Wide Shut"
"Parade"
"The Boy Who Turned Yellow" (1972 TV film by Michael
Powell and Emeric Pressburger)
"The Honey Pot" (more than "Sleuth")
"The Voice of the Moon"
"Trois places pour le 26th"
"Blue" (The film Derek Jarman made after he went
blind)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
20667
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:00am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
On Saturday, January 8, 2005, at 08:50 PM, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> "The Voice of the Moon"
This is the first positive something I've heard for this film outside
of the 'I, Fellini' book. I've never seen it, but have always looked
forward to it -- but only after I've caught up with 'Casanova,' 'I
clowns,' and 'Ginger and Fred.' BTW, another tremendously underrated
Fellini, 'Intervista,' is getting a new disc release in the US next
month or March from Koch Lorber. A nice Italian disc of this was
recently released, with a pristine image and English and Italian
subs... unfortunately, due to an authoring error, every other subtitle
is missing if you have set the subtitles to English (sentences are
never finished, or begin halfway through) -- with all missing subs
cropping up in the Italian subtitles -- which in turn are missing all
the lines that appear in English!!
craig.
20668
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:09am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> > > Peter
>
> It would be interesting to know why/where/how you got the idea
> that the late films had to be "greater" -- was it the influence of
> auteurist writings or just a personal instinct? JPC
Both, but "greater" is the wrong word. Only a madman would call Rio
Lobo "greater" than Rio Bravo. Here we enter the realm of personal
expression valued as such - the late work expresses the
last "thoughts," to put it too succinctly, of great artists.
Needless to say, such "fetishism" exists in other artforms.
Shakespeare's late plays, Beethoven's late work, van Gogh's last
painting etc. Nothing specifically cinephilic about it.
20669
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:11am
Subject: Nat'l Crix Dig Daggers, Babe
Zhang named helmer for 'Daggers,' 'Hero'
NEW YORK -- With awards season in full swing, the National Society of
Film Critics picked Clint Eastwood and Warner Bros.' boxing
drama "Million Dollar Baby" as the year's best pic Saturday evening.
"Baby" narrowly beat out Alexander Payne's "Sideways" to get the
decision. Richard Linklater's "Before Sunset" placed third in Society
voting.
20670
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:12am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
--- Craig Keller wrote:
> This is the first positive something I've heard for
> this film outside
> of the 'I, Fellini' book.
It'sa very strange work in that it stars Roberto
begnini. But it isn't a Begnini vehicle as such (and
in his it's close to Ferreri's "My Asylum" also with
Begnini. ) It's a rather close adaptation of Ermanno
Cavazzoni's novel and as such is part of a school of
"Magic Realism" that connects Italy with Latin
America. It was Fellini striking out in something of a
new direction in that there is less distinction
between "real" and "dream" than even in "City of
Women" (a very important late Fellini.)
I first saw "Voice of the Moon" at a special screening
Mazursky arranged at the Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences. it was open to the public and jam
packed.
At the time I thought Fellini had beat Beniex at his
own game vis-a-vis "The Moon in the Gutter"
I also saw "Les Amants du Pont-Neuf" right around that
time. Just got it on DVD the other day. Great, great
film.
I've never seen it, but
> have always looked
> forward to it -- but only after I've caught up with
> 'Casanova,' 'I
> clowns,' and 'Ginger and Fred.' BTW, another
> tremendously underrated
> Fellini, 'Intervista,' is getting a new disc release
> in the US next
> month or March from Koch Lorber. A nice Italian
> disc of this was
> recently released, with a pristine image and English
> and Italian
> subs... unfortunately, due to an authoring error,
> every other subtitle
> is missing if you have set the subtitles to English
> (sentences are
> never finished, or begin halfway through) -- with
> all missing subs
> cropping up in the Italian subtitles -- which in
> turn are missing all
> the lines that appear in English!!
>
> craig.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20671
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:12am
Subject: Re: Sallitt on not showing (Was: OT: Sade)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> I wish I could think of some particular good example of
foregrounding
> something (sexual or otherwise) but deciding not to show it
M.
20672
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:19am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
Bill mentioned how in the early-to-mid the last Hawks
> and Ford fascinated him, but not Siegel. However, I can tell you -
even
> though I am not a Siegel aficionado now – to be a budding teen
> cinephile in 1975 in Australia meant getting the first significant
> 'hit' from CHARLEY VARRICK and THE BLACK WINDMILL in glorious 35
mill
> at the cinema, and THE BEGUILED, MADIGAN and COOGAN'S BLUFF on
TV ...
Well now that you list those films, w. the excepetion of Black
Windmill, and Rough Cut, which you mention later, I still love them!
Charley Varrick, Madigan and Coogan's Bluf in particular. I guess The
Shootist left a bad taste, and I was influenced by P. Kane's attack
on The Beguiled. I recently picked up Jinxed - I was on the set and
talked to DS afterward - to see if the parts w/out Bette Midler are
as great as I remember. I'll let you know, Adrian.
> I am sure many members will have stories like this, but fixed on
> different 'twilight' works and directors (and theories) 'of their
> time'.
It does give you a concetrated "hit" - I was dazed after Red Line
7000, my first Hawks - and virtually demands critical theorizing -
which I found in the CdC issue, my first evr, w. Red Line on the
cover. The 3 reviews of the film (Comolli, Narboni and one other)
talked about repetition, abstraction, mathematics, irony...
everything I had seen in the film but was unable to believe I HAD
seen!
20673
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:24am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> no one seemed to have seen "His Girl Friday" (Rivette doesn't
> even mention it in his famous "Genie de Howard Hawks" Cahiers
> article).
When I first met Olivier Assayas he told me The Front Page was
thefunniest movie he ever saw. I considered The Front Page (the
Wilder-Diamond) a tragedy. Then I realized he'd never seen His Girl
Friday...
Of course all the Paris cinephiles had seen "A Girl in
> Every Port" at the Cinematheque, but that was the extent of our
> knowledge of "early" Hawks. The auteurist glorifying of Hawks in
> France was largely based on "The Big Sky," "Monkey
> Business," "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes," "Pharaohs" and "Rio Bravo."
Except for Rio Bravo, those are films Hawks considered failures! He
took 4 years off after pahroahs to figure out what he had been doing
wrong!
>
> I even missed "The Searchers" when it came out (wasn't it panned by
> Truffaut in Cahiers?)
It was panned by the CdC critics cited in the Conseil des dix - I
wouldn't be surprised if Trufaut panned it.
20674
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:31am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> It'sa very strange work in that it stars Roberto
> begnini.
And survives that casting decision.
> I first saw "Voice of the Moon" at a special screening
> Mazursky arranged at the Academy of Motion Picture
> Arts and Sciences. it was open to the public and jam
> packed.
Me too. People were perplexed. I've grown to love it. It starts off
very "lunar" and poetic, and morphs into a series of increasingly
frightening visions having to do with death. It ends with an all-out
attack on commercials and tv. It is one of the great last works.
No one has mentioned one of my favorites: Cet obscur objet du desir.
What a joy that film is!
20675
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:36am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> Both, but "greater" is the wrong word. Only a madman would call
Rio
> Lobo "greater" than Rio Bravo. Here we enter the realm of personal
> expression valued as such - the late work expresses the
> last "thoughts," to put it too succinctly, of great artists.
>
> Needless to say, such "fetishism" exists in other artforms.
> Shakespeare's late plays, Beethoven's late work, van Gogh's last
> painting etc. Nothing specifically cinephilic about it.
Thanks for answering for Peter, Bill! By the way I hope I have
used the term "fetishism" enough here and there for everybody to
realize that I am not using it pejoratively. And for the record I
admire Beethoven's late string quartets above most anything else he
produced.
20676
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:50am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> No one has mentioned one of my favorites: Cet obscur
> objet du desir.
> What a joy that film is!
>
>
>
>
Thanks for reminding us.
There's also Losey's "La Truite" and "Steaming." Much
prefer the former.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20677
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 2:51am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
"Here we enter the realm of personal expression valued as such - the
late work expresses the last 'thoughts,' to put it too succinctly,
of great artists."
A lot of last films weren't intentional: Ford's next MGM picture was
cancelled because 7 WOMEN flopped, and he had three or four other
projects he wanted to do (Bogdanovich and McBride contend that he was
pysically capable of directing until about 1970, and until 7 WOMEN he
was making 1 picture a year,) Hitchcock worked on PURSUIT, Hawks
planned another picture, Sternberg optioned a Southern gothic novel
after ANATAHAN, Lang wanted to make DEATH OF A CAREER GIRL, Mizoguchi
completed preperation on OSAKA MONGATARI before entering the hospital
(the studio made it from his plan after he died,)and Welles died at
the typewriter working up scenes for the next day's shoot. No doubt
there are other examples.
In fact, I can only think of a few artists who've declared a given
work their last: Hayden Carruth said his contribution to the
anthology "Poets Against the War" was to be his last poem; Shinoda
Masahiro said SPY SORGE (2003) is his final film. And most famously
Mishima finished his last novel hours before his suicide.
I think you've accurately described these last films as late works
rather than "final statements" embodying the last thoughts of their
makers, thoughts that they apparently intended to work out in other
pictures had they lived long enough or been allowed to make them when
still strong enough to do so.
Richard
20678
From: Matthew Clayfield
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 3:18am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> In fact, I can only think of a few artists who've declared a given
> work their last: Hayden Carruth said his contribution to the
> anthology "Poets Against the War" was to be his last poem; Shinoda
> Masahiro said SPY SORGE (2003) is his final film. And most famously
> Mishima finished his last novel hours before his suicide.
Although he didn't openly "declare it," Cassavetes had an inkling
[while making it] that, given his health, LOVE STREAMS would be his
last film.
20679
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 3:24am
Subject: His Fortieth Film
Sitting down to watch the new release of 'Strangers in a Train' now
from the boxset, a question posed -- do I watch the 101-minute "final
release version," or the 103-minute "preview version" -- which one is
AH's preferred cut?
craig.
20680
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 3:26am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
On Saturday, January 8, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Craig Keller wrote:
>
> Sitting down to watch the new release of 'Strangers in a Train' now
err, 'Strangers *ON* a Train.'
(I'm not -that- stupid.)
craig.
20681
From: Chris Fujiwara
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 3:49am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
I don't know about any "preview version" of Strangers but I do know
that when I watched part of the film on TCM, maybe two years ago, I
was astonished to see that the final scene with the priest had been
replaced with a bland and meaningless alternate ending - with no
acknowledgment by TCM that this was NOT the way the film had been
known for years. I told a friend about it and he didn't know what I
was talking about - apparently he knew the film only from recent
showings and the alternate ending was the one he was familiar with!
I'm all for alternate versions being made available on DVD but this
to me was an insidious rewriting of film history and a disservice to
Hitchcock. It's like releasing a print of Vertigo with that apartment
epilogue at the end.
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> Sitting down to watch the new release of 'Strangers in a Train' now
> from the boxset, a question posed -- do I watch the 101-
minute "final
> release version," or the 103-minute "preview version" -- which one
is
> AH's preferred cut?
>
> craig.
20682
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 3:49am
Subject: re: Their Last Film
Bill mentioned late Wilder, It is amazing for me to remember this now -
as Wilder doesn't occupy my mind much these days - but in 1975, at the
age of 15, my first powerful shot of understanding of what mise en
scene was (ie, bodies in space, framing, camera movement, etc) came
from seeing in 35mm at the biggest popular cinema ... Wilder's THE
FRONT PAGE. And discovering Wilder through his late works in the 70s
was a special thing: PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES, AVANTI (still
probably my favourite Wilder) and FEDORA put me in touch with that
tender/melancholic side of the cinephilic sensibility (all 3 films are
rather sad, and dwell on ageing and/or death) - and definitively put me
on a different, warring planet to all those non-cinephile film fans who
worshipped Wilder only for SUNSET BOULEVARD and SOME LIKE IT HOT!!!
Another special passion born in that period - which i still cultivate -
is Blake Edwards. Again, RETURN OF THE PINK PANTHER on the big, wide,
loud screen in 1975 was a 'plastic' revelation in terms of the mise en
scene/gag nexus (which cinephiles discover also , variously, through
Keaton and J. Lewis ... or today, Stephen Chiau). It's salutary to
remember in those days how little critical attention Edwards got; he
really was 'maudit'. SIGHT AND SOUND or FILM COMMENT published
virtually nothing on the guy in that period; neither did CAHIERS, if I
am not mistaken. I did not yet know, in '75, about how POSITIF and
(even earlier) PRESENCE DU CINEMA had championed him. Nor did I know a
certain Coursodon/Tavernier tome yet!! How incredible and satisfying it
was then - believing as I did that 'no one' valued this director - as I
was reaching 20, that Edwards hit his 'royal road' with 10, S.O.B. and
VICTOR/VICTORIA - which to my mind was a string of masterpieces on par
with Hitchcock in the 50s or Fuller in the 60s! 'Late' Edwards
continued to be full of gems, not in an 'unbroken' line of course: and
there too the death-driven melancholia of MAN WHO LOVED WOMEN (I still
have yet to see Truffaut's original!), SKIN DEEP, etc ...
Adrian
20683
From: Saul Symonds
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 4:07am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
In a similar vein to Last Films, is Longest Films...that film when a
director was able to indulge every passion and desire to the nth
degree, when all his or her excessive tendancies reach full fruition -
and they often provide rich thematic and formal bases from which to
explore the rest of a director's ouevre. Hence: Bertolucci's "1900",
Bergman's "Fanny and Alexander", Visconti's "Ludwig", etc.
20684
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 4:53am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> On Saturday, January 8, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Craig Keller wrote:
> >
> > Sitting down to watch the new release of 'Strangers in a Train'
now
>
> err, 'Strangers *ON* a Train.'
>
> (I'm not -that- stupid.)
>
> craig.
Of course not! But I do remember Robert Osborne introducing the
film with the alternate ending a few years ago. Now it's quite
possible that in some later screenings that introduction was
dropped, but let's not be too harsh on TCM -- by and large they do a
tremendous job, and we should be grateful. JPC
20685
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 4:55am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
And with that nobody beats Warhol
****("Four Star") 1967 -- 25 hours long. And every
minute counts.
Cast of thousands (Allen Midgette, International
Velvet, Patrick Tilden Close, Ondine, Nico, Brigid
Berlin, Edie Sedgwick, Dorothy Dean, Ivy Nicholson,
Hnery Geldzahler, Mary Woronov, et. al.) dozens of
stories -- and stories within stories.
Shown in its entirety only once in the Winter of 1967,
then dismantled.
--- Saul Symonds wrote:
>
> In a similar vein to Last Films, is Longest
> Films...that film when a
> director was able to indulge every passion and
> desire to the nth
> degree, when all his or her excessive tendancies
> reach full fruition -
> and they often provide rich thematic and formal
> bases from which to
> explore the rest of a director's ouevre. Hence:
> Bertolucci's "1900",
> Bergman's "Fanny and Alexander", Visconti's
> "Ludwig", etc.
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
20686
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 4:57am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Fujiwara"
wrote:
"I don't know about any 'preview version' of Strangers but I do know
that when I watched part of the film on TCM, maybe two years ago, I
was astonished to see that the final scene with the priest had been
replaced with a bland and meaningless alternate ending - with no
acknowledgment by TCM that this was NOT the way the film had been
known for years."
A fellow by the name of Bill Deshowitz discovered the existence of
the alternate version of STRANGERS ON A TRAIN in 1995 and published
an article about in the Los Angeles Times. It seems that this
version was for the UK market (I don't remember if it was actually
released there in that version.) This version was screened here in
Los Angeles for a week at a local art house. My memory is that it
ends with Bruno's death and contains and additional scene of Guy
eluding the police in order to keep his part of the bargain. The
article is no doubt on file at the LA Times. I assumed that the
story about this so-called UK print was common knowledge. In any
case it was remiss of TCM not to explain the origin of that print.
Richard
20687
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 4:59am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> > I think you've accurately described these last films as late
works
> rather than "final statements" embodying the last thoughts of their
> makers, thoughts that they apparently intended to work out in other
> pictures had they lived long enough or been allowed to make them
when
> still strong enough to do so.
There was always going to be another picture, but no one on the set
of Family Plot was under any illusions: The writer who was there
described the crane shot to the diamond, ending on Blanche, as the
last shot of the oeuvre. Hitchcock called a break for lunch, and when
the writer was gone, he called everyone back and filmed the wink! So
it's we - and death - who write The End. No artist ever felt he or
she had said the last word when saying it. Hitchcock loved making
films - he didn't WANT that to be his last shot, so he came up with a
better one. But the one he came up with was also a farewell to his
audience.
Bunuel knew he was making his last film when he did Obscure Object -
he had announced his retirement for the second time, his diabetes
was pretty bad, and Silberman and Carriere had to fly to Mexico to
convince him to give it one last shot. The last sequence of the film
is such a studied compilation of motifs from Andalusian Dog - Wagner,
La Dentelliere, the cut being sewn back up - that it's hard to see it
otherwise. He actually went back 2 weeks later and reshot it to get
it just right - expressing again the desire to sign the testament
with a flawless flourish, and the desire not to stop.
And of course he kept thinking - he started work on Agon, about the
dreams of a female terorist in prison. And he kept revising: He undid
his ending by denying its obvious meaning - Don Lope has finally
depucelated Conchita, as in the book, but now he wants her sewn up so
they can start over - by telling Colina and Turrent that if they got
THAT out of it, he had botched the ending! Nevertheless, the ending
says everything that can be said: Like Don Lope, Bunuel would love
to sew up the eyeball and start over from scratch. We all will at
that point.
The garden fragment is Welles' last film, but thru no intention of
his. We talked a couple of days after he shot it, and he was rarin'
to go on King Lear. The producer, Jacques Lang's brother-in-law, per
Oja, screwed him out of his last creative years, then an inept
American producer screwed him out of Cradle (abetted by Spielberg,
who could have restarted the project at Universal but was afraid Amy
would cuckold him if she spent two months at Cinecitta playing
Virginia - I'm sure she cuckolded him right here anyway). Mercedes,
the script he wrote not long before he died and was rewriting as
Mercy to set it in the American South (it had been set in Spain), is
pretty much the testament, as far as I'm concerned: It's actually
ABOUT a testament - a contested one. And a poltergeist.
20688
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:01am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Clayfield"
wrote:
>
> Although he didn't openly "declare it," Cassavetes had an inkling
> [while making it] that, given his health, LOVE STREAMS would be his
> last film.
He even waves goodbye to us. But then he wrote and staged Woman of
Mystery, and would have tried to film it, I imagine, if the cancer
hadn't written The End.
All these examples are making me think that testament films are real,
but that any testaments is a deeply ambivalent act.
20689
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:02am
Subject: Re: Re: His Fortieth Film
On Saturday, January 8, 2005, at 11:53 PM, jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> Of course not! But I do remember Robert Osborne introducing the
> film with the alternate ending a few years ago. Now it's quite
> possible that in some later screenings that introduction was
> dropped, but let's not be too harsh on TCM -- by and large they do a
> tremendous job, and we should be grateful. JPC
I'm guessing that the preview version is the one with the limp ending,
if the better ending had been familiar to Chris Fujiwara for years --
the back of the case describes the 103-minute preview version as
"uncovered in 1991 and theatrically issued in 1996." I've also checked
in with Bill's book to find out which of the two versions is which, and
while the alternate endings are described (there apparently were two
preview versions), running-times aren't attached to either. The
filmography in the back lists a running-time of "approximately 100
minutes," which would seem to correspond to the 101-minute "final
release version."
For the time being, I have in 'Onibaba' instead.
craig.
20690
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:03am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> Sitting down to watch the new release of 'Strangers in a Train' now
> from the boxset, a question posed -- do I watch the 101-
minute "final
> release version," or the 103-minute "preview version" -- which one
is
> AH's preferred cut?
>
> craig.
That's not his preferred cut. The ending sucks. He previewed it, made
a few changes, and then got Warner's ok to use the ending he wanted.
20691
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:06am
Subject: Re: His Fortieth Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Fujiwara"
wrote:
>
> It's like releasing a print of Vertigo with that apartment
> epilogue at the end.
>
Exactly. A good journalist named Desowitz started the myth, which is
based on the preview print being in a box mislabelled "English
Version." There never was an English version, and Warners' release of
the "English version" on tape and then as a bonus is a disservice.
Ned Price agrees with me on that, by the way.
The film that DOES need to be restored is Topaz. Urgently.
20692
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:10am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
-- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES, AVANTI (still
> probably my favourite Wilder) and FEDORA put me in touch with that
> tender/melancholic side of the cinephilic sensibility (all 3 films
are
> rather sad, and dwell on ageing and/or death)
exactly - and CdC were right on top of this. The first sign of thaw
in the magazine after the Maoist interlude was a piece by Kane on
Avanati.
> Another special passion born in that period - which i still
cultivate -
> is Blake Edwards - SIGHT AND SOUND or FILM COMMENT published
> virtually nothing on the guy in that period; neither did CAHIERS,
if I am not mistaken.
He was highly prized by LA cinephiles, and a few in NY, if I'M not
mistaken. I wrote a very long piece on Skin Deep for CdC called Ars
Poetica. It actually got me laid.
20693
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:11am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
--- hotlove666 wrote:
> He even waves goodbye to us. But then he wrote and
> staged Woman of
> Mystery, and would have tried to film it, I imagine,
> if the cancer
> hadn't written The End.
>
I was lucky enough to have seen "A Woman of Mystery."
I sat between Lelia Goldoni and Seymour Cassel so it
was a 3-D experience. Cassavetes was there with an
edema that puffed his stomach out in way that madehim
look pregnant.
He was in excellent spirits.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20694
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:13am
Subject: Re: Re: His Fortieth Film
On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 12:03 AM, hotlove666 wrote:
>
> That's not his preferred cut. The ending sucks. He previewed it, made
> a few changes, and then got Warner's ok to use the ending he wanted.
Noted, and noted. The final-release-version it will be, then.
20695
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:15am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 12:11 AM, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> I was lucky enough to have seen "A Woman of Mystery."
> I sat between Lelia Goldoni and Seymour Cassel so it
> was a 3-D experience. Cassavetes was there with an
> edema that puffed his stomach out in way that madehim
> look pregnant.
Then how does 'Big Trouble' figure in to the "final film" equation,
with regard to the Cassavetes oeuvre?
cmk.
20696
From:
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:19am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
Jean-Pierre Coursodon wrote:
>And I dislike Frenzy and
>Family Plot.
I like "Frenzy" very much (the dolly shot down the staircase and out of the
apartment building is one of the most haunting things in Hitchcock), but I
don't like how critics at the time over-praised it as a "comeback" film for
Hitchcock. I think the films which preceded it - especially "Marnie" and "Torn
Curtain," but also the best segments of "Topaz" - are better.
"Family Plot," however, I love, mainly for the reasons laid out by Bill in
his chapter on it. The mise-en-scene is really something to behold. For a long
time, I flirted with selecting it as my favorite Hitchcock, but then I saw
"Vertigo" in 35mm...
> It would be interesting to know why/where/how you got the idea
>that the late films had to be "greater" -- was it the influence of
>auteurist writings or just a personal instinct?
Undoubtedly it was some combination of the two. Sarris was an influence, as
were the writings of Fred and Jonathan which I found online, but I also very
early on identified, I think on my own, what Aaron termed as the "fully formed"
quality of the late works I saw. Or to put it another way: given my
auteurist inclinations (clearly formed partly due to the books and articles I'd been
reading), late films usually gave me the most to chew on. I'm sure many here
can relate to this or would say the same thing in so many words.
Peter
20697
From:
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:23am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
Bill Krohn wrote:
>Only a madman would call Rio
>Lobo "greater" than Rio Bravo.
Then I think I may have been a madman around age 15 or so! I was really,
really high on "Rio Lobo" in those days. Jonathan's comment in his capsule
review comparing it to "King Lear" (albeit Jonathan qualified this by saying that
one could only compare the two if Hawks's film were "better and more
substantial") really resonated with me.
These days, I see it clearly as a flawed work, much inferior to the
masterpiece "Rio Bravo," but it's still a film I admire and cherish.
Peter
20698
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:23am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
--- Craig Keller wrote:
>
> Then how does 'Big Trouble' figure in to the "final
> film" equation,
> with regard to the Cassavetes oeuvre?
>
The same way "Steaming" does for losey -- an "extra."
He only did "Big Trouble" because Peter Falk wanted
him to. It's not a Cassavetes film in any real way.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
20699
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 5:24am
Subject: Re: Their Last Film
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 12:11 AM, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> > I was lucky enough to have seen "A Woman of Mystery."
> > I sat between Lelia Goldoni and Seymour Cassel so it
> > was a 3-D experience. Cassavetes was there with an
> > edema that puffed his stomach out in way that madehim
> > look pregnant.
>
> Then how does 'Big Trouble' figure in to the "final film" equation,
> with regard to the Cassavetes oeuvre?
>
It was a job of work he took over because Falk was in it. He still
spent months working on it, and it's a wonderful film. In my CdC
obit, The Two Endings, I praised it lavishly as the film that stands
in for all the H'wd genre stuff - and all the comedies! - he never
got to make, describing the production David and I saw of Woman of
Mystery the real goodbye (despite the wave at the end of Love
Streams). So call it three farewells. The one at the end of Love
Stream feels awfully final to me, somehow. But works also change with
time and exceed theuir author's intentions.
Hey, I'm the lunatic who thinks The Star was Gerd Oswald's eulogy for
his own blighted career. I'm sure it was an assignment he was
thrilled to get. And if there's another TZ, which I haven't seen, I'm
fully prepared for it to be even better than The Star! I hope it is -
I love his work.
20700
From:
Date: Sun Jan 9, 2005 0:25am
Subject: Re: Re: Their Last Film
David Ehrenstein wrote:
>Other "Last" films of note:
I like or love all of the films you name which I've seen, though the two late
films I tirelessly push these days - even as recently as our group's New
Year's Day chat session - are Preminger's "The Human Factor" and Mulligan's "The
Man in the Moon." They both have fairly secure places on my evolving top films
list.
Peter
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact