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.
22701
From: Brian Charles Dauth
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:25pm
Subject: Re: Offlist: Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?
David:
I am sending you this offlist since it has become more
personal and less filmic.
> Discovered that the city I'd grown up in had vanished.
I was walking down B'way with my husband the other
day from about Columbia, and I realized that all the
way to Lincoln Center, H&H Bagels was the only
place unchanged since the time I grew up.
> 58 on the 18th.
Happy B'day. I am 45 on 3/3.
> Great. He's my favorite African-American writer.
Have you read "Times Squre Red/ Times Square
Blue"?
Yes. And Hogg and Mad Man. He just blows me
away every time.
> Hmm. I should read more of him.
I definitely recomnmend him. Growing up two writers
(along with Faulkner influenced me): Patrick White
and Edward Albee -- it was only later that I discovered
both were queer.
> Does the name Irving Rosenthal ring a bell?
Sorry, no.
> The Heights perchance?
No, the Heights were full up when I came
to Brooklyn. I am in Park Slope -- moved
here before it was Park Slope and now
can't leave or I couldn't afford to move
back in.
> Mankiewicz was a wise man.
Agreed. I have never figured out why he was
(and is) so ignored. His influence is so
pervasive and beyond just film. I saw a great
play about 2 years ago at the Pubic called
Talk. And right in the middle of it was a
quote from Eve. More than 50 years later and
his dialogue is still percolating. He had such
influence on generations of gay men, who
then had so much influence on society and
culture at large.
> And one of my very favorite Metrosexuals to
boot.
Maybe the original. People always look at me
quizzically when I say that he is a queer director.
> Rather an important figure in gay history in that
he not only had an affairwith Judy Garland and
lived to tell about it, but encouraged her to see a
shrink.
His metrosexuality is probably why she had the
affair. Is he one of the few non-gay men she had
affairs/marriages with?
Brian
22702
From: Brian Charles Dauth
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:52pm
Subject: Re: Pialat (was Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?)
ht666 writes:
> He is also the rare filmmaker of this stature who is
not unanimously liked - witness Brian's assessments -
by people who in general agree on the broad strokes
of the film canon.
I first saw his films at the NY Film Festival when they
played there, so it was about 20 years between my
first and second screening.
Looking back at my notes, I saw that the two I liked
back then were the two I liked now -- Police and Loulou.
I also liked Graduate First then, but not this time.
Under Satan's Sun was a wash both times.
> But to judge by what has been said about him at
a_film_by, no one felt that cinematic lightning had struck.
Not for me I am afraid.
> Or is Pialat someone who needs to be seen and reseen to
be appreciated?
Could be. Certainly was that way for me with Godard and
Rohmer. I finally got Godard the year Passion played NYC.
By coincidence 2 or 3 Things and Every Man for Himself
were playing at the Metro the day Passion was playing the
NYFF. I decided to make a Godard day of it and went to the
Metro and came in on 2 or 3 Things just at the point were the
boy is sitting on the stairs aiming his gun at the audience.
I finished that film, watched Every Man for Himself and then
went to see Passion. That was the day I finally understood
the mindset I needed to adopt to enjoy Godard -- everything
fell into place.
With Rohmer it was seeing Pauline at the Beach at Film Forum.
Suddenly everything clicked. Interestingly, though I could
go back and see early Rohmer and appreciate him, the Godard
films I like start with La Chinosie/2 or 3 Things and go forward.
I am interested to see if I can push the barrier back further when
I see the new print of Maculine Feminine this week.
Brian Dauth
22703
From: Fred Camper
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:14pm
Subject: Re: Brakhage & avant-garde's "contempt for cinema" (was Re: What Time Is It There?)
First of all, JPC, my locution "mainstream commercial narrative films
with actors walking around and talking" is not meant to disparage
narrative filmmaking, but to try to humorously categorize it as only
*one* of many of the already-established possibilities for cinema. There
are also, for instance, mainstream commercial narrative films with
actors walking around and not talking, that is, silent narrative cinema.
Then there are non-mainstream commercial narrative films with actors
talking but never walking around, which could characterize some of the
sound films of Andy Warhol; "The Life of Juanita Castro" comes to mind.
I use my phrase here to emphasize how much I'm in the minority in
thinking that too many are equating sync-sound commercial narrative
films (by "commercial" I mean anything with paid crew, including, say,
Bresson) with cinema itself, and normalizing their judgments of other
films according to the standards of this kind of cinema, which may be
commercially dominant and define "movies" in the eyes of the "general
public" but is very much in the minority of total films produced in the
world either in terms of running time or number of films when one
considers home movies and instructional films and other amateur films
and student films, and even more in the minority if one adds TV
commercials and music videos, as I would.
I love many, many, many commercial narrative films. If you look at my
list of the 30 best films of all time in our "Files" section (for which
I limited myself to one film per filmmaker), 11 of the 30 are Hollywood
sound films, and 19 of the 30 are commercial narrative films. My problem
is that in most *other* lists the commercial narrative film will be far
more dominant -- quite often, the *only* type of film included.
If I put a film on my all-time best list, I think it's no less
intellectually demanding and aesthetically rewarding than a Brakhage
film. Drawing a "trashy" film from near the bottom of my list, "The
Naked Kiss" is a greater and more intellectually demanding film than,
say, the "bottom" 100 films of Brakhage's oeuvre, most of which I still
think are great, even if minor compared to his best. If Brakhage had
seen "The Naked Kiss," which I doubt, he would now be doing something a
lot more thunderous than rolling over in his grave at that statement.
So when you write,
"Also, within the field of narrative film, there is an amazingly broad
range of forms and styles, some of which at least require a considerable
effort on the viewer's part. Such films are often discussed here. Why
single out 'avant garde' as the only intellectually demanding form of
cinema?"
I agree with you. But I would counter, why is there such an infatuation
with *only* the actors walking around and talking type of film, to the
point where it vastly dominates most greatest-films list? Why are so
many more in this group interested in discussing Scorsese (in whom I'll
confess I have little interest) than Brakhage? I thank you for being
willing to engage with Brakhage, whatever the result of that engagement.
JPC:
"Contrary to what you claim, commercial narrative films do not affect
everyone the same way -- even if that's the intention. And I doubt that
each viewer has a different reaction to Dog Star Man, even if they all
have hoods over their heads."
I find the second part of your statement hard to justify. Almost
tautologically, everyone responds to any thing in a different way. So no
film will affect everyone exactly the same way. But there's a big
difference between the two types of cinema here. The core plotline of
most, to keep things simple, Hollywood films *is* supposed to affect us
all the same way. The child-molester in "The Naked Kiss" is
reprehensible, Madeline in "Vertigo" is beautiful, Tom Doniphon's death
in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence" makes us sad. By contrast, the
child nudity in Brakhage affects many people in different ways; the
women in his films can be seen by some as beautiful and by others as not
so beautiful; the "death" of the "Dog Star Man" is meant as both
positive and negative, and people can take it both ways to varying
degrees. There is little to agree on in the way one responds to "Dog
Star Man" except in terms of naming the objects and actions seen. The
extreme tilt to the camera in some mountain climbing shots is scary,
tragic, humorous, and ridiculous, and I've seen it all these ways at
different times, and sometimes all at once too.
I won't be as liberal as Sam and Jason in saying that I have "no
problem" if you don't like "Dog Star Man," in the sense that if I think
a film is really great I think it ought to be accessible to anyone. I
certainly have no problem with you expressing your dislike here; that's
one thing our group should be for. It seems to me that your negative
statements on the film have two components. The component that seems to
me legitimate is that part of what you're saying is that you just don't
get it, that you don't like the film's pacing, that its imagery does
little for you. I would say the same about "The Gangs of New York." In
the end we can't "prove" anything about such subjective reactions.
But I can't help thinking that the other component to your statements
does reveal a bias, a "normalization" of all cinema to the terms of the
commercial narrative film. You're entitled to do that too, just as I'm
entitled to critique your doing so, but as far as I can tell you are
saying you're not doing this. Remember that the trouble started when you
said you had a problem with silent films made after the advent of sound
because we expect post-sound films to have sound. This is already a
judgment based only on convention. But as I pointed out, the history of
art, especially in the last century, shows that the greatest works often
violate conventions. I picked on "showing it to me" because I thought it
revealed a similar bias in the way you think about the relationship
between viewer and screen. I can't prove that it does, but I do only
have your words to go on to understand how you see films. "Showing it to
me" is indeed the way a viewer much less sophisticated than yourself
might respond to a film as "entertainment." Similarly, your notion that
"Dog Star Man" betrays a "mistrust and even hatred of the image"
suggests a bias in a particular direction. Why can't a film express a
"mistrust and even hatred of the image" as part of its greatness?
In "Dog Star Man," Brakhage avoids fixing "the image" -- because he
wants to avoid the static, the given, the notion that objects have fixed
functions in the world, when, to a filmmaking exploring human
subjectivity, they do not. What is so profound about Brakhage is that
he's not "showing you" his "world," but rather trying to show you how he
sees the world by engaging you in an interactive perpetual process.
Viewing a Brakhage film can be compared to plunging into a rushing
stream -- in mid-stream. You're caught up in the flow of thought itself.
The rapid pace of "Dog Star Man" is indeed meant to destabilize and
unsettle. The jittery camera dynamizes the imagery, reflects human
physiology (the way our body makes tiny movements at every moments), and
encourages you to see objects not as static entities but as things that
your whole sensorium is constantly having to assemble and reassemble --
as fragments of a cosmos that is changing as rapidly as human
consciousness changes. The rapid montage and multiple superimpositions
constantly re-envision objects in shifting relationships to other
objects, rather than as individual entities in themselves -- a vision
that, I might say, is much truer to the way the world really is than the
more fixed functions assigned to things in most narrative films. And
sure, objects can have multiple functions and shades of symbolic meaning
in narrative films too, but this happens more on the level of "subtext"
than in the radical re-orienting of eyesight that Brakhage accomplishes.
Just as a person with an actively changing subjective relationship to
the world will see a tree in two different ways at two different times,
so Brakhage constantly shifts the way he shows things. His subject is
less the things themselves than these shifts. He's not trying to
"manipulate" at all, but to avoid the emotional manipulations of
mainstream cinema that are based on our common reactions to, say, an
axe. The axe in "Dog Star Man" is a tool for chopping wood, a phallus, a
metaphor for film editing, and perhaps a dozen other things. His films
are so liberating because, by focusing as much as or more than on ways
of seeing than on things seen, they provide the viewer with new
possibilities for seeing the objects in the viewer's own world, or the
visions the viewer might summon up in his mind's eye.
Fred Camper
22704
From:
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:39pm
Subject: Re: Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?
Just a side note as I can't possibly digest all that's been written
so far. Someone wrote that Scorsese's movies don't seem to improve as
the budgets get larger and I have to agree. I wouldn't wish a lack of
success on anyone, but it does seem that MS's next movie would end up
more satisfying if he chose to make one on a budget that's closer to
shoestring than epic. GANGS and AVIATOR are self-consciously
grandiose and full of bravura sequences (the X-11 flight in AVIATOR
is a brilliant little mini-movie), but they don't hang together, and
they certainly lack the sharpness of his best films -- to me, MEAN
STREETS and KING OF COMEDY. (The former's influence continues to be
underrated: it's hard to imagine HEAD-ON, for one, without it.)
What's most notable in his recent movies is not the bloat, but the
dramatic decline in the quality of the acting, which seems to be
driven by a need to cast names with international recognition (i.e.
$). I mean, TWO movies with Leonardo diCaprio? Can anyone (other than
David E) argue that his performance isn't AVIATOR's weakest link by a
Prince St. mile? Even a reasonably good actor like Day-Lewis is
turned loose to give one of the worst, hammiest performances of his
career in GANGS, and Cameron Diaz (a wonderful movie star, I think)
is as out of her element in a period piece as Winona was in AGE OF
INNOCENCE (another one of my faves, incidentally; the closing moment
when the light glints off the window literally took my breath away).
In AVIATOR and GANGS, the performances are indifferent to downright
lousy. It used to be that actors would give the best performances of
their careers in Scorsese's movies (Ray Liotta in GOODFELLAS, for
one); but that hasn't been consistently the case for a long string of
films.
It seems to me (based only on the films, mind) that Scorsese has
become so enamored of his image as a creator of spectacle that he's
incapable of making simple statements, and his movies have lost much
of the human feeling that once made them precious. It's been a long
time since they were set in anything resembling the real world. (And
no, Mike G., I'm not talking about realism. I mean the sense that
they're not encased in lucite cocoons. KING OF COMEDY is hardly
realist, but it feels real.) Speaking, admittedly, as someone who's
never put him in the pantheon, he seems to have lost his way on a
very lofty and expensive level. Which I suppose makes him an ideal
candidate for the Oscar.
Sam
22705
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:45pm
Subject: Huck Finn (Was: Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?
> That could also be an after-the-fact justification for
> Scorsese's omissions. Like Mark Twain in Huckleberry
> Finn having Huck and Jim pass St. Louis in the night
> (because Twain wasn't ready to deal with Huck and
> Jim in St. Louis), Scorsese builds his films around the
> holes created by the issues he wants to avoid.
I'm sort of enjoying the Scorsese-bashing, but, on the other hand, I'm
quite fond of HUCKLEBERRY FINN. What was Twain trying to avoid in St.
Louis, do you think? Some race issue that he didn't deal with otherwise?
The section in which Huck describes the lights of St. Louis as they float
by on the raft is a highlight, I'd say. - Dan
22706
From: J. Mabe
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:50pm
Subject: Re: Re: Pialat (was Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?)
> > hl666 asked:
> >
> > > Now that that's been took care of, let's talk
> esthetics. So did
> > anyone besides me and Dan see the Pialats?
I planned to see every one of them at the Walter Reade
last year, but being in New York always finds a way to
distract me (but always in a good way). The only one I
had seen beforehand was Van Gogh which is one of my
all time favorites. I ended up just seeing Van Gogh,
Under Satan's Sun, and Le Garcu. I love Under Satan's
Sun just as much as Van Gogh now, and like Le Garcu
slightly less. Judging from this recent discussion, I
gather most of his other work is closer to Le Garcu
than Van Gogh & Under... I will never stop kicking
myself for missing A nos amours and We Will Not Grow
Old Together... but I'm young yet... so maybe BAM'll
reprise it sometime.
Josh Mabe
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
22707
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:56pm
Subject: Re: Re: Offlist: Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?
--- Brian Charles Dauth
wrote:
>
> > Does the name Irving Rosenthal ring a bell?
>
> Sorry, no.
>
See if you can scare up a copy of his one and only
book, "Sheeper." Irving is the eminence gris of "beat"
belles lettres. back in the early 60's he lost the
eidorship of the Chicago review, the University of
Chicago's literary magazine, for trying to publish
excerpts from the novel of an old boyfriend of his. So
he created hius own magazine "Big Table" and published
the excerpts from. . ."Naked Lunch" As for the rest of
the Irving saga, rush right out and get yourself the
DVD of "The Cockettes."
>
> Agreed. I have never figured out why he was
> (and is) so ignored. His influence is so
> pervasive and beyond just film. I saw a great
> play about 2 years ago at the Pubic called
> Talk. And right in the middle of it was a
> quote from Eve. More than 50 years later and
> his dialogue is still percolating. He had such
> influence on generations of gay men, who
> then had so much influence on society and
> culture at large.
>
There's a greatscene in "A Home at the End of the
World" (a film I love beyond reason) where the trio go
to the Theater 80 St. Marks to see "Eve" and mouth the
lines right along with the actors.
Alot of people on the list appear very interested in
him from a number of perspectives. Rivette's
disparagement of him has offered an opportunity to
really examine his mise en scene more closely.
.
>
> Maybe the original. People always look at me
> quizzically when I say that he is a queer director.
>
Then they fail at "Gay Jeopardy"
> His metrosexuality is probably why she had the
> affair. Is he one of the few non-gay men she had
> affairs/marriages with?
>
Sid was the only straight man she married.
And Liza repeats the pattern -- with Scorsese as
Mankiewicz.
Marty, for all his seeming tough guy veneer, has a lot
of Metrosexuality around the edges. Very obviously in
"New York New York" and "After Hours." Less obviously
in "The Aviator" -- whose screenwriter is gay.
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
22708
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 3:35pm
Subject: Re: Re: Pialat (was Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?)
> I
> gather most of his other work is closer to Le Garcu
> than Van Gogh & Under...
Yes, I think that's accurate. If one breaks Pialat's career into periods,
then LE GARCU feels like a throwback to the style of the middle period
films (PASSE TON BAC D'ABORD, LOULOU, and A NOS AMOURS). The bulk of the
late period work (POLICE, UNDER THE SUN OF SATAN, and VAN GOGH) could be
seen as Pialat stretching a little and trying new things, new material.
The early work (L'ENFANCE NUE, LA MAISON DES BOIS, WE WON'T GROW OLD
TOGETHER, LA GUEULE OUVERTE) is a bit more overtly "formal" and plays with
long takes and other minimalist ideas, though the early and middle films
still have quite a lot in common. - Dan
22709
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:30pm
Subject: RMasculine-Feminine (Was: Pialat )
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Charles Dauth"
wrote:
\the Godard
> films I like start with La Chinosie/2 or 3 Things and go forward.
> I am interested to see if I can push the barrier back further when
> I see the new print of Maculine Feminine this week.
>
> Brian Dauth
As someone who saw it when it was first released, it's always been my
sentimental favorite. According to Patrick MacGilligan its technique
made a big impression on Hitchcock, who screened it repeatedly.
22710
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:32pm
Subject: Re: N. Ray interview?
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
It appeared in
> French mid 1979.
>
> curious Adrian
I did one in 1978, my first for CdC. He died a year later.
22711
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:38pm
Subject: Re: RMasculine-Feminine (Was: Pialat )
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> As someone who saw it when it was first released,
> it's always been my
> sentimental favorite. According to Patrick
> MacGilligan its technique
> made a big impression on Hitchcock, who screened it
> repeatedly.
>
>
Now that's rather fascinating. Do you see any traces
of it's influence in late Hitchcock?
When it came out "Masculine Feminine" was such a
precise snapshot of its time it took my breath away.
Hollywood was notoriously ten years behind when it
came to the lives of young people. This looked like it
had been shot the day before yesterday and starred
half of my friends. "David Holzman's Diary" (shot the
following year) is its closest equivalent.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
22712
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:53pm
Subject: Brakhage & avant-garde's "contempt for cinema" (was Re: What Time Is It There?)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Fred Camper wrote:
JPC:
"Contrary to what you claim, commercial narrative films do not affect
everyone the same way -- even if that's the intention. And I doubt
that each viewer has a different reaction to Dog Star Man, even if
they all have hoods over their heads."
Fred C:
"I find the second part of your statement hard to justify. Almost
tautologically, everyone responds to any thing in a different way. So
no film will affect everyone exactly the same way. But there's a
big difference between the two types of cinema here. The core
plotline of most, to keep things simple, Hollywood films *is*
supposed to affect us all the same way."
That's also true on a visceral level: everybody laughs at Buster
Keaton's pratfall or screams when Mother pulls the shower curtain
back. Some laugh louder or scream longer but the response is more or
less the same. If we can take Hitchcock at his word, he wanted
audiences from disparate cultures all over the world to be affected
the same way by the sight of Thronhill's peril or Marion's death. I
don't take this as evidence of *bad* intention on the part of
Hitchcock or other filmmakers working in the Hollywood tradition.
Rather it seems to be part of the way mass entertainment works.
By the way, I remember the days when Anthology Film Archives had
those side flaps on the seats thus isolating viewers from each other,
and when they showed a Keaton comedy the laughter was sporadic. I
always though that was one reason why they went back to conventional
viewing conditions.
Richard
22713
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:15pm
Subject: Re: RMasculine-Feminine (Was: Pialat )
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Hollywood was notoriously ten years behind when it
> came to the lives of young people.
Hitchcock thought so too. He became fascinated with Masculine-
Feminine while planning Kaleidoscope, an aborted serial killer film
for which he had test footage shot with natural lighting and unknowwn
actors in NY. The other films he had been screening repeatedly were
Blow-Up and Red Desert - the latter had already inspired his new
approach to creating "natural" lighting in Torn Curtain. (He had used
real natural lighting in the early days in England.) The only traces
of Kaleidoscope, nixed by "With-it" Lou Wasserman after a
presentation complete with test footage, slides of locations and a
script by Howard Fast, are in Frenzy.
22714
From: BklynMagus
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:30pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene (was Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?)
David writes:
> There's a great scene in "A Home at the End
of the World" (a film I love beyond reason)
where the trio go to the Theater 80 St. Marks to
see "Eve" and mouth the lines right along with
the actors.
I know what you mean. Memories flooded back
to me when that scene unspooled. I worshipped
at Theatre 80 so often. Their double bill of Eve
and Sunset Blvd was a cinematic high holy day
for me.
> Alot of people on the list appear very interested
in him from a number of perspectives. Rivette's
disparagement of him has offered an opportunity
to really examine his mise en scene more closely.
I boycotted Rivette for 6 months in protest over his
defamation of JLM.
Okay- here are two brief arguments for JLM based
on two scenes from Eve.
1. The opening sequence.
Wide shot in which all of the major players are visible.
Addison's voice starts, telling the viewer what he
needs and does not need to know. Now Addison
begins his introductions, so for the moment both image
and sound are controlled by Addison (note: I am not
seeking to be radical, but I must comment on the
excitement I feel as JLM hands the film over to a queer
man. It is inseperable from my excitement over the
mechanics of JLM's technique).
Having done the introductions, Addison relinquishes
the image and soundtrack to the Aged Actor (underscoring
stops at this point rather abruptly). Aged Actor then
introduces Eve. Addison breaks in and freezes the frame
(Mankiewicz also introduced freeze frame as a producer
in Fury and The Philadelphia Story. Was it his idea in those
two films? He has claimed so on more than one occassion.
I do not recall Cukor using freeze frame before PS, and as
for Lang, I do not know his work well enough to comment).
Music starts again and Addison now hands the narrative off
to Karen. Shot of Karen looking toward podium. Karen is in
focus while the applauding audience is not in focus in the
background. The soundtrack is a combination of Karen's
thoughts and musical underscoring. In this moment JLM
captures in a single shot two different time experiences of
the same event: Karen musing while looking at the podium
(a slow paced experience) and the reaction of the audience
to Eve's rising and going to accept the Sarah Siddons Award
which seems to be happening in a slightly faster time sense
than normal (I think that JLM achieved this effect by having
the audience shot out of focus. I experience it as if that
portion of the shot were speeded up somehow).
Karen's voice then takes us back in time to when Eve first
spoke to her.
2) Margo, Addison and Miss Caswell in the theatre lobby.
Margo enters, sees Addison, hand to hair, makes entrance
instead of just walking in. "Why so remote Addison?", etc.
Addison remains seated as he starts to tell Margo about
Eve's performance. Margo paces back and forth swinging
her handbag. The poles of her pacing are Addison on the
right and a giant poster depicting a caricature of her
along with the title of the play "Aged in Wood" (JLM could
be sneaky kind/cruel) on the left.
Margo must now improvise, having just learned that Eve
was her new understudy. Addison raves about Eve, seeing
what performance he can draw out of her. They are finally
caught in a tight two shot with the poster in the back left
background. JLM releases them by having Miss Caswell
enter from the ladies' room. Monroe walks toward them
as if she had just swum the English Channel, giving Margo
the chance to leave Addison.
This small scene (the first part of the larger scene in the
theater which is a triptych) contrasts Addison's stillness
(he possesses knowledge) with Margo's pacing (she wants
to know what he knows and figure out how to use it
when she meets Bill, Max, Lloyd and Eve). Addison stirs
from his chair as his desire grows to know what Margo is
going to do (he cannot actually witness the performance
since that would give the game away), and Margo's
pacing slows down as her plan of action solidifies in her
mind. We then get the two shot interrupted by Miss Caswell.
In the next scene (the middle of the triptych) Margo has
the script in hand (mind) and the others must improvise.
These are two minor examples of Mankiewicz's brilliance.
There are many others across the body of his work.
Brian Dauth
22715
From: BklynMagus
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:47pm
Subject: Re: Masculine-Feminine (Was: Pialat )
hl666 writes:
> The only traces of Kaleidoscope, nixed by "With-it"
Lou Wasserman after a presentation complete with
test footage, slides of locations and a script by
Howard Fast, are in Frenzy.
Frenzy (along with Family Plot and Lifeboat) are my
favorite Hitchcock's. I feel that in Frenzy he combined
the best of his British style along with the best of his
Hollywood style.
Brian Dauth
22716
From: BklynMagus
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 5:52pm
Subject: Re: Brakhage & avant-garde's "contempt for cinema" (was Re: What Time Is It There?)
Richard writes:
> By the way, I remember the days when Anthology
Film Archives had those side flaps on the seats thus
isolating viewers from each other, and when they
showed a Keaton comedy the laughter was sporadic.
I always though that was one reason why they went
back to conventional viewing conditions.
When my parents knew I liked movies they would
tell me their favorites (most of which were Billy Wilder
films interestingly enough).
They loved Some Like It Hot and went to see it several
times with friends. However, when they took my
grandparents they decided to see it at a drive-in. My
Dad said that the experience was terrible -- the movie
suddenly wasnt as funny.
Brian
22717
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:00pm
Subject: Default film (Was: Sights & Sounds)
> This is a really interesting point and it came up in a lecture I was
> giving the other day. There's a sort of default film which gets made
> when the creators aren't questioning convention. The scottish film
> STELLA DOES TRICKS was singled out by me, probably unfairly - Loacian
> realism until a car explodes, then slow motion - "because that's how
> you film exploding cars, isn't it?"
The concept of the "default film" is difficult to defend in its
particulars, but I continue to think that auteurism makes no sense without
it. If directors simply imposed unity on interesting hodgepodges, then I
wouldn't be motivated to be an auteurist: unity has appeal, but is far
from essential to my concept of art. On the other hand, if films
naturally gravitate toward some kind of boring, craft-ridden middle
ground, then the director becomes crucial, as the only person in a
position to defy this gravitational pull and nudge everyone toward art.
Having lived on a few movie sets now, I think I can see a little bit how
the psychological forces operate that drag films toward a default
mediocrity. - Dan
22718
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:01pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Some very astute observations. But to go back to the
(justly or unjustly) maligned Rivette, what HE took
issue with was the "on the money" absolutism of
Mankiewicz's mise en scene. The acotrs and the camer
move and fram to very definite purpose. Rivette's
cinema is all about questioning such purpose.
Rivette's disenchantment arose from an unfilmed
project called "Pheonix." It was to have starred
Juliet Berto as a young novie understudying big star
Jeanne Moreau. Rivette and berto went to see "All
About Eve" and he found imself verymuch disappointed
in it. The "Phoenix" projectgave way to "Celine and
Julie Go Boating," but many of its ideas turn up in
"La Bande des Quatres" and "L'Amour par Terre" in the
form of dramas that are enacted off-stage rather than
on by characters who are profesional actors.
What it all coems down to is the difference between
being a critic and observing the work of others and
the real world experience of directing filsm yourself.
I don't agree with Rivette at all about Mankiewicz or
Minnelli -- though I'm pleased he prizes Chuck
Walters.
Mankiewicz is part of a writer-director tradition that
encompasses figures as diverse as Preston Sturges,
Sacha Guitry, Sam Fuller and Eric Rohmer. That he got
a chance to do as much as he did -- to considerable
acclaim -- only goes to show that Hollywood was a far
more complex industry in the studio era than its been
given credit for.
Finally this makes me want to look at "Cleopatra"
again -- a film by Mankiewicz and the studio system
itself. "The three hardest pictures I ever made," he
called it. And two of those three are pretty damned
good.
--- BklynMagus wrote:
>
> This small scene (the first part of the larger scene
> in the
> theater which is a triptych) contrasts Addison's
> stillness
> (he possesses knowledge) with Margo's pacing (she
> wants
> to know what he knows and figure out how to use it
> when she meets Bill, Max, Lloyd and Eve). Addison
> stirs
> from his chair as his desire grows to know what
> Margo is
> going to do (he cannot actually witness the
> performance
> since that would give the game away), and Margo's
> pacing slows down as her plan of action solidifies
> in her
> mind. We then get the two shot interrupted by Miss
> Caswell.
> In the next scene (the middle of the triptych) Margo
> has
> the script in hand (mind) and the others must
> improvise.
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
22719
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:02pm
Subject: Re: Re: Masculine-Feminine (Was: Pialat )
--- BklynMagus wrote:
>
> Frenzy (along with Family Plot and Lifeboat) are my
> favorite Hitchcock's. I feel that in Frenzy he
> combined
> the best of his British style along with the best of
> his
> Hollywood style.
>
Really? I thought you would have cottoned to "Rope"
and "Strangers on a Train" as well -- not to mention
"Vertigo" and "Rear Window."
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
22720
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:42pm
Subject: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Finally this makes me want to look at "Cleopatra"
> again -- a film by Mankiewicz and the studio system
> itself. "The three hardest pictures I ever made," he
> called it. And two of those three are pretty damned
> good.
Me too, but let me repeat an earlier question, now flagged in the
subject head. When Natsha Arnauldi was at the late Fox Classics she
restored the director's cut of The Leopard (whatever that would be)
and planned to do the same for Cleo. Did that ever happen? I assume
not - but Natasha is still around, doing gardening instead of movies.
She might know where the stuff is, at least.
22721
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:53pm
Subject: All About Hitch
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
Whitfield Cook's original ending for Stage Fright (which was filmed)
shows Wyman declaring her love on stage so convincingly that Wilding
is beginning to look uncomfortable in the wings, wondering if this
girl can ever be for real. I've always thought that ending (which
perhaps Wyman couldn't pull off) was a bit Eve-like. Mankiewicz was
in prepro when Hitchcock was shooting, but the short story and the
radio play were well-known, and the Wyman-Dietrich relationship is
very Eve-like.
22722
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:02pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> Me too, but let me repeat an earlier question, now
> flagged in the
> subject head. When Natsha Arnauldi was at the late
> Fox Classics she
> restored the director's cut of The Leopard (whatever
> that would be)
> and planned to do the same for Cleo. Did that ever
> happen? I assume
> not - but Natasha is still around, doing gardening
> instead of movies.
> She might know where the stuff is, at least.
>
Well restoring "The Leopard" was a simple matter
because the negative of the original released
everywhere else in the world still exists. A new print
was struck and -- voila!
"Cleopatra" was prettymuch reduced to guitar picks
during the course of its various cuts. Mankiewicz
originally wanted two movies (a la "Kill Bill") Zanuck
wouldn't hear of it and slammed togetehr the massive,
nearly four-hour original release version. This was
then cut down on subsequent releases. I doubt there's
anything over in the vaults to work from to do a Big
Red One" on "Cleo."
A must-read is the now out of print "The Cleopatra
Papers" by Jack Brodsky and Nathan Weiss. They were
the publicists on the film. Oroginally they were hired
on because the film wasn't getting enough publicity.
Then Liz met Dicka dna all hell broke loose. A very
funny and very knowing epistilatory saga. Amuch faster
read than "Les Liasons Dangereuses" but just as
all-wise.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
22723
From: BklynMagus
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:23pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
David writes:
> But to go back to the (justly or unjustly) maligned
Rivette, what HE took issue with was the "on the
money" absolutism of Mankiewicz's mise en scene.
Gotcha. I do like Rivette for the most part,
especially La Belle Noiseuese, Secret Defense and
the Joan of Arc movies.
> The actors and the camera move and frame to
very definite purpose. Rivette's cinema is all about
questioning such purpose.
Gotcha. JLM characters are very conscious of
giving performances as part of existence. I think
queer men gravitate to his work since we are aware
very early on that much of the time we must give
performances in order to protect ourselves. Our
learned ability to out think and out wit straight society
is our safety net.
> in the form of dramas that are enacted off-stage
rather than on by characters who are profesional
actors.
Which to me seems a very Mankiewiczian notion.
> though I'm pleased he prizes Chuck Walters.
As should we all. On the ides of March, I will
finally have Easter Parade on DVD, a favorite
musical along with Guys and Dolls. Now if they
would just release Torch Song.
> Mankiewicz is part of a writer-director tradition that
encompasses figures as diverse as Preston Sturges,
Sacha Guitry, Sam Fuller and Eric Rohmer.
It is the tradition I respond most deeply to. I would
also add Billy Wilder and John Huston. Huston and
JLM believed that writing/directing were not separate
things, while Wilder started to direct to protect his
scripts (which I think can sometimes make his films
less interesting from a visual point of view). The
irony is that JLM gets hit for being the visual bore,
while Wilder is feted. I wonder if Wilder's staying in
Hollywood and JLM's straegic retreat to the East Coast
played a role in that?
> That he got a chance to do as much as he did -- to
considerable acclaim -- only goes to show that Hollywood
was a far more complex industry in the studio era than
it's been given credit for.
I recently got from ebay a copy of Life Magazine from
February 1951. Their main article is on JLM and his style
and subjects, and I was amazed. This serious critical
article in Life Magazine.
> Finally this makes me want to look at "Cleopatra"
again -- a film by Mankiewicz and the studio system
itself. "The three hardest pictures I ever made," he
called it. And two of those three are pretty damned
good.
I like it. Political comment alert: I do enjoy having a strong
woman at the center of the film. Cleopatra is definiely in the
tradition of Eve and Margo.
In the contest between JLM and the studio, I'll give it to JLM
on points even though he doesn't score a knockout with
this one.
What continues to amaze me is how JLM will take a genre or
theatre piece -- the musical (Guys and Doll), the epic
(Cleopatra), the thriller (Sleuth), the family drama (House of
Strangers), film noir (Somewhere in the Night), Shakespearean
drama (Julius Caesar), Tennessee William's gothic (Suddenly
Last Summer) -- and will end up with a movie that is both
absolutely his own and an honest rendering of the original.
As far as the Cleopatra dvd is concerned, as far as I know it
contains all the material currently known to exist. Some is still
missing (as with The Honey Pot and There Was a Crooked Man),
but has yet to be found.
Brian
22724
From: hotlove666
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:24pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> "Cleopatra" was prettymuch reduced to guitar picks
> during the course of its various cuts. Mankiewicz
> originally wanted two movies (a la "Kill Bill") Zanuck
> wouldn't hear of it and slammed together the massive,
> nearly four-hour original release version.
Oh well, we'll always have Century City.
Maybe Natasha was looking for the roadshow version. I'll ask her what
she meant.
> A must-read is the now out of print "The Cleopatra
> Papers" by Jack Brodsky and Nathan Weiss.
Jack hired me when I went to work at Fox - an urbane, old-school guy.
I found a tattered paperback at a thrift. I'm sure there are more
tales where those came from.
22725
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:35pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
> >
> Well restoring "The Leopard" was a simple matter
> because the negative of the original released
> everywhere else in the world still exists. A new print
> was struck and -- voila!
The original preview version of THE LEOPARD was actually some 20
minutes longer than the currently circulating 'director's cut'. The
Italian trailer includes a few glimpses of the missing scenes,
notably some additional shots of The Prince with his prostitute
mistress (actually part of a dream that the Prince has during the
stopover at the inn).
>
> "Cleopatra" was prettymuch reduced to guitar picks
> during the course of its various cuts. Mankiewicz
> originally wanted two movies (a la "Kill Bill") Zanuck
> wouldn't hear of it and slammed togetehr the massive,
> nearly four-hour original release version. This was
> then cut down on subsequent releases. I doubt there's
> anything over in the vaults to work from to do a Big
> Red One" on "Cleo."
The long documentary on the UK DVD of CLEOPATRA includes a few
glimpses of additional scenes. I may be misremembering, but I believe
that one of these depicts the death of Martin Landau's character. I
believe that the documentary implies that these scenes are part of a
restoration that is slowly being pieced together.
22726
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:40pm
Subject: Re: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- BklynMagus wrote:
>
> As should we all. On the ides of March, I will
> finally have Easter Parade on DVD, a favorite
> musical along with Guys and Dolls. Now if they
> would just release Torch Song.
>
I can't look at "Torch Song" without thinking of Carol
Burnett's fabulous "Torchy Song" -- one of her very
best movie parodies. "Do you know how long it took me
to get THIS pose?!!!!"
> > Mankiewicz is part of a writer-director tradition
> that
> encompasses figures as diverse as Preston Sturges,
> Sacha Guitry, Sam Fuller and Eric Rohmer.
>
> It is the tradition I respond most deeply to. I
> would
> also add Billy Wilder and John Huston.
Correct. Should have mentioned them.
Huston and
> JLM believed that writing/directing were not
> separate
> things, while Wilder started to direct to protect
> his
> scripts (which I think can sometimes make his films
> less interesting from a visual point of view). The
> irony is that JLM gets hit for being the visual
> bore,
> while Wilder is feted.
Well Wilder was a satirist, and the impact he makes is
far more immediate. Mankiewicz is tons subtler. But
Wilder DOES have visual style -- best displayed in
"The Apartment." While Fassbinder acknowledged
Mankiewicz in "The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant," I
feel Wilder was an influence as well. Jack Lemmon
spending Christmas alone is very Fassbinderian.
>
> What continues to amaze me is how JLM will take a
> genre or
> theatre piece -- the musical (Guys and Doll), the
> epic
> (Cleopatra), the thriller (Sleuth), the family drama
> (House of
> Strangers), film noir (Somewhere in the Night),
> Shakespearean
> drama (Julius Caesar), Tennessee William's gothic
> (Suddenly
> Last Summer) -- and will end up with a movie that
> is both
> absolutely his own and an honest rendering of the
> original.
>
You got it!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
22727
From: thebradstevens
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:52pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> The long documentary on the UK DVD of CLEOPATRA includes a few
> glimpses of additional scenes. I may be misremembering, but I
believe
> that one of these depicts the death of Martin Landau's character. I
> believe that the documentary implies that these scenes are part of
a
> restoration that is slowly being pieced together.
I just took another look at the documentary. Landau's suicide is
described, but not shown (though there is a still from it). The
rediscovered scenes show Cleopatra outside her encampment at
Alexandria (which would have been her first scene in the film), and a
snake dance sequence (which was glimpsed in the trailer).
22728
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:14pm
Subject: Sex and trailers (Was: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut)
> and a
> snake dance sequence (which was glimpsed in the trailer).
Is this one of the not-too-rare cases in which the trailer is spiced up
with sexy material that is cut from the film?
I remember watching Petrie's THE BRAMBLE BUSH (from Petrie's early,
not-good-at-all period) on TV in LA - I think it was Ch. 11, but I'm not
sure. Just before the film was broadcast, the channel showed a TV trailer
dominated by a suggestive image of Angie Dickinson sprawled across a bed
without too many clothes on. As the movie began, the channel issued a
disclaimer: some scenes from this film were deemed unsuitable for
television and have been edited. Lo and behold, Angie's scene on the bed
was gone from the edited version. Outrageous. - Dan
22729
From: Travis Miles
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:50pm
Subject: Re: Pialat: lightning did strike
Well, I suppose I should say that the effect of the Pialat retrospective on
me and my wife (at the Walter Reade) was of the most fundamental and
disruptive kind. I felt as if a new plateau had been opened to me, one in
which Eustache finally began to make some sense and seem less monstrous,
less singular. I had seen a Eustache retro in London, which only failed to
be as overwhelming because of the necessarily heterogeneous nature of his
collected works. La Mama et la putain is such a slap in the face, and for
years it was the only thing that I (or many people of my age, 31) could see,
so it was a UFO. Even after the Eustache retro, I tend to think of many of
the shorter works as footnotes, or equally intransigent works of
singularity. Le Cochon is that proto-Canadian Film Board wonder, Le Pere
Noel seems to be BY Leaud, or out-takes from Masculin Feminin, Mes Petites
Amours is so gentle, so reluctant to be bitter...
Having seen the Pialats, and I don't mean to make some base comparison here,
I now feel like La Mama et la putain is less of orphan. The Pialat corpus is
definitely more cohesive, in dedicated pursuit of the same things, than
Eustache's, but at least they're from the same planet. I find Eustache
absolutely unsentimental, while at the same time obsessed with the process
of mythologizing through memory and re-enactment. Pialat strikes me as a
sentimentalist who, through some sort of self-adopted quasi-ethical rigor,
attempts to present things free from sentiment. Yet it keeps creeping back
in. The fact that his personal favorite was La Maison des bois, which is his
most sentimental work, may indicate some support for this conjecture.
I can definitely feel where a suspicion for the emotional set-tos in his
films comes from (and there's a feeling in A Nos Amours that the dinner
table showdown is the emotional equivalent of the end of a John Woo film,
and knowing the on-set story is like seeing the wires), but for me, the real
kick in the stomachs come in quieter moments, and in his devastating closers
(Van Gogh's "He was a friend of mine", Police's freeze-frame on Depardieu
with the ridiculously out of place Gorecki sound cue, the letter at the end
of L'Enfance nue, the shattering nowhere end of Le Garcu.)
It has yet to sink in for me why I find these so great, but I definitely
wanted to weigh in to say that this was indeed lightning of a sort. And on a
more personal note, being a wedded cinephile and therefore cherishing all
those films and filmmakers that somehow become "ours" rather than "mine"
with my somewhat less cinephilic wife, Pialat might be the centerpiece of
this occasional and longed-for communion. As I told a film friend who lost
his way in recent years (he saw two films in 2004, after hundreds the year
before), I found myself during the Pialats wondering where he was, sadder
and sadder that he wasn't there. I hadn't felt that before, and that must be
some kind of testament to the films.
T
> The retrospectives at the Walter Reade and more recently at UCLA,
> accompanied by a big spread in Film Comment, were an opportunity for
> American cinephiles to see and assess the whole body of work, and I
> remember how eagerly members of this group were looking forward to
> the one in New York. But to judge by what has been said about him at
> a_film_by, no one felt that cinematic lightning had struck. Or is
> Pialat someone who needs to be seen and reseen to be appreciated? As
> the mini-debate between Dan and me has indicated, he's not an easy
> acquisition, but I find him a fascinating subject for discussion. The
> issues his films pose are the fundamental ones, no matter how you
> assess the results.
>
22730
From: BklynMagus
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 8:55pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
David writes:
> I can't look at "Torch Song" without
thinking of Carol Burnett's fabulous
"Torchy Song" -- one of her very
best movie parodies.
Agreed. I also love "A Swiped Life"
Movies with female twins (one evil,
one good) have never been the
same: "It says PATSY!"
I think she should release all the
movie parodies as a DVD set.
> But Wilder DOES have visual style --
best displayed in "The Apartment."
I gave the wrong impression -- he
certainly does have visual style.
As much as The Apartment, I like
Kiss Me, Stupid. If what Marx said
was correct (there I go being
radical again) and the first time is
tragedy and the second time farce,
then KMS is the farcical remake of
Sunset Blvd: aspiring writer/songwriter
has to satisfy the libidinal lusts of
successful performer. Each has a
writing partner.
Last point: after two high points in
his career (Sunset and Apartment),
Wilder set a movie in the desert that
critiqued American culture. Both
bombed and hurt his career. He spent
much of the 50's making up for
Ace in the Hole, (The Spirit of St.
Louis anyone?), and after KSM produced
one of the biggest atonement films of
all time: The Fortune Cookie.
> Jack Lemmon spending Christmas alone
is very Fassbinderian.
And Fassbinder watching a movie with
Veronika Voss in a theatre -- so Sunset
Blvd.
Brian
PS: Kiss Me, Stupid is at the Thalia on 95th
Street this Sunday, February 13th at 4:15 p.m.
22731
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 9:05pm
Subject: Re: Cleopatra: The Director's Cut
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
"The long documentary on the UK DVD of CLEOPATRA includes a few
glimpses of additional scenes...I believe that the documentary
implies that these scenes are part of a restoration that is slowly
being pieced together.
"...Landau's suicide is described, but not shown (though there is a
still from it). The rediscovered scenes show Cleopatra outside her
encampment at Alexandria (which would have been her first scene in
the film), and a snake dance sequence (which was glimpsed in the
trailer)."
I recall seeing this documentary on US TV about 6 or 7 years ago.
Didn't it say that Zanuck directed the opening few shots? And if so,
would they be deleted from a Mankiewicz director's cut?
Another interesting book is "My Life With Cleopatra" by Walter
Wanger. I have it packed away somewhere but I remember that he
cabled Hitchcock asking him to take over direction after Mamoulian
was fired.
The laser disc has a running time of 243 minutes, I guess it's the
road show version.
Richard
22732
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 9:19pm
Subject: Re: Pialat: lightning did strike
> Well, I suppose I should say that the effect of the Pialat retrospective on
> me and my wife (at the Walter Reade) was of the most fundamental and
> disruptive kind.
I'm pretty sure that Travis wasn't the only NYC a_film_by'er to be
impressed with the Pialat series - I remember enthusiastic comments at the
time from some of the younger members.
> I can definitely feel where a suspicion for the emotional set-tos in his
> films comes from (and there's a feeling in A Nos Amours that the dinner
> table showdown is the emotional equivalent of the end of a John Woo
> film, and knowing the on-set story is like seeing the wires)
Although I think this scene is very effective, I'll propose an objection
to it which registers on me more strongly than any glitches in the acting:
the scene does indeed function as the showdown, the emotional climax; and
yet it's centered more on the father and the family in general than on the
Bonnaire character. She comes back into focus only during the chilling,
post-script-y scenes following the dinner scene.
This strikes me as a defect of sorts, but one that is so typical of Pialat
that I don't stay up nights over it. Perhaps the film would be improved
if Pialat had simply unbalanced the drama (shifting attention away from
Bonnaire here has a very good effect on the ending) without creating a
pseudo-crescendo. The intentional lumpiness of structure in Pialat's
films sometimes results in this sort of lack of proportion, in much the
way that a truly random series of coin flips will often produce a lot of
heads or tails in a row. - Dan
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
22733
From: Fred Camper
Date: Fri Feb 11, 2005 9:22pm
Subject: Peter Kubelka: upcoming US shows
The Austrian avant-garde filmmaker Peter Kubelka will be in the U.S. for
close to a month, from late February to late March, showing his complete
works (seven films) in two lecture screenings in six different cities:
Washington, Toledo, Chicago, Madison, Milwaukee, and Minneapolis. The
schedule and links to more information about him can be found at
http://www.fredcamper.com/M/Kubelka.html
Kubelka is one of my ten favorite filmmakers. His seven films are mostly
quite different from each other. I've seen the most recent one (2003)
only once and am not completely sure what to make of it yet. But his
films define a unique possibility for cinema. "Adebar" and "Schwecahter"
are incredibly short (1-2 minutes each) but edited with a calculated
precision worthy of, well, Bach. For them Kubelka established specific
rules that account for every frame. "Unsere Afrikareise" (Our Trip to
Africa) began as a commissioned documentary about some Europeans on a
hunting trip. Kubelka then spent five years editing the footage and sound.
This film is based on his idea that cinema makes "articulations" between
its elements, and that the strongest articulations are made between very
different elements. Thus instead of sync sound events ("weak"
articulations) he uses asynchronous sound with shattering precision: a
hat is blown of a head to the accompaniment of a gunshot; a white shakes
an African's hand to the sound of thunder. The film is deeply critical
of the Europeans' attitudes (they relate to the "native" animals and
plants through shooting and aggressive looking, which are compared) but
it's far more complex than any single theme.
He's also a great speaker on his work. His influences are many, from
classical music to architecture to "primitive" cultures. I first heard
him (and met him) when we invited him to our film society in 1968. I
heard him most recently last year, in Hong Kong, and he was better than
ever. He's 71, and it's unlikely that he'll return to these cities,
though he may return to the US in the fall to do some other dates
further west. Of the seven films, five were made originally in 35mm and
will be shown in that gauge, which is not usually done, the exception
being Toledo where all films will be in 16mm. If you have a chance to
see him, go. The Chicago screenings are in a small auditorium so be sure
to come early as it's just about sure to be overfull.
Fred Camper
22734
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 0:11am
Subject: Re: Pialat (was Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?)
Hotlove:
> But to judge by what has been said about him at
> a_film_by, no one felt that cinematic lightning had struck. Or is
> Pialat someone who needs to be seen and reseen to be appreciated?
Lightning struck for me (but that still doesn't mean the answer to
your second question has to be "no"). I'd seen and greatly
appreciated some Pialat prior to the Walter Reade retro, but the
retro was what reaffirmed my affection.
I don't know if I'd quite go "ten best ever," but I'm in agreement
with Dan that A NOS AMOURS is one for the ages. WE WON'T GROW OLD
TOGETHER, LOULOU, L'ENFANCE NUE: near-masterpieces (and I could be
easily convinced that the first two are *full* masterpieces).
POLICE, VAN GOGH, and GRADUATE FIRST: well they're not chopped liver.
Pialat seems to me to have a two-pronged approach to filmmaking.
One prong is a veneer of "naturalism" that informs the storylines
and the acting. The other prong, sneakier, is what drives Pialat to
disrupt, scrunch together, and string out parts of his stories
(relative to the conventions of naturalistic family drama), so that
the emotions, the relationships, the changes of heart, the lust, the
regret, it all takes on a new set of textures and rhythms. Pialat's
special touch is in making familiar experiences (familiar in life
and familiar in cinema) seem exceedingly unfamiliar.
--Zach
22735
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:03am
Subject: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, BklynMagus wrote:
> David writes:
>
> Gotcha. JLM characters are very conscious of
> giving performances as part of existence. I think
> queer men gravitate to his work since we are aware
> very early on that much of the time we must give
> performances in order to protect ourselves.
>
Sorry to butt in your sweet exchange, guys, but don't we all
must "give performances" in order to protect ourselves? Or just
survive? Whether straight or gay? Maybe it's harder for you but you
still have "gay pride". I sometimes wish I had something like your
gay culture to relate to, to root with, because I really don't have
anything even remotely similar. JPC
22736
From: K. A. Westphal
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:35am
Subject: Re: Item: 50,000 Old Asian Films Found
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Michael E. Kerpan, Jr."
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jason Guthartz" wrote:
>
> > February 11, 2005
> > [50,000 OLD ASIAN FILMS FOUND]
>
> > The catalogue contains Daichi wa Hohoemu
> > [The Earth Smiles] (Mizoguchi, 1925) amongst its many treasures.
>
> I wonder how many treasures thought to be lost forever could be in
> this cinematic horde. I hardly dare to dream.
>
> MEK
Count me in for any Mizoguchi.
I'm surprised no one on a_film_by has yet speculated on the
possibility of the complete AMBERSONS in this stash.
22737
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:04am
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
>
> Sorry to butt in your sweet exchange, guys, but
> don't we all
> must "give performances" in order to protect
> ourselves? Or just
> survive? Whether straight or gay? Maybe it's harder
> for you but you
> still have "gay pride". I sometimes wish I had
> something like your
> gay culture to relate to, to root with, because I
> really don't have
> anything even remotely similar. JPC
>
>
Good grief, J-p! You've got the lion;s share of
history, not to mention culture and society. We've got
a spare cubbyhole over the corner somewhere in the
Marais!
Performance knows no gender specificity.
Admittedly movie history gives the lion's share of the
better roles to women. And that's largely due to
cultural structures dampening down male expressivity.
Marlon Brando, whose recent death we all mourn (to
varying degrees) was one of the handful of males to
break thorough this longjam, giving full-blooded,
multifacted performances not just in "Waterfront" and
"Streetcar" but"One-Eyed Jacks," Reflections in a
Golden Eye" and "Last Tango in Paris."
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
22738
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 11:49am
Subject: Re: Default film (Was: Sights & Sounds)
> On the other hand, if films
> naturally gravitate toward some kind of boring, craft-ridden middle
> ground, then the director becomes crucial, as the only person in a
> position to defy this gravitational pull and nudge everyone toward
art.
It's kind of like Welles' theory that films can be made by anybody,
but GREAT films are made by the director. Writing, design,
cinamatography, can add areas of interest to a bland confection, but
the director is the only person situated tomake such interesting
aberrations work.
There are filmmakers we can think of who create chaos out of order
rather than the other way around, while still keeping some kind of
control so that the film gets made. Ferrara seems to be one of these,
Peckinpah might be another.
> Having lived on a few movie sets now, I think I can see a little
bit how
> the psychological forces operate that drag films toward a default
> mediocrity.
As soon as one stops asking questions,like "Do we need it?" you're in
trouble. The producer of A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE
FORUM was appalled that Richard Lester intended to shoot a musical
without a crane. If all musicals have cranes, or all films that can
afford steadicams have steadicam shots, we start to be in trouble.
22739
From: Saul
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:38pm
Subject: Anyone know/like Jeff Mills??
Does anyone here know anything about Jeff Mills who, from what I can
gather, creates modern-day electronic soundtracks for old silent
films, most recently I'm told for Keaton's "Three Ages"? Are these
films screened with his accompaniment?? Does anyone know??
A review I read of this CD contained a line, which I thought might
amuse some a_f_b readers. The critic wrote, "The name `Buster Keaton'
may not be a familiar one to the modern day movie connoisseur" What?!?
What movie connoisseur doesn't know this name, if only in name??
One more ?: Does anyone here know where I can get a DVD or good
quality VHS of Giorgio Moroder's superior version of "Metropolis". It
seems to be out-of-print, I think cause his rights to the material
elapsed or something, and I sorely miss watching it.
-- A slightly elegiac Saul wondering if that's an emotion possible to
experience at 20 years of age.
22740
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:34pm
Subject: Re: Item: 50,000 Old Asian Films Found
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "K. A. Westphal"
wrote:
"Count me in for any Mizoguchi."
Ditto.
"I'm surprised no one on a_film_by has yet speculated on the
possibility of the complete AMBERSONS in this stash."
No US pictures reached Japan or its occupied teritories after January
1942, and the number of complete AMBERSONS prints seems to have been
no more than two. However, it's entirely possible that a couple of
lost Sternbergs may show up given his popularity in Japan,
especially THE CASE OF LENA SMITH since one reel was discovered in
Shanghai a couple of years ago and a continuity script in Japanese
that was prepared for the censors was also discovered.
Richard
22741
From:
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 10:17am
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Was somewhat surprized by the recent description of George Sanders' character
(Addison De Witt) in "All About Eve" being described as a gay man. Agree that
there are a lot more gay characters in films than are often seen. But just in
this one case, am a bit dubious. Sanders spent his career playing
sophisticated, heterosexual wolves and cads in movies. How is his performance here
different than his other film roles? Plus, he has Marilyn Monroe in tow in the early
scenes, and targets Eve in the later ones. I always had the impression that
he blackmails Eve into being his mistress in the later parts of the film.
Sophistication used to be very big in old Hollywood films. It is different
from today, when the hero is dressed in a tee shirt, and everyone in the film is
a good ol boy with a pickup truck.
Mike Grost
Who saw "All About Eve" and "Suddenly, Last Summer" in 1973 at a screening
after which Mankiewicz answered questions.
22742
From: Saul
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:27pm
Subject: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein wrote:
> Performance knows no gender specificity.
> Admittedly movie history gives the lion's share of the
> better roles to women. And that's largely due to
> cultural structures dampening down male expressivity.
> Marlon Brando, whose recent death we all mourn (to
> varying degrees) was one of the handful of males to
> break thorough this longjam, giving full-blooded,
> multifacted performances not just in "Waterfront" and
> "Streetcar" but"One-Eyed Jacks," Reflections in a
> Golden Eye" and "Last Tango in Paris."
What a sweeping comment David!: "movie history gives the lion's share
of the better roles to women." I mean, this is, in essence, an
argument with no resolve, but I still find it a large pill to
swallow!!! Brando one of the handful of males to break through and
give a full-blooded performance! Burt Lancaster, to cite a well-known,
(and perhaps for some of you, groan-inducing) example, could do the
same, and it's not hard to find men as unafraid to show emotions in a
very feminine way onscreen, such as Alain Delon, who coud, when he
wanted, be so tender and beautiful.
22743
From: Jonathan Takagi
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:27pm
Subject: Re: Anyone know/like Jeff Mills??
Jeff Mills is one of the old Detroit techno pioneers,
mainly known these days for his DJ skills. His own
productions tend to be very hard, fast and minimal.
I'm not really sure what his soundtrack work is like,
but you can buy the soundtrack for "Three Ages" (the
Buster Keaton work) at boutique.mk2.com
Jonathan Takagi
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:38:59 -0000, Saul wrote:
>
>
> Does anyone here know anything about Jeff Mills who, from what I can
> gather, creates modern-day electronic soundtracks for old silent
> films, most recently I'm told for Keaton's "Three Ages"? Are these
> films screened with his accompaniment?? Does anyone know??
22744
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:34pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- Saul wrote:
>
> What a sweeping comment David!: "movie history gives
> the lion's share
> of the better roles to women." I mean, this is, in
> essence, an
> argument with no resolve, but I still find it a
> large pill to
> swallow!!! Brando one of the handful of males to
> break through and
> give a full-blooded performance!
Well of course it's a sweeping generalization.But it
was getting late and I was getting tired
Burt Lancaster, to
> cite a well-known,
> (and perhaps for some of you, groan-inducing)
> example, could do the
> same, and it's not hard to find men as unafraid to
> show emotions in a
> very feminine way onscreen, such as Alain Delon, who
> coud, when he
> wanted, be so tender and beautiful.
>
I agree re Lancaster -- one the greatestactors in the
history of the cinema.
And you already know about my feelings toward Delon.
But he's truly an exception to most rules. I'd place
him right alongside Marlene Dietrich as an exotic.
And then there's Montgomery Clift and (inevitbly)James
Dean.
The question is do these complex ('sensitive") types
translate over the long haul.
My admiration for Johnny Depp is boundless and Peter
Sarsgaard shows more than a great deal of promise. But
careers are hard to keep afloat these days in
commercial terms.Look at what's happened to Colin
Farrell. He's teriffic (especially in "A Home at the
End of the World") but he hasn't "taken" in mass
audience terms.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
22745
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:43pm
Subject: Brisseau
Jean-Claude Brisseau (who was discussed here -- rather heatedly if
memory serves -- a year ago when the Walter Reade organized a
retrospective of his films) has just been indicted for Harrassment
and sexual misconduct. The examining magistrate who set a trial date
noted that Brisseau over the years had repeatedly asked young
actresses (about fifteen have complained) to masturbate in front of
him while himself masturbated, promissing them film roles.
Apparently tapes he made have been seized. Earlier similar charges
going back three or four years had been dropped in November 2004 and
sent back to a lower jurisdiction ("tribunal correctionnel"). If
found guilty he could face one to five years in jail. Brisseau
denies everything. He gave an interview to "Liberation" supposedly
yesterday but I couldn't find any trace of it on the Libe web site.
"Fiction-into-Life (or vice-versa)" Department: in one of his films
("L'Ange noir"?) a young woman masturbates in front of her lover
while he videotapes her.
JPC
22746
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:00pm
Subject: Jorge Sanjinés / Ukamau
This post is part recommendation and part query. Yesterday marked
my introduction to the work (and not just the reputation) of Jorge
Sanjinés and the Ukumau Group, guerrilla filmmakers of the Andean
region. I read the book THEORY AND PRACTICE OF A CINEMA WITH THE
PEOPLE (which is a pretty good text on anti-capitalist filmmaking
and film-distributing practices) and also watched a video of THE
COURAGE OF THE PEOPLE (1971), a pretty strong effort with two or
three amazing scenes.
I've been digging slowly--and so far shallowly--into the world of
Latin American & Caribbean cinema as of late, and am always
impressed by the intensity and also nuance of engagement and
dedication that these "politicized" filmmakers show in a part of the
world where this kind of commitment was often met with brutal
torture and death. (And yet the fascinating political filmmaking is
not always contra government: Cuban films under Castro like MEMORIES
OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT and UNA CIERTA MANERA are so impressive; I have
to see LUCIA right away. Web critic Ed Gonzalez--Cuban and anti-
Castro--has an interesting review of UNDERDEVELOPMENT available on
Slant Magazine, by the way.) THE COURAGE OF THE PEOPLE exemplifies
this pretty well. Here is a film made on the cheap but which was
clearly put together intelligently and with a certain economy of
images. Italian neorealism is clearly one starting point, but only
a single influence within a larger movement of ideas and purposes.
The query: Does anyone know how easy it is to find copies of the
book THEORY AND PRACTICE OF A CINEMA WITH THE PEOPLE? The copy I
read was in my university library. I just don't know if it's scarce
or anything. (My Spanish reading comprehension is so-so; I'd prefer
an English translation.) What's more, I am quite intrigued to see
more films by Sanjinés, who made a feature as recently as last year--
LOS HIJOS DEL ÚLTIMO JARDÍN. The one I want to see most (and the
first thing I ever heard about this filmmaker or group) is
the "famous" YAWAR MALLKU (BLOOD OF THE CONDOR, 1969), apparently
the masterpiece of Sanjinés/Ukumau. Does anyone have any videos of
the group's work, or any information on how often these films might
be shown? (For all I know the Bolivian embassy down in D.C. might
screen these films every Sunday night. But somehow I doubt it.)
--Zach
22747
From: Samuel Bréan
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:18pm
Subject: RE: Brisseau
>From: "jpcoursodon"
>
>Jean-Claude Brisseau gave an interview to "Liberation" supposedly
>yesterday but I couldn't find any trace of it on the Libe web site.
There you go:
http://www.liberation.com/page.php?Article=274885
http://www.liberation.com/page.php?Article=274886
Samuel
22748
From:
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 0:38pm
Subject: Re: Jorge Sanjinés / Ukamau
In a message dated 05-02-12 12:05:17 EST, Zach Cambell writes:
<< Cuban films under Castro like MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT and UNA CIERTA
MANERA are so impressive >>
MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT is choked to the gills with Communist
propaganda. It glorifies Fidel Castro, for introducing the atomic weapons into Cuba that
triggered the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. I lived through the crisis, a
horrifyingly traumatic event, and felt so angry at this film that I nearly kicked
in my TV set while watching it.
How can any filmmaker glorify atomic weapons in this way?
This is a low point of screen propaganda.
Mike Grost
I was 10 years old. My school principal sent us all home. She told us the
world was coming to an end, and wanted us to have a chance to die with our
families.
22749
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:47pm
Subject: Re: Brisseau
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Samuel Bréan
wrote:
> >From: "jpcoursodon"
> >
> >Jean-Claude Brisseau gave an interview to "Liberation" supposedly
> >yesterday but I couldn't find any trace of it on the Libe web
site.
>
> There you go:
>
> http://www.liberation.com/page.php?Article=274885
> http://www.liberation.com/page.php?Article=274886
>
> Samuel
Thanks, Samuel! This is very interesting stuff. Both sides have
valid points, although Brisseau's is aesthetic while the
accusation's is ethical and legal.
22750
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:03pm
Subject: Memories of Underdevelopmetn (was Sanjinés)
Mike:
> MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT is choked to the gills with Communist
> propaganda. It glorifies Fidel Castro, for introducing the atomic
> weapons into Cuba that triggered the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
Well, Mike, if this nuanced and conflicted film about life under the
Cuban revolution strikes you as a repulsive piece of propaganda,
then you should NEVER watch Soviet cinema. I have no idea how
MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT "glorifies" Castro or atomic weapons ...
(Despite this, I hope that you will at least give the other film I
mentioned, Sara Gomez Yera's UNA CIERTA MANERA, a try if you ever
get the chance.)
--Zach
22751
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:23pm
Subject: Re: Item: 50,000 Old Asian Films Found
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "K. A. Westphal"
wrote:
> I'm surprised no one on a_film_by has yet speculated on the
> possibility of the complete AMBERSONS in this stash.
I don't know how it'd get there - all the prints but the one in
Brazil are accounted for. But it sounds like just about anything else
could be there!
22752
From: Fred Camper
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:28pm
Subject: Una Ceirta Manera (was: Memories of Underdevelopmetn)
Zach Campbell wrote:
> ....Despite this, I hope that you will at least give the other film I
> mentioned, Sara Gomez Yera's UNA CIERTA MANERA, a try ....
Zach already knows my capsule on this film
(http://onfilm.chicagoreader.com/movies/capsules/18654_ONE_WAY_OR_ANOTHER
) -- also known as "One Way or Another." I like it very much. It has a
playfulness that reminds me as much of low-budget Ulmer as of Dziga
Vertov. It is, however, pro-Castro-government, as far as I can tell. To
me, that isn't necessarily a good thing. But to me, as an eco-extremist,
few films have ideologies I accept. And as I recently noted, "Red River"
is pro-manifest-destiny-imperialism, at least arguably.
Fred Camper
22753
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:46pm
Subject: Re: Brisseau
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
> Thanks, Samuel! This is very interesting stuff. Both sides have
> valid points, although Brisseau's is aesthetic while the
> accusation's is ethical and legal.
All kidding aside, since the guy is facing serious charges: I'm
pretty sure he believes what he's saying. Note the self-comparison
with Hitchcock: I seen him compare himself to Bresson and to Ford in
interviews - something few filmmakers do. Expect an impassioned
defense on Olivier Joyard's blog.
Helene de Fougeroles??
22754
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:57pm
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
Fred on SGY's film:
> It is, however, pro-Castro-government, as far as I can tell. To
> me, that isn't necessarily a good thing.
(By the way, I realized I misrepresented the title, which is DE
CIERTA MANERA. Sorry!)
I don't think anyone here needs convincing that Castro is
responsible for a lot of bad things, but he's not exactly Hitler,
either--there are a lot of good things that were accomplished by the
revolution, as far as I can tell. I'm currently reading Michael
Chanan's "biased" but measured and nuanced book on Cuban cinema,
which goes a good way in explaining what Castro was good for and not
good for in developing a progressive government and how that related
to Cuban cinema and free speech. (Also, a few months back I
recommended documentarian Michael Rubbo's fascinating documentary
WAITING FOR FIDEL, which presents a good portrait not only of Cuba
but how Anglocentric North Americans view Cuba.) DE CIERTA MANERA
is about something "larger" than (not to say independent of)
Castro's government/regime and its policies. It's about the
feminization of Cuba, the crisis of machismo that confronts the male
protagonist Mario. (Chanan has an interesting analysis of the film
in his book.)
And the film is formally inventive--this is no less an important
part of it than its ideological critique of machismo--inventive
enough for Fred to like it a lot! The integrative (rather than
dichotomizing) combination of what we might call fact and fiction
can be productive of truly interesting textures and "emotional"
appeals (broadest sense possible), and this is something that seems
to apply to "resistant" filmmaking of Latin America--the Ukamau
Group used nonprofessionals, playing themselves while representing
the peasantry, bringing genuine documentary elements into
fictionalizations of historical events. (I've never seen Ruiz's
early Chilean films, but one can even see an element of this in his
French work, too.) The play between fiction and nonfiction becomes
really productive in these films--archival footage and pure mise-en-
scene, direct address and theatrical verisimilitude, immediate
camera and roving detached camera: the way these left-leaning films
of the Spanish-speaking South work is quite interesting! (But
that's a generalization that may prove wrong as I see more.)
Now, back to Castro, I can't make a very fair judgment since my
sampling is too small, but my impression is that, while criticizing
the government was and is outlawed, Cuban films under Castro seem to
be VERY open--maybe even surprisingly open to an American viewer--
about the difficulties of the Cuban revolution and their new
society. Under a basic, tacit limitation that you can't
say "communism is bad" or "Castro must go" (and I'm not denying that
this is very much a limitation!) people were and are allowed to
express their misgivings about life and policy extensively. To me,
the Cuban filmmakers seem much less rosy than the Soviet directors
were about their own revolution, which produced far more bloodshed
and tyranny.
I don't know if Mike went to Slant's website to look up Ed
Gonzalez's review. But Ed is a big fan of MEMORIES OF
UNDERDEVELOPMENT and vehemently anti-Castro (though he's no
conservative). If Ed felt the film were purely (or even
predominantly) pro-Castro I would imagine he would not admire the
film--which is all about mixed feelings!--as much as he does. (I
can ask him about this to be sure, if anyone wants.)
And now I want to revisit Richard Lester's CUBA!
--Zach
22755
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:13pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jorge Sanjinés / Ukamau
--- MG4273@a... wrote:
> I was 10 years old. My school principal sent us all
> home. She told us the
> world was coming to an end, and wanted us to have a
> chance to die with our
> families.
>
>
I was in High school. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the
turning point of my politial consciousness. Kennedy's
broinksmanship revolted me. Consequently I wasn't all
that upset when he was taken out. He was a reckless,
dangerous man of low moral character. And I'm not
talking about his sexcapades when I say that.
The best screen portrayal of Kennedy was Brendan
Frasier in Noyce's version of "The Quiet American."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
22756
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:17pm
Subject: Re: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
--- Zach Campbell wrote:
>
> And now I want to revisit Richard Lester's CUBA!
>
> --Zach
>
>
>
>
A truly teriffic movie, very much worthy of
revisiting. In fact I'd place it right up near
Lester's best --"Petulia" and "The Knack."
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
22757
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:24pm
Subject: Re: Brisseau
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
>>
> All kidding aside, since the guy is facing serious charges: I'm
> pretty sure he believes what he's saying.
He HAS to believe it -- or convince himself that he believes it --
otherwise how could he face himself?
He has interesting things to say in the interview about the
representation of sex in films. I don't doubt that the objective of
his 'research" is to improve this representation. I haven't seen any
of his films, so I can't tell whether he has succeeded or not.
22758
From: K. A. Westphal
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:24pm
Subject: Re: Item: 50,000 Old Asian Films Found
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "K. A. Westphal"
> wrote:
>
> "I'm surprised no one on a_film_by has yet speculated on the
> possibility of the complete AMBERSONS in this stash."
>
> No US pictures reached Japan or its occupied teritories after January
> 1942, and the number of complete AMBERSONS prints seems to have been
> no more than two.
Richard and Dan:
I am well aware that a complete print of AMBERSONS turning up in Japan
would be counterintuitive. I was joking ... especially given the
recent a_film_by enthusiasm for barnstorming through the Brazillian
archives.
Also: Someone once told me that the full 9 hours of GREED played only
twice -- once in Thalberg's office and again in Brazil. It sounded
suspect to me.
--Kyle
22759
From: Paul Fileri
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:35pm
Subject: Re: Joyard blog (was: Brisseau)
Bill:
> Expect an impassioned
> defense on Olivier Joyard's blog.
What's the address of the blog? I gave a search a try and came out empty-handed.
- Paul
22760
From:
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:43pm
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
"Memories of Underdevelopment" is not just a Castro film - although footage
of Fidel is prominent in it. It is very concretely and strongly a pro-atomic
weapons film, and pro their deployment in the Cuban Missile Crisis. This goes
far beyond any pro- or anti-Castro points of view in other movies.
Mike Grost
22761
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:10pm
Subject: Re: Re: Brisseau
On Saturday, February 12, 2005, at 02:24 PM, jpcoursodon wrote:
> He HAS to believe it -- or convince himself that he believes it --
> otherwise how could he face himself?
>
> He has interesting things to say in the interview about the
> representation of sex in films. I don't doubt that the objective of
> his 'research" is to improve this representation. I haven't seen any
> of his films, so I can't tell whether he has succeeded or not.
I wonder how much of a case these plaintiffs really have. How does one
participate in "between twenty and thirty tests" across five years;
another, thirteen times between March and November 2000; and still
another, five times in a month -- without being complicit in the
method? Furthermore, it seems at least somewhat reasonable to me that
their refusal to participate in the "erotic tests" could result in a
refusal of the role; provided that Brisseau made that stipulation
before "conducting" the tests, and provided Brisseau has been on record
either via conversation/correspondence with his producers/financiers,
or simply in interview, that part of the films' purposes (or "charter"
if you will) was to excite his audience sexually, à la porn, and in the
process explore the bounds of his actors' sexuality.
Now, if he whipped his dong out spontaneously so he could masturbate
like a hentai in heat, and if that's on tape, obviously he's
complicated the situation.
And complicated it still more, apparently, by the following (as he
relates in the last words of the Libé interview) --
"It's ugly -- you could call it a witch-hunt -- with my cinematographic
work consisting as it does of bearing forth the beauty of feminine
pleasure. But I committed one error, I admit: not having made the
actressses sign a release before each test. This is undoubtedly my
naivete, my 'culpable innocence.' "
craig.
22762
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:24pm
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
Mike:
> "Memories of Underdevelopment" is not just a Castro film -
> although footage of Fidel is prominent in it. It is very
> concretely and strongly a pro-atomic weapons film, and pro their
> deployment in the Cuban Missile Crisis. This goes
> far beyond any pro- or anti-Castro points of view in other movies.
But how!? I saw this film just a few days ago and I can attest that
the political events of Cuba in the early 1960s are more like
structuring absences (if intentional ones) than anything else.
Footage of Fidel Castro is most definitely not "prominent" in this
film. The whole movie is about a bourgeois intellectual's mixed
feelings about the revolution (and about America), his ennui, his
conscience, as he tries to dally with other women and carve out a
new place for himself now that his bourgeois family and friends have
all left the country. The most obvious stylistic and intellectual
influences are in my view Buñuel and Resnais. Are you sure you saw
Tomás Gutiérrez Alea's MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT from 1968?
--Zach
22763
From: Brian Charles Dauth
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:27pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Mike writes:
> Was somewhat surprized by the recent description of
George Sanders' character (Addison De Witt) in "All
About Eve" being described as a gay man. Agree that
there are a lot more gay characters in films than are often
seen. But just in this one case, am a bit dubious.
From my first viewing as a teenager, I have seen Addison
as being queer. For me there is zero heterosexual text to
his performance. He is described as being a (venomous
fishwife). Miss Caswell says: "That's how he met me . . .
in passing." Addison then sends Miss Caswell off to
make Max Fabian happy (an odd thing to do if she is
his mistress).
> How is his performance here different than his other film
roles?
In his other work he exhibits (to varying degrees) interest
in women. Compare Addison to his performance for JLM
in "The Ghost and Mrs. Muir." To me, there is a
discernable difference between Sanders in queer mode
and in het mode.
> Plus, he has Marilyn Monroe in tow in the early scenes,
and targets Eve in the later ones.
I have always seen both Miss Caswell and Eve as bait for the
men he is truly interested in. I have always seen Addison as
a rough trade afficianado.
Brian
22764
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:33pm
Subject: Re: Re: Joyard blog (was: Brisseau)
Olivier Joyard: http://popculture.kaywa.com/
Jean-Sëbastien Chauvin: http://image.kaywa.com/
for those unfamiliar, they are former Cahiers du Cinema reviewers deposed by
the november 2003 economic Le Monde coup d'état
22765
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:45pm
Subject: Re: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- Brian Charles Dauth
wrote:
>
> From my first viewing as a teenager, I have seen
> Addison
> as being queer. For me there is zero heterosexual
> text to
> his performance. He is described as being a
> (venomous
> fishwife). Miss Caswell says: "That's how he met me
> . . .
> in passing." Addison then sends Miss Caswell off to
> make Max Fabian happy (an odd thing to do if she is
> his mistress).
>
Brian has a point.
And you can't imagin how tempted I am to say "a
idiotic one but a point nonetheless."
Addison is one of those nominally straight characters
with gayness-around-the-edges typical of the post WWII
period. Clifton Webb in "Laura" is the locus classicus
ofthis sort of thing. We're supposed to believe that
he's in love with Gene Tierney to the degree that
he'llkill her to keep ay ohter man from having her.
In the immortal words of Keanu Reeves, "Whoa, Dude!"
On a less venemous level there's David Wayne in
"Adam's Rib" with his painfully transparent "date" at
the dinner party and his songs -- written by Cole
Porter.
Still it's far more important to recognize the fact
that the most important gay character in "All About
Eve" is Eve herself. The boarding house phone call
scene tells all.
Happily we're free of this sort of subterfuge these
days, thanks to Rupert Everett.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
22766
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:53pm
Subject: Re: Brisseau
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
>
> Now, if he whipped his dong out spontaneously so he could
masturbate
> like a hentai in heat, and if that's on tape, obviously he's
> complicated the situation.
>
He argues that he had to become aroused himself in order to
ascertain that the tests were efficient, which somehow makes sense.
And from arousal to masturbation there is only one small step to
take. But I doubt that he taped himself masturbating. And notice
that masturbation doesn't raise its ugly head during the De Baecque
interview -- only arousal is very delicately alluded to.
JPC
.
22767
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:06pm
Subject: Re: Joyard blog (was: Brisseau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Ruy Gardnier"
wrote:
> Olivier Joyard: http://popculture.kaywa.com/
> Jean-Sëbastien Chauvin: http://image.kaywa.com/
>
> for those unfamiliar, they are former Cahiers du Cinema reviewers
deposed by
> the november 2003 economic Le Monde coup d'état
Joyard hasn't posted anything on his blog since November.
22768
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:55pm
Subject: Re: Joyard blog (was: Brisseau)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
>
> Joyard hasn't posted anything on his blog since November.
I heard that he's trying to get an Arte documentary about tv series
off the ground.
22769
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 10:58pm
Subject: Re: Million Dollar Baby Questions
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera" > -
-- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
> > wrote:
> >
> > "few movies would survive if submitted to that kind of
scrutiny."
>
I'm coming to this film rather late since I've just seen it and
I'm concerned about raising old issues. But, in comparision to THE
AVIATOR and the issues of authorship this group raises, it is by far
the superior film.
No matter how much one may disagree with Eastwood's politics and
the depiction of "trailer trash" (a term used by Clinton's Alistair
Campbell mad dog Jim Carville to abuse a women his master probably
raped while Governor of Arkansas - or threatened by virtue of his
office), MILLION DOLLAR BABY is consistent with the director's
cinematic vision and represents another development in his work.
We must also remember who actually abolished "welfare as we know
it." Reactionary tendencies belong to the Democrats as much as to
their political "opposites."
At least, Clint's attitudes are out in the open and not concealed
in the way that Howard Hughes anti-semitism and business dealings
with Fascism are ignored in THE AVIATOR, a film deliberately
designed to appeal to the Academy and win that Oscar. (The recent
news that Scorsese is going to remake the accomplished INFERNAL
AFFAIRS with Leonardo, Mark Wahlberg, and "Jack, the Lad" attempting
to beat those excellent performances by Andy Lau, Tony Leung, and
Eric Tsang fills me with despair). It does look like Scorses is
heading down the road of creative decline and one can only hopes he
retires well before that and teach again at NYU before inflicting on
his audiences his "burnt out version" of A COUNTESS FROM HONG HONG,
a film mostly defended by rabid auteurists.
It is much better than any "Joe Palooka" boxing movie and the final
tragedy is very much anticipated in an excellent screenplay far
better than that. The screenplay is much better structured than that
by the hack who wrote THE AVIATOR (a script which many have argued
uses previous drafts by others). The film can not defined according
to any standard definitions of genre, especially the boxing movie.
But like any good work by an author, it transcends the genre.
Eastwood's films never disappoint on the level of performance. He
can really direct actors so well. Neither do we have the dominance
of flashy, special effects, and distracting references to past
cinematic technology (as in AVIATOR) which really add nothing to the
film
Eastwood operates as director, producer, and composer. Yes, the
film does have problems in logic as previous correspondence has
noted. But it has a consistency of its own, especially in the
poignant use of Yeats in that beautiful closing shot, male guilt,
the dysfunctional family motif, and disavowal of the consequences of
previous actions until the beloved daughter figure asks for release
even though the result may leave its perpetrator in eternal
damnation and limbo.
MILLION DOLLAR BABY may not be Clint's best. It does contain
problems but is far superior to THE AVIATOR and shows a director
still at the top of his creative talent rather than on the rooad to
creative fatigue.
Tony Williams
22770
From:
Date: Sat Feb 12, 2005 6:58pm
Subject: ALL ABOUT EVE and lesbian representability (Was Mankiewicz vs. Rivette )
In a message dated 2/12/05 2:46:38 PM, cellar47@y... writes:
> Still it's far more important to recognize the fact that the most important
> gay character in "All About Eve" is Eve herself. The boarding house phone
> call scene tells all.
>
The finest writing I've ever read on ALL ABOUT EVE is Patricia White's from
the end of her fantastic book UNINVITED. It's all about how lesbian viewers
find themselves in classical Hollywood cinema largely through retrospectatorship,
i.e. seeing ALL ABOUT EVE over and over. For White, the final scene with
Phoebe tells all (or most - a HILARIOUS reading too).
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
22771
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:16am
Subject: Re: ALL ABOUT EVE and lesbian representability (Was Mankiewicz vs. Rivette )
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
For White,
> the final scene with
> Phoebe tells all (or most - a HILARIOUS reading
> too).
>
Yes, her work is excellent. She's very good on "The
Haunting" too.
Historical note: The waiters at "Max's Kansas City"
were referred to as "the Phoebes"
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
22772
From: Brian Charles Dauth
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:38am
Subject: Re: ALL ABOUT EVE and lesbian representability (Was Mankiewicz vs. Rivette )
Kevin writes:
> For White, the final scene with Phoebe tells all
(or most - a HILARIOUS reading too).
It also reinforces Addison as queer -- why would
a straight man want a lesbian mistress?
JLM once commented that Eve would hump a cat
if it helped her get ahead.
For me JLM is very generous in terms of respect for
his audience. He well knew what he could and could
not get past censors, and crafted his films accordingly,
creating enough space so that any viewer could
discern the truth about his chacters.
SPOILER ALERT:
Once free from the Code, he puts a gay couple at the
center of "There Was a Crooked Man . . ." They are
the only ones to survive the jailbreak alive -- one of
the men (Hume Cronyn) realizes it is a trap and
doesn't allow he and his partner to be killed.
Everyone else dies.
Brian
22773
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:02am
Subject: Re: Jorge Sanjinés / Ukamau
Zach,
issue 63 of Contracampo has a section on Sanjines, including an interview and 7 reviews of his films from Ukamau till the one he did last year.
I also agree with you on Memories of Underdevelpement (one of my favorite films). It does an amazing job of presenting to us a very subjective perspective and it belongs to a man that has mixed feelings toward the Castro regime.
Also, if you ever had a chance of seeing Eryk Rocha's doc Rocha que Voa about his father Glauber Rocha relation to cuban cinema. It's not a completly succeful film but it has many things to say about the perspectives of a Latin American cinema in the 60's/70's.
BTW, Gabe has a very good new article on Glauber Rocha in the great directors section of Senses of Cinema.
Filipe
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
22774
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:15am
Subject: Re: Jorge Sanjinés / Ukamau
Filipe:
> issue 63 of Contracampo has a section on Sanjines, including an
> interview and 7 reviews of his films from Ukamau till the one he
> did last year.
Fantastic, thanks! My Spanish is just competent enough for me to
glean the basics from the Portuguese here. The online journal Jump
Cut has an interesting looking paper that I haven't read in full yet:
http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc44.2001/garcia/garciatextonly.html
> I also agree with you on Memories of Underdevelpement (one of my
> favorite films). It does an amazing job of presenting to us a very
> subjective perspective and it belongs to a man that has mixed
> feelings toward the Castro regime.
And it's not even much of a political film in the most obvious,
straightforward sense of the word. Sergio is trying (and in many
ways succeeding) to *remove* himself from his world and his nation,
while at the same time being constantly affected by them, and in
fact letting himself burrow deeper into the sociopolitical situation
as he remains in revolutionary Cuba while his friends and family
leave. As a result his psyche cracks just a little bit, his
neuroses (the film suggests) calcify slightly, and he's left feeling
mostly apathy and regret for the "rot" (overdevelopment) of this
underdeveloped world. All he can do to alleviate the pain is rework
these masturbatory fantasies of beautiful women--and even that has
its limits. It's a fascinating film ...
> BTW, Gabe has a very good new article on Glauber Rocha in the
> great directors section of Senses of Cinema.
And to me it's appropriate that Gabe wrote it--he's someone who has
always been closely linked to Rocha in my personal mapping of the
cinema and its culture. (Excellent article, Gabe!)
--Zach
22775
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:47am
Subject: Re: Re: Brisseau
On Saturday, February 12, 2005, at 03:53 PM, jpcoursodon wrote:
>>
> He argues that he had to become aroused himself in order to
> ascertain that the tests were efficient, which somehow makes sense.
> And from arousal to masturbation there is only one small step to
> take. But I doubt that he taped himself masturbating. And notice
> that masturbation doesn't raise its ugly head during the De Baecque
> interview -- only arousal is very delicately alluded to.
It reminds me of a narc having to "taste the blow" so he can be sure
it's real.
There was that part where (de?) Baecque asked, "Que voulez-vous dire
par <>?" which induced a chuckle. But in
all earnestness J-P, if you haven't seen 'Choses secrètes' yet, do
check it out -- I think it's out on DVD in the US now -- it has many
haters on this list, but I'm very fond of it. The opening sequence
throws this whole affaire into a kind of relief.
craig.
22776
From:
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:54am
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
In a message dated 05-02-12 15:26:02 EST, Zach writes:
<< Are you sure you saw Tomás Gutiérrez Alea's MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT
from 1968? >>
This is a good question. I saw this film on cable TV around 2 years ago.
Could there be more than one version of the film?
The version I saw has a fiction story about an intellectual in 1962 Cuba. But
periodically, this fictional story grinds to a halt, and little non-fiction
mini-documentaries take over. At least one of these non-fiction sections was
all about Castro and the Cuban Missile Crisis - in the most literal manner
possible.
I have never seen any reviewers mention these non-fiction sections. It is as
if they did not exist in the version of the film they saw. They were VERY
prominent in the TV version. They had all the subtlety of a sledge-hammer; like
the political commercials shown on TV during election years. They are
straightforward Communist propaganda.
Mike Grost
22777
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:14am
Subject: re: Brisseau (coming attractions)
"Brisseau over the years repeatedly asked young actresses to masturbate in
front of him while he himself masturbated ... 'But I committed one error, I
admit: not having made the actresses sign a release before each test'."
Gives a whole new significance to the film-industry term 'release' !!!!
'culpably innocent' Adrian
22778
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:38am
Subject: Humbert Balsan
Going to the weblog of Chauvin listed recently, I found a sad entry on
recent deaths in French cinema, including producer Humbert Balsan and actor
Karen Bach from BAISE-MOI. Balsan (who suicided at 50) was an actor in
Bresson's LANCELOT, and as a producer he had a hand in bringing to the
screen films by Sandrine Veysset (Y aura t'il de la neige à noêl? and her
subsequent films), Philippe Faucon (L'Amour, Muriel fait le désespoir de ses
parents, Samia), Jean-Louis Trintignant (Le Maître nageur), René Allio
(Transit), Niko Papatakis (Les Equilibristes), Elia Suleiman (Divine
Intervention), Hervé Le Roux (Grand Bonheur), James Ivory (Quartet & several
others) Yousry Nasrallah (Mercedes, La Ville, La Porte du soleil). Recently
he produced Claire Denis (L'intrus) et Béla Tarr (The Man from London).
Above all he was Youssef Chahine's French producer, from Adieu Bonaparte up
to Alexandrie New York via Silence on tourne, Alexandrie pourquoi? and
Destiny. An amazing career, and a tragic loss.
Adrian
22779
From: Saul
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:34am
Subject: Re: Humbert Balsan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Martin wrote:
> Going to the weblog of Chauvin listed recently, I found a sad entry on
> recent deaths in French cinema, including producer Humbert Balsan
and actor
> Karen Bach from BAISE-MOI. Balsan (who suicided at 50)
Adrian, they both suicided, but is there a known reason: a note, a
history of depression, etc?
(Arthur Miller also passed away, on the same day as Balsan actually,
from heart fauilure. This month also marks the death, on the 2nd, of
producer Goffredo Lombardo whose name was, most notably, attached to
Visconti's "The Leopard" and "Rocco and his Brothers", and on the
topic of Visconti, Franco Mannino, who composed music for "The
Innocent" and "Conversation Piece" passed on the 1st)
22780
From:
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:57am
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Some more thoughts:
1) George Sanders is one of a series of Hollywood actors who played
"sophisticated English gentlemen": Ronald Colman, Brian Aherne, Basil Rathbone were
others. These men were incredibly refined, fabulously articulate, had huge IQ's,
beautiful manners, deep understanding of all social situations, etc. They were
hero worshipped by the American public, who thought they reprersented a
social ideal. Colman & Aherne usually played heroes, while Rathbone & Sanders could
play heroes or villains, depending on the film. All of these men nearly
always played heterosexuals: it was part of their "screen personas". To sum up,
"They're not gay, they're British"!
This archetype survives to this day. Colin Firth and Hugh Grant have built
careers around such roles. The teen comedy "Chasing Liberty" (2004) has its
American heroine meet one of these English gentlemen. The American TV soap opera
"All My Children" currently has a British heartthrob as one of its mainstays.
He's a billionaire, always wears pinstripe suits, has beautiful manners, is
articulate, etc.
Old Hollywood also had a parallel series of sophisticated Continentals:
Charles Boyer, Louis Jordan, Paul Lukas, etc. These men too were both sophisticated
and straight.
2) I've argued in previous posts that many of Robert Bresson's heroes and
Ozu's heroines were gay. In both cases, there are explict indicators of gayness.
The priest in "Diary of a Country Priest" has his only happy moments with the
young motorcyclist, the prisoner in "A Man Escaped" develops a close
relationship with another male prisoner, Joan of Arc wears men's clothes and is deeply
horrified about the thought of relations with men. Similarly, the heroine of
"Late Spring" is horrified over her forced marriage, the heroine of "Early
Summer" is mainly interested in a relationship with the mother-in-law of her
arranged marriage.
Are there any such "explicit indicators" of George Sanders' character in "All
About Eve" being gay? Its been a long time since I've seen the film. Maybe
there are. But if it is simply his "sophistication" that allegedly suggests
gayness, I am going to balk.
3) Waldo Lydecker (Clifton Webb) in "Laura" furnishes an interesting parallel
case, as David E. suggests. One difference between Waldo and Addison De Witt:
Waldo has "created" Laura. Such makeover relationships between a man and a
woman have long been seen as a gay male - straight woman friendship. Clothes
designers, hair dressers, elocution teachers, etc are seen as gay men who are
experts on creating "femininity" in their female clients. See Danny Kaye's
"Anatole of Paris" number. This whole concept somewhat survives today on the
American TV show "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", where a group of gay style experts
makeover a series of good-natured but hopelessly slob-like straight men.
Webb almost never played roles in which he romanced women. Perhaps the
closest he came was in "Dreamboat", and his lukewarm pursuit of Ginger Rodgers in
that film. Usually he played either gay men: Mr. Belvedere series, "The Razor's
Edge", or men who were long married to women, and who had grown children, etc.
By contrast, George Sanders played ardent womanizers in most of his films. I
never knew Sanders had anything but a "het" side to his screen persona.
Mike Grost
22781
From: Saul
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:00pm
Subject: male-male bonding(was:Mankiewicz vs. Rivette)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> 2) I've argued in previous posts that many of Robert Bresson's
heroes and
> Ozu's heroines were gay. In both cases, there are explict indicators
of gayness.
> The priest in "Diary of a Country Priest" has his only happy moments
with the
> young motorcyclist, the prisoner in "A Man Escaped" develops a close
> relationship with another male prisoner, Joan of Arc wears men's
clothes and is deeply
> horrified about the thought of relations with men.
Mike, so wherein lies the difference between films that deal with
male-male relationships in which gayness isn't implied, and those that
deal with male-male relationships in which gayness is implied. I mean,
it's always seemd to me that there's a strongly masculine strain
through much French cinema, of deep male bonding, in a way I don't
feel in other national cinemas: considers not just Bresson, (the eg's
you cited), but Jules Dassin's French films, Henri-Georges Clouzot,
Jean-Pierre Melville, et al. Wasn't it Melville who said something to
the effect of: a city belongs to it's men? Plus, in "Moby Dick",
written by Jean-Pierre's namesake, there are scenes early on where the
narrator is sharing his bed with Queequeg, the south seas cannibal,
and wakes up to find the man's arms around him, (exact details I can't
remember, it's been a while since I tackled that particular novel), in
what is quite a humorous scene. The whole book deals with male
closeness in a way as unsexual as possible. So what I come back to is
again the question: when can be begin to read 'gay' into a male-male
relationship?
22782
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:59pm
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
> > And now I want to revisit Richard Lester's CUBA!
> >
> > --Zach
> A truly teriffic movie, very much worthy of
> revisiting. In fact I'd place it right up near
> Lester's best --"Petulia" and "The Knack."
Lester had some rueful comments about it in a Sight & Sound interview
in the eighties, but admitted a certain fondness for it. I think he's
right - it's perhaps flawed but has so much great stuff in it,
including some of Connery's best ever acting. Sad that Connery
detested the disorganisation of the shoot so much that he resolved
never to work with Lester again. I'm not sure he's even looked at the
movie.
I personally rate the first two Musketeers films, ROBIN AND MARIAN,
and HOW I WON THE WAR higher than CUBA, but it's his last great work
and one of the last gasps of intelligent political commercial cinema
in the mainstream for some time.
22783
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 2:53pm
Subject: Not gay, British! (Colin Firth) (was Mankiewicz/Rivette)
Mike:
> This archetype survives to this day. Colin Firth and Hugh Grant
> have built careers around such roles.
Hugh Grant might apply but I don't think Firth fits this stereotype--
just last night I listened at length to what my girlfriend and
another female friend, both swooning, had to say about Colin Firth's
appeal! For him the exemplified British register is "reserve" more
than suavity or elegance or "metrosexuality."
--Zach
22784
From: Zach Campbell
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:00pm
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
Mike:
> The version I saw has a fiction story about an intellectual in
> 1962 Cuba. But periodically, this fictional story grinds to a
> halt, and little non-fiction mini-documentaries take over. At
> least one of these non-fiction sections was all about Castro and
> the Cuban Missile Crisis - in the most literal manner
> possible.
Hmm. Well, this sounds like the same film all right. But maybe
we'll have to agree to disagree. To me the nonfiction elements--
just like the fiction ones--presented ambiguous messages about life
in Cuba. (They weren't pro-American, though, that's for sure.) I
know I'm not alone in finding the film as a whole a nuanced and
ambiguous work: certainly a lot of viewers have felt that they were
NOT being fed propaganda here. So we'll have to foreground our
subjective responses here and figure that you're not bashing this
complex work of art that I (and others) have seen, and we're not
praising the propaganda that you believe marks this film.
--Zach
22785
From:
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:17am
Subject: Re: Not gay, British! (Colin Firth) (was Mankiewicz/Rivette)
Colin Firth has a huge appeal to women, from ages 6 to 60! He probably the
best loved of any current male star among the fair sex.
Colin Firth is very gentlemanly. But so were Ronald Colman and Brian Aherne
and Paul Lukas. The cinema used to uphold gentlemanly behavior as a civilized
ideal. Men respected this too - they thought of Colman as a role model.
Many American stars were very decent in their behavor, too - think of Richard
Bathelmess or Fred Astaire. Just saw Bathelmess in "Weary River" (Frank
Lloyd, 1929), a strange "part-talkie" of the transition over to sound. He gives a
charismatic performance.
I confess I have never been comfortable about the concept of "metrosexual".
It implies that most straight men are hopeless louts, and that any straight man
who is less of a roughneck than Sylvester Stallone is some sort of strange
anomaly. Curent Hollywood cinema often seems to support this red state, good ol
boy definition of straightness, too. It's a real disservice to men, both
straight and gay. I confess that I have grown frightened of all the "red state"
imagery in US mass media. Current mystery novels often seem to be set in red
states, too, whereas in the Golden Age of the 1920's-1940's they tended to be set
in the blue state zone of New York, New England, Chicago and California. It
is as if the media were trying to redefine the US to equate it with red state
life.
IMPORTANT NOTE: I am not trying to "lay down the law" to people on the list
about all these gender issues. Just trying to start a discussion. My ideas
could well be wrong. But I AM hoping to prod other list writers to dig deeper, and
get their full ideas out on the table. Then we can all learn from them.
Mike Grost
22786
From:
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:43am
Subject: Re: De Cierta Manera & Memories of Underdevelopment
Probably the whole "Memories of Underdevelopment" situation is more complex
than any of us have described.
The fictional parts are indeed filled with ambiguities and reservations about
the quality of daily life in Communist Cuba. Whereas the non-fiction sections
are full of messages from Western Union praising Fidel, glorifying Atomic
Weapons, lauding Fidel for launching the Cuban Missile Crisis, etc.
When "Memories of Underdevelopment" came out outside of Cuba in the 1970's,
it was much celebrated. Anti-Communist critics such as Andrew Sarris lauded the
director's political courage in daring to criticize the Castro regime, with
their critiques emphasizing the fiction sections of the film. Marxist critics
loved this and just about ever other Cuban film ever made. Between these two
poles, all other points of view about this movie have been shut down, and frozen
out of public discussion. The idea that the film is a definitive treatnment
of Cuban politics is now deeply entrenched in film history.
Alea might indeed have shown courage in making this film. I am not trying to
judge the man, about whom I know little.
But the film itself is not much like any of its descriptions in film
criticism or film history books. And it is time for some serious re-thinking about was
this film actually "is", rather than the fantasy accounts of the movie that
litter film history writings.
It is more than time for caution and skepticism about some of the extreme
ideas promoted by radical filmmakers. On the far right, we have Clint Eastwood
calling for the extermination of a minority group, the disabled, in "Million
Dollar Baby". On the far left, we have Alea glorifying nuclear weapons and the
Cuban Missile Crisis in "Memories of Underdevelopment". Both of these films are
sickening death trips.
There are so many good movies out there that celebrate life. Why do we need
to admire these films that worship death?
In a recent post, I tried to get a_film_by-ers interested in New Zealand's
Stuart Main and Peter Wells. There were no takers. Why? Is there no interest in
a cinema of life? Must we follow dangerous political radicals right into the
grave where they want to take us?
Mike Grost
22787
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:58pm
Subject: Re: male-male bonding(was:Mankiewicz vs. Rivette)
--- Saul wrote:
I mean,
> it's always seemd to me that there's a strongly
> masculine strain
> through much French cinema, of deep male bonding, in
> a way I don't
> feel in other national cinemas: considers not just
> Bresson, (the eg's
> you cited), but Jules Dassin's French films,
> Henri-Georges Clouzot,
> Jean-Pierre Melville, et al.
Quite true. There's a "male bonding/tough guy" ethose
right on the verge of homoeroticism that's always been
part of French cinema. "Wages of Fear" is the best
example of this. But Bresson pushes the envelope quite
a bit further. It's especially marked because his
characers aren't "touch guys" -- save for the
delinquents of "Balthazar"
Wasn't it Melville who
> said something to
> the effect of: a city belongs to it's men? Plus, in
> "Moby Dick",
> written by Jean-Pierre's namesake, there are scenes
> early on where the
> narrator is sharing his bed with Queequeg, the south
> seas cannibal,
> and wakes up to find the man's arms around him,
> (exact details I can't
> remember, it's been a while since I tackled that
> particular novel), in
> what is quite a humorous scene. The whole book deals
> with male
> closeness in a way as unsexual as possible.
Melville was gay.
So what
> I come back to is
> again the question: when can be begin to read 'gay'
> into a male-male
> relationship?
>
Well that's the worl of the thoughtful critic. There
are all kinds of male-male relationships in the
cinema, but only within the past few decades have we
seen a number of explicitly gay ones. Homoeroticism
may pop up in any number of places and circumstances
but it's quite separate from frank and open dealing
with male-male desire.
Or to put it another way there's a world of difference
between "La Bete Humaine" and "Those Who Love Me Can
Take the Train."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
22788
From: Brian Charles Dauth
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:34pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Mike writes:
> Are there any such "explicit indicators" of George
Sanders' character in "All About Eve" being gay?
Mankiewicz doesn't need to incorporate any
such indicators since (as David pointed out) he is
a subtle director. Addison's queerness is indicated
by his behavior/actions in the film. Your reading
of Eve as his mistress has no evidence. If she were,
would Eve so openly and triumphantly tell Addison
that Lloyd was going to leave Karen and marry her?
Addison has yet to write his openning night review.
Eve is not stupid.
If Eve is his mistress, why does he refer to her as a
killer outside the door of her hotel room? Also, why
does Addison seem to accept with such nonchalance
the appearance of Phoebe at Eve's front door?
Finally, Eve backing up her statement that she and
Lloyd talked until it was light by saying "I want a
run-of-the-play contract" is superfluous if she were
sexually involved with Addison. If they were
intimate he would be well aware of what she would
and would not do in terms of sex.
The brilliance of Mankiewicz is that he created a queer
male character to whom he gives long stretches of
narrative control (in fact, it can be argued that Addison,
along with Birdie, are the only ones not taken in by
Eve) without ever resorting to the Franklin Pangburn
stereotype. He doesn't need the markers/signposts
that less sophisticated filmmakers rely on to indicate
sexual orientation.
> But if it is simply his "sophistication" that allegedly
suggests gayness, I am going to balk.
Most of Mankiewicz's characters are sophisticated --
both male and female.
> One difference between Waldo and Addison De Witt:
Waldo has "created" Laura.
Addison is equally the author of Eve through the
columns he writes about her to chronicle her struggles.
Eve started the transformation, but also relies on the
help of others to continue it: the hand-me-down suit
from Margo; Karen's intervening with Max so Eve can
be Margo's understudy; Eve's (attempted) seduction of
Bill; Eve's proposed marriage to Lloyd after which he
will write great plays and Eve "will make them great."
With Bill and Lloyd there is a clear sexual component;
no such component exists between Eve and Addison.
Since Eve has proved so adept at manipulating others,
it can be said that she knows her audience. Obviously
she knows that a sexual approach is unnecessary (or
even impossible) wih Addison.
> By contrast, George Sanders played ardent womanizers in
most of his films.
And? Because he played womanizers in most of his films,
doesn't mean that he did so in every one of them. Henry
Fonda played good guys most of the time, but a villian in
"Once Upon the Time in the West."
Brian
22789
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:01pm
Subject: Five Fingers
The mostly high-level talk about Mankiewicz prompted me to watch the
above-referenced film I'd never seen, which mostly takes place in
offices - what a challenge for a director! Micahel Wilson (the other
one) wrote the script, but Mankiewicz obviously had a hand in the
dialogue. Serge Daney loved the ending, which an early CdC reviewer
mistakenly compared to Huston. The movie is a gem. What do we make of
Mank and cynicism?
22790
From:
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:02pm
Subject: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
Brian,
Thanks! This is a fascinating post on "All About Eve".
I will check out the film again soon.
Mike Grost
22791
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:18pm
Subject: Re: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- Brian Charles Dauth
wrote:
>
> Addison is equally the author of Eve through the
> columns he writes about her to chronicle her
> struggles.
Not quite in the same way. Eve, who was born Mildred
Plotka, created herself before she got Addison's help.
What he gets out of her is a weapon to wield as a
Broadway power broker. Waldo sees a bright young girl
on her way up and points her in a direction she hadn't
planned to take. Moreover Laura is a nice girl. Eve is
a predator.
As for her relationship with Addison don't forget the
Boston hotel scene where he says "You belong to me"
while spoofing the melodramatic nature of said speech.
He also has a line -- can't rememebr it exactly --
where he says "That I desire you at all" is absurd or
words to that effect.
In "The Devil Finds Work" James Baldwin notes that to
Harlem audiences this scene played as a pimp putting
his hooker "in her place."
>
> With Bill and Lloyd there is a clear sexual
> component;
> no such component exists between Eve and Addison.
I wouldn't go that far. Havig sex with Addison and
then rushing right out to seduce Lloyd feeds Addison's
masochism -- which hasn't been discussed as yet.
Yes he's "a gay character" but as I've said only up to
a point.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
22792
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:20pm
Subject: Re: Five Fingers
Yes it's one of his best and he did have more than a
hand in the script. Mason's machinations here are
quite comparable to harrison's in "The Honey Pot." As
for cynicism "Five Fingers" is a very rare film with
an out-and-out crook as nominal "hero." The closest
thing to it is "Purple Noon."
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> The mostly high-level talk about Mankiewicz prompted
> me to watch the
> above-referenced film I'd never seen, which mostly
> takes place in
> offices - what a challenge for a director! Micahel
> Wilson (the other
> one) wrote the script, but Mankiewicz obviously had
> a hand in the
> dialogue. Serge Daney loved the ending, which an
> early CdC reviewer
> mistakenly compared to Huston. The movie is a gem.
> What do we make of
> Mank and cynicism?
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
22793
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:22pm
Subject: Karen Bach (was: Re: Humbert Balsan)
Karen Bach a.k.a. Karen Lancaume left a note to her parents
with the words "too painful"...
Virginia Despentes has a blog entry on the whole affair:
http://www.20six.fr/Despentes
>Adrian, they both suicided, but is there a known reason: a note,
>a
>history of depression, etc?
22794
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:33pm
Subject: Re: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
> Not quite in the same way. Eve, who was born Mildred
> Plotka
Wasn't this the real name of Carole Lombard's character in TWENTIETH
CENTURY? - Dan
22795
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:43pm
Subject: Re: Re: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
You're right!
I beleive that Mankiewicz uses the same name- or if
not something very much like it.
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > Not quite in the same way. Eve, who was born
> Mildred
> > Plotka
>
> Wasn't this the real name of Carole Lombard's
> character in TWENTIETH
> CENTURY? - Dan
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
22796
From: Kian Bergstrom
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:19pm
Subject: Re: Re: Scorsese: Goombah or Genius?
Sorry to bring up arguments that may have passed away with a global sense
of relief, but the posts come too fast and furious for me to keep up in my
limited amount of email time.
At 08:39 PM 2/10/2005 -0500, Brian Dauth wrote:
>I consider it radical to make the
>star (and savior of "democracy") a Black man in a Hollywood
>movie.
I don't understand. Does this mean you consider _Mr. 3000_ a radical film,
or _Pluto Nash_? Or, for democracy saviors, what about the television
series "24", or _Deep Impact_ They've got black men in the oval
office! (Fun fact: before Sorkin offered Martin Sheen the job as president
on "West Wing" he offered it to Sidney Poitier, who turned it down.) I
don't know if I can think of a film more complacent in its politics than
_Deep Impact_.
Within the ideological structures of Hollywood, racial deviance from the
"norm" of whiteness is today nearly forgotten in the face of a performer's
hotness, and Denzel Washington is undeniably a stunningly attractive
man. If the politics of a film can, or should, be seen in the casting of
the lead, I say it would be radical to cast an *ugly* person as the savior
of democracy.
>So it is not as political as you think it could be. Does that
>make is less radical? That there is any critique at all in
>a major Hollywood production is radical.
This is undoubtedly true, but it weakens the concept of the radical, and
has to apply to _Casino_ as well. For my own part, I see an extensive
critique of consumer culture built into the structure of the wonderful
_Dude, Where's My Car?_, manifesting itself on practically every level of
the aesthetic. Despite what I see as its massive success, I'm not sure I'm
prepared to call even it radical. I don't deny that radical films can be
made within the confines of Hollywood industrial production, but capitalism
is so good at incorporating within itself low-level critiques that to call
any film with critique radical is to practically every film radical.
-Kian
22797
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:37pm
Subject: Re: Melville (was: male-male bonding)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
> Melville was gay.
Is that a fact? Didn't know it. Not very surprising.
Just seen Un Flic again. The Delon/Crenna relation is actually
unambiguous. And the trans informer seems to make Delon doubt of
what he is.
I love that crazy scene in the nightclub, when Delon, Deneuve and
Crenna have a drink at the bar. The sound is turned down, and
Melville offers the most incredible minute of his whole work, with
those (almost) silent close-up where the three faces are snatched
from the world and call to each other trough a language without
equal. A very last film.
22798
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:39pm
Subject: Park Kwang-su & Shin Shang-ok
The Black Republic (Park Kwang-su, '90). Remarkable film. The
virtuosity in the cutting is impressive, with a very clever use of
space, which does not hesitate to break the angles. Nothing
systematic, no show-off, but a mature filmic writing that favours
the multiplicity of the gazes and master the complexity. Far away
from a certain prevailing pose that would like us to believe that we
only have to let the time make its own law. Moreover, the political
gesture is refreshingly violent. I'm sorry no more Park's were shown
in this Paris festival. What else is to be seen?
I unevenly but overall enjoyed the few Shin's I've seen. I was
touched by the Evergreen Tree, edifying melodrama where the purity
of simple feelings marks the bruised face of Choi Eun-hee. Are his
post-kidnapping works available?
22799
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:40pm
Subject: Mankiewicz vs. Rivette (Was Re: Mankiewicz's Mise en Scene)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
"Webb almost never played roles in which he romanced women. Perhaps
the closest he came was in "Dreamboat", and his lukewarm pursuit of
Ginger Rodgers in that film. ... By contrast, George Sanders played
ardent womanizers in most of his films. "
To enjoy George Sanders in hetero-issimo mode, one need only watch
THE STRANGE WOMAN, where he plays a burly lumberjack complete with
plaid flannel shirt and tractor company hat. This is quite some
distance from Addison De Witt!
Clifton Webb was also the object of Dorothy McGuire's romantic
fantasies and secretarial attentions in the hugely popular THREE
COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN, although the ostensibly happy ending strongly
hinted that McGuire needs to resign herself to a sexless
relationship.
--Robert Keser
22800
From: Maxime Renaudin
Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:41pm
Subject: Re: La Cava
I can't say I enjoy his work. If this kind of improvisation may be
theoretically stimulating, why should we care about his methods when
watching the films, re: Pialat/Dan? On the screen, I only see an
uncontrolled and vain energy. Watching his movies, I'm feeling that
they (the actors) certainly had a great time making it up (which may
be totally untrue actually), but I'm just bored myself. I was
largely irritated by the overall sloppiness in some of his silent
(Tell it to Sweeny was the worst, I guess). I'm not that obsessed by
the precision of the continuity cut, but when the only rule seems to
throw the most screwball stuff ever in front of the camera, what's
the point? The films are desperately lacking of a key issue in
comedy: rhythm. Not even talking of a consistent approach in the
spatial organization. I believe I enjoyed Primrose Path a little
more than the others. Don't remember why.
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact