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.
23501
From:
Date: Sun Feb 27, 2005 2:11pm
Subject: Re: Win a Date With Tad Hamilton! (Robert Luketic)
In a message dated 2/27/05 8:39:56 AM, MG4273@a... writes:
> In both cases, we are looking at a society interested in capitalism and
> jobs, in which anything resembling romance takes a secondary place.
>
Amen, Mike! Witherspoon's most productive relationship in the sequel is with
a sage, withered Bob Newhart. And right, a lot of the Topher Grace character's
resentment of (swoon!) Tad Hamilton stems from class. I offer up all three
films to people bitching about the state of current Hollywood cinema.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23502
From: filipefurtado
Date: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:35pm
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
> Just realized last night that "The Motorcycle Diaries"
> didn't make the cut for Best Foreign Film. So they'll
> give it to the other four-hankie paraplegic movie.
Actually it never had any chance of getting nominated. It is one of those international co-productions that don't belong clearly to any country so in light of the ridiculous Academy rules no country could actualy pre-nominated it in the first place (anyway most of the money came through Robert Redford so I guess it would be desqualified the same way the Jeunet film were).
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]
23503
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Sun Feb 27, 2005 9:46pm
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> Ostentatious sentimentality -- especially when
> disguised as neo-Bressionian restraint -- beats
>
"Neo-Bressonian restraint" - The mind boggles as Scotty says in
THE THING (1951).
However, there is a really good Scorsese interview in today's LONDON
TIMES. Access THE TIMES rather than SUNDAY TIMES so you won't be
charged by Rupert Murdoch.
Will probably watch some Brakhage tonight similar to my watching
Jerry Lewis on Presidential election night!
Wish the rest of you good viewing.
Tony Williams
23504
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Feb 27, 2005 11:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
Neat Marty piece. And he's right. He's not gonna get
it.
--- peckinpah20012000
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
>
> wrote:
> > Ostentatious sentimentality -- especially when
> > disguised as neo-Bressionian restraint -- beats
> >
> "Neo-Bressonian restraint" - The mind boggles as
> Scotty says in
> THE THING (1951).
>
> However, there is a really good Scorsese interview
> in today's LONDON
> TIMES. Access THE TIMES rather than SUNDAY TIMES so
> you won't be
> charged by Rupert Murdoch.
>
> Will probably watch some Brakhage tonight similar
> to my watching
> Jerry Lewis on Presidential election night!
>
> Wish the rest of you good viewing.
>
> Tony Williams
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
23505
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 0:40am
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "cairnsdavid1967"
wrote:
>
As someone
> who definitely didn't need that film after half an hour, maybe I
> shouldn't be commenting on it, but having picked up the rest of
the
> plot in conversation I didn't feel I had missed anything
regrettable.
>
Should we consider it a responsible critical stance to reject and
discuss at length a film of which you have seen only half an hour?
Should we base our critical opinions on what friends tell us about a
movie's plot? I definitely think you shouldn't be commenting on it,
although your honesty in stating you have seen only a small part of
it is commendable. Of course, FUNNY GAMES being the fairly rare kind
of film that triggers very strong gut reactions, you probably would
hate it as much and for the same reasons if you had seen it from
beginning to end. Still, it seems unfair, not to say unethical, to
discuss a film on the basis of a partial viewing. You might just as
well have rejected it, not having seen it at all, on the basis of
what you "picked up in conversation". Shades of people you go out
and picket a movie they haven't seen but have been told is immoral
or sacrilegeous or whatever.
You say that the film depressed you, and that's understandable,
but is being depressed a valid critical objection? Many great works
of art are depressing.
And is "I don't 'need' the film" a valid critical objection? I
don't think any film ever made was ever "needed". "Need" is not what
the relationship to a work of art is all about. Whatever Haneke may
have said is irrelevant. Let's deal with what a film says and shows,
not what the auteur claims.
JPC
> On the subject of sadism, I think the BIG moral difference between
> Tarantino and Haneke is that Tarantino's violence is inflicted on
> fictional character for some kind of (sometimes complicated)
pleasure
> to be gained by the audience. So nobody is really suffering, on
the
> contrary, Tarantino wants to give pleasure. sometimes the squirmy
> pleasure of a gross-out act or a piece of hissable villainy, but
it's
> not intended to cause suffering.
>
> Haneke on the other hand is torturing real human beings - his
> audience. He wants us to have a bad time at FUNNY GAMES. He has a
> High Moral Purpose in punishing us, of course, which he feels
fully
> justifies taking our money and presenting a thriller narrative
with
> the pleasure carefully removed, but for me this is ramming a
lecture
> down our throats.
>
> > I don't understand your point. The film mimics the conventions
of
> > the slasher franchise, which always sets us up for a sequel by
> > letting the killer go free. The situation is hopeless. The
> suffering
> > is inconsolable. There is no escape.
>
> But of course the ending is not believable - if those guys carry
on
> going from house to house like that, they will eventually be
caught.
> I know the film is not exactly naturalistic, but if that was the
> point intended, I reject it as soon as I think about it.
>
> > Well, the killers in the film are laughing, but there's no
evidence
> > that Haneke is.
>
> Maybe the title? But I don't think he actually has a sense of
humour
> as such - humour is used in the film, but again, the actual
pleasure
> content has been surgically drained.
>
> > As for the "poverty of imagination," I can only say
> > that Haneke's film made me feel the fear and hopelessness that
> > people in similar situations must go through.
>
> I got a sense of hopelessness but not out of empathy with
> any "characters". The fear felt by opera-listeners for death-metal
> listeners came across, but I was never remotely frightened myself.
I
> was DEPRESSED, but I rarely feel any gratitude for that. I can't
> claim you were wrong to feel what you felt, your reaction has its
own
> validity, but my interpretation of the artist's intentions based
on
> my (partial) viewing and his comments are that he wants to give
the
> audience a bad time, and I don't sympathise.
>
> D Cairns
23506
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 0:53am
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000"
wrote:
>
>
>
> Will probably watch some Brakhage tonight similar to my watching
> Jerry Lewis on Presidential election night!
>
> Wish the rest of you good viewing.
>
> Tony Williams
WHAT??? You're not going to watch even for the dresses? Swank
wore the most darling, tasteful low-cut-in-the back dress.
But maybe the film to watch on Oscar Night is the best film of 50
years ago. "Silver Lode"? "I Love Melvin"? "The Naked Jungle"?
Opening with a cartoon: "Drag-along Droopy" of course.
JPC
23507
From: Fred Camper
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:22am
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
jpcoursodon wrote:
> Should we consider it a responsible critical stance to reject and
> discuss at length a film of which you have seen only half an hour?
A friend of mine who was a graduate student at NYU cinema studies in the
90s, got into a long argument with a fellow graduate student over the
merits of a particular film. Unfortunately he can't remember which film.
Anyway, my friend loved it, and was defending it, while the other
student dismissed it as worthless and not worth considering. After a
half an hour, it became evident that the other grad student hadn't even
seen the film at all! And that other student still defended rejecting
it: he knew, from what he read and heard, that it was worthless.
I think JPC is making an important point here, and I agree with him.
There's a big difference between my deciding not to go to the latest
Spielberg because life is short and I haven't much liked his other
films, and my actually having an opinion about it. I don't think you can
have an informed critical opinion of a film you haven't seen from
beginning to end. You can have a kind of viewer's life-choice opinion --
I hated the opening and I think I would have hated the rest of it; I
hate this particular type of slasher film and don't want to risk hating
another one; whatever -- but that's all it is, and not a critical opinion.
Some might argue that you can't really have an informed opinion about a
film that you've seen only once, and especially if you don't know the
filmmaker's other work well. I started a Brakhage show in a commercial
theater once by showing "Mothlight" with absolutely no introduction. The
I talked about it, both how it was made and what I liked about it, and
unreeled a spare prints so people could look at the strip. Then I showed
it again. A woman said afterwards that she was glad I showed it again,
because the first time she didn't even realize she was watching a film
-- I think she thought it was random leader or something. Could she have
an informed opinion based on that one viewing? I don't think so. In a
story I know I've told here before, it took me six Walsh films before I
really loved any, and understood how great a filmmaker he is.
Fred Camper
23508
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:34am
Subject: Re: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
> But maybe the film to watch on Oscar Night is the best film of 50
> years ago. "Silver Lode"? "I Love Melvin"? "The Naked Jungle"?
THE RAID by Fregonese! - Dan
23509
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:10am
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > But maybe the film to watch on Oscar Night is the best film of
50
> > years ago. "Silver Lode"? "I Love Melvin"? "The Naked Jungle"?
>
> THE RAID by Fregonese! - Dan
Or maybe Ludwig's "Jivaro" or "Crime Wave"? JPC
23510
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:28am
Subject: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
1. Watch some great movies that were never even nominated.
2. Watch Brakhage on one screen and the Oscar show on another.
3. Watch Brakhage on one screen and only commercials of the Oscar
show on the other.
4. Watch Brakhage on one screen and only test patterns on another.
5. Watch only test patterns while listening to the sound track of "A
Star Is Born".
6. Watch only test patterns while listening to silent Brakhage
soundtracks.
7. Turn off TV and go out in drag (if you're male) as Kate Blanchet
as Katherine Hepburn (and try to be picked up -- not by the police
though)
8. Try to remember songs that were nominated and won in the days
when there were good songs. Sing along with your friends. Wake up
David E. to sing "I'll Walk Alone" to him. ("Because to tell you
the truth I'll be lonely")(it didn't win though).
9 Try to remember who won and lost the year you were born. Then try
to remember the year you were born (by now you're too high to tell).
10. Write the speech you would give if you won an Oscar. Then
promptly destroy it. Call your mother and tell her you love her.
Then go to bed. It's getting late.
JPC
23511
From:
Date: Sun Feb 27, 2005 10:09pm
Subject: Re: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
Loved Chris Fujiwara's 1954 Auteurist Oscars!
Some good films of 1954:
Ali Baba (Jacques Becker)
Bengal Brigade (Laslo Benedek)
Chikamatsu Monogatari (Kenji Mizoguchi)
Crime Wave (André De Toth)
Deep in My Heart (Stanley Donen)
Desistfilm (Stan Brakhage)
Elephant Walk (William Dieterle)
French Cancan (Jean Renoir)
Godzilla (Ishiro Honda)
Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (Kenneth Anger)
It Should Happen to You (George Cukor)
Johnny Guitar (Nicholas Ray)
Late Chrysanthemums (Mikio Naruse)
The Naked Jungle (Byron Haskin)
Private Hell 36 (Don Siegel)
The Purple Plain (Robert Parrish)
Rear Window (Alfred Hitchcock)
River of No Return (Otto Preminger)
Sansho the Baliff (Kenji Mizoguchi)
Saskatchewan (Raoul Walsh)
The Seven Samurai (Akira Kurosawa)
Sign of the Pagan (Douglas Sirk)
Silver Lode (Allan Dwan)
A Star Is Born (George Cukor)
La strada (Federico Fellini)
Them! (Gordon Douglas)
They Rode West (Phil Karlson)
The Wild One (Laslo Benedek)
World for Ransom (Robert Aldrich)
Mike Grost
23512
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:18am
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Loved Chris Fujiwara's 1954 Auteurist Oscars!
>
> Some good films of 1954:
> Ali Baba (Jacques Becker)
> Bengal Brigade (Laslo Benedek)
> Chikamatsu Monogatari (Kenji Mizoguchi)
> Crime Wave (André De Toth)
> Deep in My Heart (Stanley Donen)
> Desistfilm (Stan Brakhage)
> Elephant Walk (William Dieterle)
> French Cancan (Jean Renoir)
> Godzilla (Ishiro Honda)
> Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (Kenneth Anger)
> It Should Happen to You (George Cukor)
> Johnny Guitar (Nicholas Ray)
> Late Chrysanthemums (Mikio Naruse)
> The Naked Jungle (Byron Haskin)
> Private Hell 36 (Don Siegel)
> The Purple Plain (Robert Parrish)
> Rear Window (Alfred Hitchcock)
> River of No Return (Otto Preminger)
> Sansho the Baliff (Kenji Mizoguchi)
> Saskatchewan (Raoul Walsh)
> The Seven Samurai (Akira Kurosawa)
> Sign of the Pagan (Douglas Sirk)
> Silver Lode (Allan Dwan)
> A Star Is Born (George Cukor)
> La strada (Federico Fellini)
> Them! (Gordon Douglas)
> They Rode West (Phil Karlson)
> The Wild One (Laslo Benedek)
> World for Ransom (Robert Aldrich)
>
> Mike Grost
I could you forget Apache,Bad Day at Black Rock, Beat the Devil,
Executive Suite, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Vera Cruz...?
23513
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:36am
Subject: Re: 29th Hong Kong Film Fest lineup
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Raymond P." wrote:
> I doubt I'll have time, but I'd like to try and catch the truly
epic
> 10.5 hour film by Lav Diaz!
>
> Raymond
I'm more than halfway through that one. I'll be writing more about
it, but my impressions at the moment are that it's hampered somewhat
by the no-budget production values (the editing between sequences is
off, some of the scenes are woefully underlit). More serious problem
is that the dramatic sequences--killings and suchlike, where
everything happens fast--tend to stick out and remind you this is a
movie, and (in the case of these scenes) an ineptly executed one.
But everything else, the smooth flow of many of the scenes, the
poignant underplaying of the actors, it's fantastic, maybe the first
time countryside life has been so honestly, unflinchingly portrayed
in the Philippines (may be the most honest, unflinching portrayal of
countryside life in Aisa, even the world--someone wants to correct
me on this, he's welcome to).
23514
From: Henrik Sylow
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:08am
Subject: Re: Henrik's Oscar Predix
Since I did so well, only three categories I didn't get right (song,
make-up and animated short), Im one happy camper :)
I still believe the best make-up should have gone to "Passion of
Christ", and wonder why they nominated it, when they then decided to
give it to "Lemony Snickets".
A cold Danish beer to the house.
Henrik
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Henrik Sylow"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666" wrote:
> >
> > Now, fully cognizant that my gibbering will be archived in stone on
> > Fred's Herculean server for all to see and mock at come Monday,
> > here's how I'm calling it:
> >
> > I haven't seen Million Dollar Baby, but I predict that Clint will
> > clean the floor with Marty's scrawny ass in the top categories. The
> > only thing likely to keep Baby from pulling an It Happened One Night
> > hat trick and taking all five: Everyone seems to think that Jamie
> > Foxx locked up the Best Actor nod when he channelled Sally Field at
> > the Golden Globes. Clint's just going to have to work on showing his
> > emotions better. That leaves Virginia Madsen as Sideways' best shot
> > at an Oscar, and I'm betting she walks off the Oscar-traditional
> > Energizer Bunny Award for longevity and perseverance. Tech awards
> > only for The Aviator: It's been nice competing with your schlock art
> > movies, Harvey. Be sure not to let the door bump you in the ass on
> > the way out...
>
> Bill shouldn't be alone for a possible mocking :)
>
> I agree that Clint will clean the top:
>
> Million Dollar Baby: Best Film, Best Direction, Best Actress (Swank),
> Best Supporiting Actor (Freeman)
>
> Aviator: Best Art Direction, Best Costumes, Best editing and Best
> cinematography.
>
> Best supporting actress is a very unpredictable category. Madsen does
> seem to be the favorite, but Blanchett is impressive, has more star
> appeal and could get a mercy Oscar, simply because the film only will
> get technicals. To be honest, I find the supporting actress category
> this year more a best actress category.
>
> On best actor, I believe Foxx is unbeatable. On best adapted, my bet
> goes to Sideways. So I really don't see MDB pull an "It Happend one
> Night".
>
> Henrik
23515
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:04am
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
.
> >
>
> Should we consider it a responsible critical stance to reject
and
> discuss at length a film of which you have seen only half an hour?
> Should we base our critical opinions on what friends tell us about
a
> movie's plot?
Not the same, JP. I sneak into tons of film when I'm in a multiplex -
when am I not these days? And I form opinions quickly. If I don't
like something, I sneak into the next one. Godard, I've heard, used
his critic's pass to work the Champs Elysee the same way. That
doesn't mean I haven't been wrong. I ankled Demon Pond at a festival
(I had paid!) before all hell broke loose. Friends told me what I had
missed. Apparently the same is true, to a lesser extent, of Hide and
Seek. But my stepson turned off Irreversible after the second scene,
which appalled him, and he's a good kid for doing so.
23516
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:13am
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> 1. Watch some great movies that were never even nominated.
etc.
I slept on the couch with a video fireplace playing on the tv - I
gave my rabbit ears to my stepson and his gf so they could watch.
Anyway, I was pooped from recovering rare videos from my storage in
Glendale. I do regret missing Swank's dress, which I just saw on AOL.
I will have to say one thing: When I drove around the Oscar part of
H'wd Boulevard, the traffic was moving smoothly, whereas Glendale was
bumper to bumper. That's my report from the front. I never get
invited to any parties.
I wonder what Harvey Weinstein will do now?
23517
From: Peter Henne
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31am
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
11. Just keep making a_film_by posts on non-Oscar topics. After nearly every Oscar contest for the past 25 years, the winners in the "major" categories became a strain to remember in a few weeks' time. So what's all the fuss?
Peter Henne
jpcoursodon wrote:
1. Watch some great movies that were never even nominated.
2. Watch Brakhage on one screen and the Oscar show on another.
3. Watch Brakhage on one screen and only commercials of the Oscar
show on the other.
4. Watch Brakhage on one screen and only test patterns on another.
5. Watch only test patterns while listening to the sound track of "A
Star Is Born".
6. Watch only test patterns while listening to silent Brakhage
soundtracks.
7. Turn off TV and go out in drag (if you're male) as Kate Blanchet
as Katherine Hepburn (and try to be picked up -- not by the police
though)
8. Try to remember songs that were nominated and won in the days
when there were good songs. Sing along with your friends. Wake up
David E. to sing "I'll Walk Alone" to him. ("Because to tell you
the truth I'll be lonely")(it didn't win though).
9 Try to remember who won and lost the year you were born. Then try
to remember the year you were born (by now you're too high to tell).
10. Write the speech you would give if you won an Oscar. Then
promptly destroy it. Call your mother and tell her you love her.
Then go to bed. It's getting late.
JPC
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23518
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:56am
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Peter Henne wrote:
> 11. Just keep making a_film_by posts on non-Oscar topics. After
nearly every Oscar contest for the past 25 years, the winners in
the "major" categories became a strain to remember in a few weeks'
time.
Swank's dress will be remembered. And by the way, JP, you have to
work on your Mr. Blackwell a bit. The autopilot adjective for that
dress is "daring," not "darling." Natasha (Yorgan's gf) thought
Natalie Portman had the best dress.
23519
From:
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:14am
Subject: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
In a message dated 2/27/05 6:41:20 PM, jpcoursodon@y... writes:
> I don't think any film ever made was ever "needed". "Need" is not what the
> relationship to a work of art is all about. Whatever Haneke may have said is
> irrelevant. Let's deal with what a film says and shows, not what the auteur
> claims.
>
Ah but see, that's one of my many problems with FUNNY GAMES. Every frame
screams "You need this, you dum dums who like Tarantino films and mainstream
Hollywood fare." The film says and shows this so we have to talk about "need."
And really, isn't this a drawback to much of the art that uses distanciation,
the idea that it's good for you, like green beans? The artist, of course, is
perfectly healthy. But you are not.
And J-P, don't you think it's a tad, um, ironic that you call out Cairns (I
think) for ripping on a film he hasn't seen in its entirety (PLEASE don't waste
your time on the rest!) when you continually rip on current popular music
about which you willfully know nothing? Case in point just from today: "Try to
remember songs that were nominated and won in the days when there were good
songs." Grrr!
Now I agree with Camper when he says that "There's a big difference between
my deciding not to go to the latest Spielberg because life is short and I
haven't much liked his other films, and my actually having an opinion about it."
Life IS short and if you want to spend the rest of yours listening to Blossom D
earie or whoever and ignoring the existence of Nelly McKay, more power to ya.
But implying that there are no good songs any more is critical opinion enough
for me and it begs the same question of ethics. At least Cairns saw 30 minutes
of pieceashit FUNNY GAMES. Have you heard one note of The New Pornographers
or, hell, even Destiny's Child? And I think it's absurd that you and David E
don't even know who Stephin Merritt is, an artist who's doing more than anyone
today to keep the classic Porter/Gershwin/Berlin/etc.-style pop song alive.
But Camper's post got me thinking of that terrific scene in Stillman's
METROPOLITAN where two Park Avenue kids discuss Jane Austen (I believe). One of them
speaks quite knowledgeably about the book in question but eventually reveals
that he's never actually read it. Instead, he's driven through tons of
criticism about the book. "That way, I can glean the story while reading analyses of
it," he concludes (or something to that effect - haven't seen the film in
ages). And it's worth noting that it never became evident that he had never
actually read the book.
So taking your MOTHLIGHT example, Fred, someone who came into the theatre
just as you started your lecture/showed the strip of film but then left before
you showed the film again does have an informed opinion about MOTHLIGHT just
like the guy in METROPOLITAN has one on Austen. It's all a question of cultural
capital in the end, for better or worse. This theoretical person who hasn't
actually seen MOTHLIGHT probably won't be asked to write the liner notes (is that
what they're called?) for the next Brakhage Criterion Collection. But there
are definitely contexts where s/he can use and even benefit from that informed
opinion (a Park Avenue soiree perhaps).
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23520
From: Noel Vera
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40am
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
Hey, when ARE the Oscars airing? I want it over with, the hype is
getting pretty damned dull.
23521
From: Craig Keller
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:08am
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
On Monday, February 28, 2005, at 02:14 AM, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> And J-P, don't you think it's a tad, um, ironic that you call out
> Cairns (I
> think) for ripping on a film he hasn't seen in its entirety (PLEASE
> don't waste
> your time on the rest!) when you continually rip on current popular
> music
> about which you willfully know nothing? Case in point just from today:
> "Try to
> remember songs that were nominated and won in the days when there were
> good
> songs." Grrr!
I once offered to send Tag Gallagher a burn of a Björk DVD with a few
other films, and he said (after apologizing for being such a "square"),
"I have next to no interest in pop music, thanks." The Grammys are to
Björk what a Swiffer commercial is to Solanas/Getino, but there's just
no point in telling people over a certain age, who haven't listened to
pop music since 1973, that there's an entire world of magnificent
pop-music art out there as large as the entirety of their non-native
cinemas, as they won't believe it, or have images of Jessica Simpson
and/or Emerson Lake and Palmer in their heads. (Just joshing, JP; I
know you'd appreciate Morrissey/The Smiths.) This should be an
a_f_b_OT thread, btw at this point, but I'm still not sure who has
subscribed to that list and who hasn't; all this non-mise-en-scèneing
will in due time drift from these hallowed archives. In any case,
wrapping up, I just wanted to say that one of the most interesting
things to me about pop music is the fact that one can barely analyze
the chords, key changes, intervals, or technicalities of the spacings
-- but all of that would be the least interesting thing about it
anyway. (Duke = "If it sounds good, it -is- good," etc.) In place of
easy critico-aesthetic categorization, there's pure mainlined emotion;
which sounds like a cop-out line, but the instant emotional correlative
for good pop-music is an almost cerebral-visual cinematic overcoming,
and a nerve-tingling. Bach cannot convey the tragic-romantic
heartflutter of the dribbling late-night '00 hours, no matter how
brain-battering his pile-up of notes becomes. (All due respect to
Bach, whom I love; like he and that needs my fucking endorsement.)
In any case, Bill K. is getting a seven-month-delayed pop-wallop from
me, like thirteen discs or some shit, but although the discs are all
burned, I've been too swamped to finish writing the liner notes, and
I'm not sending until then.
And further OT, Kevin, I enjoyed your M.I.A. piece in the 'Pazz and
Jop' section of the Voice a few weeks back. Her record got pushed back
due to sampling copyright issues that cropped up at the eleventh hour,
apparently, but it didn't stop whoever the Voice critic was who
reviewed it from reviewing it, or the Voice from running the review,
unbeknownst to them re: the delay, as all that would seem...
craig.
23522
From: Hadrian
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:39am
Subject: Re: thin-slicing movies pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
> Not the same, JP. I sneak into tons of film when I'm in a multiplex -
> when am I not these days? And I form opinions quickly. If I don't
> like something, I sneak into the next one. Godard, I've heard, used
> his critic's pass to work the Champs Elysee the same way.
I'm with you, Bill. Working at a video store, films are often on the in-store monitor;
and I have definitely come to conclusions about films based on slices of the larger
picture that I think have some validity. And often when I see a film all the way
through, my ideas only get subtler and better supported, but don't change
signifcantly. Once could almost define expertise as the ability to confidently
extrapolate a lot of information for a brief observation. While a full critical analysis
isn't possible, that's not to say no interesting or accurate conclusions will be made.
How often have you been watching a film and had your overall opionion drastically
change after ten or twenty minutes? Honestly, it's rare for me that a film get THAT
much better or worse.
Which brings up Gladwell's last book again (I assuming that's where the autism thread
came from, though i missed the head). There's a lot of studies wherein peoples first
impressions are shown to only be fractionally less accurate than more studied
impressions: students rating teacher's after ten minutes as opposed to a whole
semester for example. He calls this "thin-slicing", and I certainly understood it. from
my days of taking home stacks of 10 or 20 movies and watching the first 10 minutes
of a bunch of them, until one of them seemed promising.
One obvious exception to all this would be a heavily ironic film, in which a strong
style is assumed, but there are clues and cues littered throughout that the film is not
to be interpreted in the obvious way. But, even then, how many minutes would an
experienced viewer have to see before I comprehending the film's tone?
That said, of course one should see the whole film. But I wouldn't discount someone's
opinion if they hadn't, I would just like to know what their opinion was based on
(which I would do anyways, and use my own knowledge of the film to consider if the
opinion might have been affected by seeing the rest.
On another related note, I also heard the Surrealists took this idea to an extreme,
walking into movies halfway, and walking out to find another the moment the film
made sense to them. A day of this activity, and they had a film equivalent to the
"Exquisite Corpse" game.
Hadrian
23523
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:27pm
Subject: Re: thin-slicing movies
And often when I see a film all the way
> through, my ideas only get subtler and better supported, but don't
change
> signifcantly. Once could almost define expertise as the ability to
confidently
> extrapolate a lot of information for a brief observation.
From my (auteurist) perspective, the precise opposite seems to be
true. I have often had the experience of watching a film by a
favourite auteur, and feeling that I was seeing something of little
or no interest. Only the fact that the film was directed by somebody
I had previously admired encouraged me to go back for a second (or
even a third, fourth, fifth and sixth) look. On at least two
occasions, I eventually realized that the botched mess I had
preceived on first viewing had at some point mutated into either a
near-masterpiece (James Toback's THE PICK-UP ARTIST) or an actual
masterpiece (Elaine May's ISHTAR).
On the other hand, multiple viewings of Scorsese's KUNDUN only made
me realize that I had been right the first time.
23524
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:36pm
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Peter Henne
wrote:
> > 11. Just keep making a_film_by posts on non-Oscar topics. After
> nearly every Oscar contest for the past 25 years, the winners in
> the "major" categories became a strain to remember in a few weeks'
> time.
>
> Swank's dress will be remembered. And by the way, JP, you have to
> work on your Mr. Blackwell a bit. The autopilot adjective for that
> dress is "daring," not "darling." Natasha (Yorgan's gf) thought
> Natalie Portman had the best dress.
The front was not a bit daring, and that's all I had seen when I
wrote my post. "Darling" was what I meant, although I must confess
to a bit of campy affectation there. My (ex) wife thought Swank's
dress was the best and I agreed. And we both like MDB. JPC
23525
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:44pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> But my stepson turned off Irreversible after the second scene,
> which appalled him, and he's a good kid for doing so.
But I assume he didn't engage in lengthy cinephilic discussions of
the film after he did. JPC
23526
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:17pm
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
>
> Ah but see, that's one of my many problems with FUNNY GAMES. Every
frame
> screams "You need this, you dum dums who like Tarantino films and
mainstream
> Hollywood fare." The film says and shows this so we have to talk
about "need."
>
I beg to differ. The film didn't scream any such thing to me. And
It couldn't have, since I was not aware of Haneke's comments on
Tarantino. JPC
> And really, isn't this a drawback to much of the art that uses
distanciation,
> the idea that it's good for you, like green beans? The artist, of
course, is
> perfectly healthy. But you are not.
>
Isn't this a slightly simplistic view of "distanciation"?
> And J-P, don't you think it's a tad, um, ironic that you call out
Cairns (I
> think) for ripping on a film he hasn't seen in its entirety
(PLEASE don't waste
> your time on the rest!) when you continually rip on current
popular music
> about which you willfully know nothing? Case in point just from
today: "Try to
> remember songs that were nominated and won in the days when there
were good
> songs." Grrr!
>
"Continually"? Have I ever engaged in a discussion of current
popular music? Aside from saying that I don't care for it? Which is
hardly comparable to a cinephile's discussing at length a film he
has only seen 30 minutes of. And when was the last time there was a
good movie song, in your opinion? (the one that won last night was
the usual mawkish, nondescript piece of trash).
And anyway a_film_ by is not a pop music forum. I would never
engage in a serious discussion of current pop music, because of my
ignorance of it. A passing reference to my dislike/ignorance on
a_film_by shouldn't provoke your ire the way it could on a_song_by
or some such Internet Group.
Kevin, remember I am this "old guy who lives in Florida" as
someone once put it on a_film_by. I also live in the past. Only
listen to old scratchy 78s of Rudy Vallee and Guy Lombardo. But
you're unfair to David, who seems to know and like a lot of current
pop stuff.
,
JPC
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23527
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:40pm
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
Have you heard one note
> of The New Pornographers
> or, hell, even Destiny's Child?
One moan is more like it. And one was enough.
And I think it's
> absurd that you and David E
> don't even know who Stephin Merritt is, an artist
> who's doing more than anyone
> today to keep the classic
> Porter/Gershwin/Berlin/etc.-style pop song alive.
>
I was hoping to pass over that pretentious twit in
silence.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
23528
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:42pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
> Should we consider it a responsible critical stance to reject
and
> discuss at length a film of which you have seen only half an hour?
Probably not. If I were writing a review of it for publication I'd
have been dity-bound to see the whole thing. But I was watching for
pleasure and so I felt entitled to skip out when it got intolerable,
and I feel entitled to talk or type about why I did that. In terms of
opinion, mine isn't "worth" the same as yours, as you subjected
yourself to the entire ordeal, so I'd never deny that you're better
informed than I am.
> Should we base our critical opinions on what friends tell us about
a
> movie's plot?
Well, this is not so much a critical opinion, since I'm a filmmaker,
lecturer and pnly very occasional journalist writing for pleasure -
this is just a half-assed opinion. I think it has a certain half-
assed validity myself, and as long as I'm open about not having had
the full FG experience I don't feel I'm doing Haneke as grave an
injustice as he did to me by expecting me to shell out to be told I'm
degenerate scum for wanting to be entertained.
There are certainly films I've given up on prematurely onluy to be
told of impressive-sounding things I missed out on. FG ain't one of
them. I would have guessed correctly the ending if I'd given it any
thought. I have no way of knowing just how MH handled it
cinematically, of course, but that's a sacrifice I make with some
pleasure.
> Still, it seems unfair, not to say unethical, to
> discuss a film on the basis of a partial viewing.
Again, being honest about it seems important. And I'm not saying
people shouldn't go and see it - this is really an anecdotal account -
the film didn't appeal to me in any way. If people find that
helpful, fine, but they shouldn't let it put them off if they're
interested in seeing for themselves.
>You might just as
> well have rejected it, not having seen it at all, on the basis of
> what you "picked up in conversation".
I might - unless I go and see every single film on release, I have to
choose some means of rejecting films I haven't seen. And I maintain
the right to discuss my reasons for not going to see the ones I
reject. This isn't a critical opinion, just a guesstimate of how much
value or pleasure or stimulation I thought I might get from said
films.
> You say that the film depressed you, and that's understandable,
> but is being depressed a valid critical objection? Many great works
> of art are depressing.
I'm not sure they are. I don't have any solid reason why a great work
couldn't be depressing, but the ones I find great don't tend to
depress me. I'd certainly expect to gain some understanding or
insight or SOMETHING along with the feeling of depression, and then I
probably wouldn't feel depressed. "Sadder but wiser" does not teach
me anything.
I'm reminded of the worst abuse Michael Powell could heap on a
filmmaker who had served up a disappointing cinematic experience: "He
didn't teach me anything."
> And is "I don't 'need' the film" a valid critical objection? I
> don't think any film ever made was ever "needed". "Need" is not
what
> the relationship to a work of art is all about. Whatever Haneke may
> have said is irrelevant. Let's deal with what a film says and
shows,
> not what the auteur claims.
I find filmmakers interesting and sometimes enlightening on the
subject of their own work. I wouldn't want to completely exclude the
filmmaker's thoughts. For the record, I think Haneke's film does much
what of he claims he's setting out to do - my problem is with the
worth of its goals.
I guess the meaning of "need" here for me is: in a good movie, I
feel "Something seriously worthwhile is going on here and I need to
see this to the end to get the full benefit." If I feel that at the
end of the show I'll be nothing but 100 minutes older, I'm tempted
to skip the rest. If the process of reaching that discovery looks
like being painful and annoying, I'm gone!
D Cairns
23529
From: BklynMagus
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:56pm
Subject: Re: thin-slicing movies
> Once could almost define expertise as the
ability to confidently extrapolate a lot of
information for a brief observation.
With respect, I must disagree. For me,
expertise resides in the fact that I am able to
pay deep and close attention to the mise en
scene of a film, while at the same time being
emotionally and narratively/non-narratively
involved/engrossed. In a vulgar way: I see
the sleight-of-hand, but am dazzled by the
magic all the same.
I do not regard expertise as prescience: "I know
where this is going," but more as openness/
forebearance: "Where will this movie take me?
What will it show me/teach me that is new?"
Like Fred with Walsh, it took me several viewings
to understand Godard. For me expertise is also
about humility: "Others whom I esteem regard
this filmmaker highly. Maybe I have to give her
another try." Such an approach does not foreclose
me from just not vibing with a particular auteur,
or conversely, understanding a filmmaker, while
still finding him not to my taste. But it does entail
(for me at least) a conscious willingness to be
open to a film whatever misgivings the first ten
or twenty minutes engender.
For me expertise is acquired by having been open to
a great number many movies over a long period of
time with an equal mix of new films and re-viewings of
ones already seen. Once the expertise is acquired,
however, I think there is the danger that the original
openness calcifies into a posture of rigid omniscience.
Brian
23530
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:01pm
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
>> Should we consider it a responsible critical stance to reject
> and
>> discuss at length a film of which you have seen only half an hour?
Amid the general hubbub, my confession of having walked out (turned off,
actually) halfway through FUNNY GAMES has gone unremarked.
In this case, however, a sizable portion of the film's detractors will
have walked out. So I think the rules should be waived for FUNNY GAMES,
just to make the discussion a sporting contest.
Besides, walking out is sort of an inscribed response in this case. You
could argue that, unless you walk out on FUNNY GAMES, you haven't
experienced the film as Haneke intended! - Dan
23531
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:39pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> I think the rules should be waived for FUNNY GAMES,
> just to make the discussion a sporting contest.
>
> Besides, walking out is sort of an inscribed response in this case. You
> could argue that, unless you walk out on FUNNY GAMES, you haven't
> experienced the film as Haneke intended! - Dan
Exactly! I haven't seen any of Funny Games (although I liked Code Unknown very much), but I read through this thread with a growing sense of the pointlessness of basing a debate on the judging of partly-seen films -- a reasonable topic in itself -- on the somewhat unreasonable example of a film that apparently has the provocation and expectation of walkouts built right into it...
23532
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:47pm
Subject: CHAIN and Jem Cohen in Chicago
Sorry for the regional announcement, but I don't think this is
being widely publicized:
----
Museum of Contemporary Photography
General Event7:00pm - 10:00pm
Film Screening and Discussion with Independent Filmmaker
Jem Cohen
Chain blends actual shopping malls, theme parks, hotels and
corporate centers world wide into one bleak and homogenous
"superlandscape" that shapes the lives of two women caught
within it: one a corporate businesswoman, the other a young
drifter. Written and directed by Jem Cohen, Chain was shot with
little or no crew over six years in eleven American states and six
other countries. Cohen, who has written and directed several
films including Instrument (1999), which documents ten years in
the life of the band Fugazi, will introduce the film and answer
questions following the screening. This event is sponsored in
collaboration with the film department of Columbia College
Chicago.
Location: 1104 S. Wabash Ave., Room 302
Admission: Free
23533
From: jess_l_amortell
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:53pm
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
> > > But maybe the film to watch on Oscar Night is the best film of
> 50
> > > years ago. "Silver Lode"? "I Love Melvin"? "The Naked Jungle"?
> >
> > THE RAID by Fregonese! - Dan
>
> Or maybe Ludwig's "Jivaro" or "Crime Wave"? JPC
I was thrilled to see Edward Ludwig mentioned (although isn't CRIME WAVE De Toth?); years ago I was much taken with what appears to have been his Last film, THE GUN HAWK (1963), and began trying to track down others, but could find nothing to compare with it (at least as far as I could appreciate at the time -- I'll have to re-see WAKE OF THE RED WITCH, if only for Gail Russell). I gather he was a MacMahonist favorite. I hope I haven't asked this before and already forgotten any responses, but to anyone's knowledge, has anything ever been written about his work (in English)?
23534
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:04pm
Subject: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
> I was thrilled to see Edward Ludwig mentioned (although isn't CRIME WAVE
> De Toth?); years ago I was much taken with what appears to have been his
> Last film, THE GUN HAWK (1963), and began trying to track down others,
> but could find nothing to compare with it (at least as far as I could
> appreciate at the time -- I'll have to re-see WAKE OF THE RED WITCH, if
> only for Gail Russell).
I am in the weird position of being lukewarm on THE GUN HAWK and WAKE OF
THE RED WITCH, but rather liking the totally unheralded THE FIGHTING
SEABEES. Still haven't explored his work nearly enough. - Dan
23535
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:32pm
Subject: Re: thin-slicing movies
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Hadrian" wrote:
He calls this "thin-slicing", and I certainly understood it. from
> my days of taking home stacks of 10 or 20 movies and watching the
first 10 minutes
> of a bunch of them, until one of them seemed promising.
I hate to be the one to announce this, but from a few days spent
sitting with a good festival programmer, ten minutes is about how
much time they give a submitted tape. The alternative: Just see films
they know they'll like because they have been recommended. The same
thing applies to us, if we want to be anything but echo chambers for
our friends' opinions. Channel surfing is another way a lot of people
do this. Anyway, thin-slicing isn't optimal, but it's how festivals
do it.
The alternative: Use a more inclusive selection process like the
Golden Gate Awards in San Francisco, which preselects documentaries
and shorts from which the programmers make a final selection for the
festival. Having been on the doc/short jury up there, I can tell you
it was the best selction of either I've seen. Members of the
preselection committee (the group that gives the GG Awards) include
Bay Area film people of all stripes - scholars, filmmakers etc. I
know from experience, too, that the festival will jump over the GGA
process to ensure having a particular film needing an early
commitment, which is just being practical.
All in all, an interesting alternative to what I have seen individual
fest programmers doing - although I'm sure thin-slicing goes on at
the lower levels of the GGA too!
23536
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:37pm
Subject: Re: Alternative ways to spend Oscar Night
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> The front was not a bit daring, and that's all I had seen when I
> wrote my post. "Darling" was what I meant, although I must confess
> to a bit of campy affectation there. My (ex) wife thought Swank's
> dress was the best and I agreed. And we both like MDB. JPC
Natasha (Yorgan's gf) described Swank's dress as follows: "It pushed
her breasts up to under her chin, then in the back it dropped WAY
down, but didn't show cleavage."
Join afbOT JP, so that we don't have to befoul the main list w. these
observations. (It's the only place you'll see David's take on Jessica
Simpson, and his definition of 'chum,' for example.) Alternatively,
keep on truckin'like you have been. That's fun too!
23537
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:38pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> >
> > But my stepson turned off Irreversible after the second scene,
> > which appalled him, and he's a good kid for doing so.
>
>
> But I assume he didn't engage in lengthy cinephilic discussions
of
> the film after he did. JPC
He just warned me not to watch it, but I'm sure he would have NO
compunction about saying that the movie "sucks" and explaining why in
some detail.
23538
From: Raymond P.
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:41pm
Subject: Re: 29th Hong Kong Film Fest lineup
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Noel Vera"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Raymond P."
wrote:
>
> > I doubt I'll have time, but I'd like to try and catch the truly
> epic
> > 10.5 hour film by Lav Diaz!
> >
> > Raymond
>
> I'm more than halfway through that one. I'll be writing more about
> it, but my impressions at the moment are that it's hampered
somewhat
> by the no-budget production values (the editing between sequences
is
> off, some of the scenes are woefully underlit). More serious
problem
> is that the dramatic sequences--killings and suchlike, where
> everything happens fast--tend to stick out and remind you this is
a
> movie, and (in the case of these scenes) an ineptly executed one.
>
> But everything else, the smooth flow of many of the scenes, the
> poignant underplaying of the actors, it's fantastic, maybe the
first
> time countryside life has been so honestly, unflinchingly
portrayed
> in the Philippines (may be the most honest, unflinching portrayal
of
> countryside life in Aisa, even the world--someone wants to correct
> me on this, he's welcome to).
People seem to be only halfway through this film for some reason
(heh). I have a director friend who is also somewhere along the 6-
hour mark...he's going to finish the rest of it in Hong Kong.
Luckily, Lav Diaz is coming. The Q&A session will definitely be
interesting - if anyone's left at the end, that is...
Raymond
23539
From:
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:42pm
Subject: Re: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
<>
One doesn't need to be aware of Haneke's comments on Tarantino to feel as if FUNNY GAMES was being administered as a prescription. As I said earlier, I had no idea Haneke was even thinking of Tarantino when he first prescribed his drug to me.
And sure, I suppose I'm offering a simplistic view of distanciation. But nowhere near as simplistic as Haneke's use of it.
On the popular music front, all I'll say is that I clearly wasn't being unfair to David, judging from his response. But I'll try my best to swallow my bile in the future. And thank you, Craig, for your kind words on my Voice piece. My Jandek piece should be coming out in the Voice this week or next.
Kevin John
23540
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:45pm
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
And when was the last time there was a
> good movie song, in your opinion? (the one that won last night was
> the usual mawkish, nondescript piece of trash).
I didn't watch last night, but generally I like the winners. They
tend to be melodramatic, melodic and emotional. But then I bought the
single of "There's Got to Be a Morning After" (Theme from The
Poseidon Adventure) and lately can't seem to get "Goldfinger" out of
my head. Question: Why did Shirley Bassey HAVE to sing
the "Goldfinger" theme song? (AfbOT replies accepted. No prize for
the winner.)
23541
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:45pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jess_l_amortell"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > I think the rules should be waived for FUNNY GAMES,
> > just to make the discussion a sporting contest.
> >
> > Besides, walking out is sort of an inscribed response in this
case. You
> > could argue that, unless you walk out on FUNNY GAMES, you
haven't
> > experienced the film as Haneke intended! - Dan
>
> Exactly! I haven't seen any of Funny Games (although I liked Code
Unknown very much), but I read through this thread with a growing
sense of the pointlessness of basing a debate on the judging of
partly-seen films -- a reasonable topic in itself -- on the somewhat
unreasonable example of a film that apparently has the provocation
and expectation of walkouts built right into it...
Dan, Jess:
I agree that FUNNY GAMES is too extreme and eccentric a film to be
a good example for the discussion that I initiated. The film is
intended to upset the viewer, and legions of viewers were indeed
upset and as a result walked out (or switched off). But I don't
agree that Haneke had the (artistically suicidal) intention to drive
people out of the theatre. He knew that some would and some
wouldn't. So I have to take Dan's conceit as merely facetious.
I was myself very upset by the film and it bothered me for days.
But I am surprised that people who usually tolerate, accept or even
enjoy films that contain considerable violence, often of a sadistic
nature, should react so negatively to FG. Is it because for once the
violence and sadism seem more real than usual? Tarantino's violence
is fun and so O.K. Haneke's is too uncomfortably close to something
that might happen (after all, lots of women have been tortured and
killed by serial killers in even worse ways than what happens in
FG).
Yes, it's difficult after a while to continue watching the film,
but should we reject every work that upsets us, makes us uneasy?
Shouldn't we try instead to understand why we react the way we do
instead of automatically blaming the artist? Seems to me Haneke is
rejected by people of this Group on purely moral grounds, and that
moreover the validity of the moral arguments is debatable.
JPC
23542
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:52pm
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- jpcoursodon wrote:
Seems
> to me Haneke is
> rejected by people of this Group on purely moral
> grounds, and that
> moreover the validity of the moral arguments is
> debatable.
>
I'm not sure what "purely moral grounds" refers to in
this context. If a viewer find what a film presents
objectionable, is it considered "immoral" for said
viewer to walk out?
Or to put it another way, I greatly admire "Salo," but
thoroughly understand any spectator's difficulty in
sitting through it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
23543
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:53pm
Subject: Re: David E's Oscar Predictions
>
> > Or maybe Ludwig's "Jivaro" or "Crime Wave"? JPC
>
> I was thrilled to see Edward Ludwig mentioned (although isn't
CRIME WAVE De Toth?);
Of course! I should have put a period after "Jivaro" or put in De
Toth's name. JPC
years ago I was much taken with what appears to have been his Last
film, THE GUN HAWK (1963), and began trying to track down others,
but could find nothing to compare with it (at least as far as I
could appreciate at the time -- I'll have to re-see WAKE OF THE RED
WITCH, if only for Gail Russell). I gather he was a MacMahonist
favorite.
He was indeed. Michel Mourlet raved about "Jivaro". Check
out "Caribbean" too. And of course "Wake". But there's a lot of
dross too, and the MacMahonists had seen very few of his movies. JPC
I hope I haven't asked this before and already forgotten any
responses, but to anyone's knowledge, has anything ever been written
about his work (in English)?
23544
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:52pm
Subject: Re: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> I am in the weird position of being lukewarm on THE GUN HAWK and
WAKE OF
> THE RED WITCH, but rather liking the totally unheralded THE
FIGHTING
> SEABEES. Still haven't explored his work nearly enough. - Dan
Hard to see how one could be lukewarm on The Gun Hawk (famously Best
Ten Listed by Godard) - it's so in your face! I guess I'd better run
back to Amoeba and pick up the pilot episode of Bonanza, which I see
EL directed....
23545
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:02pm
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
And thank you, Craig, for your kind words on my Voice piece. My
Jandek piece should be coming out in the Voice this week or next.
>
> Kevin John
Every time I learn that a favorite afb poster has "gone public," I
feel a sense of pride that another cherished seedling we have perhaps
helped nourish here is sprouting to full life - rather like The Thing
(Hawks-Nyby) must feel when he sees his fellow carrot-people,
nurtured by the blood of the slaughtered earth-beast, pushing their
heads through the soil.
23546
From: Robert Keser
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:17pm
Subject: Re: my Oscar predix
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Fujiwara"
wrote:
> Everyone else seems to be predicting a
> shoo-in for "Sansho the Bailiff."
Some cried "foul" over the Best Director win by Sternberg
since SAGA OF ANATAHAN qualified as English-language only by virtue
of the director's own voiceover narration. Still, who can
complain when fellow nominees Buñuel (ROBINSON CRUSOE) and
Visconti (SENSO) also fall in this new category of international
productions that are sort-of-in-English?
No arguments in any language, though, for the Best Foreign Film
going to SANSHO DAYU, despite strong support in certain quarters for
ALI BABA ET LES QUARANTE VOLEURS, DOV'È LA LIBERTÀ and SI
VERSAILLES M'ÉTAIT CONTÉ!
In the contentious Best Supporting Actress competition, I found
myself pulling for Mary McCarty in THE FRENCH LINE, but true to
form, the Academy once again snubbed comedy in favor of dramatics.
Past winner Mercedes McCambridge (JOHNNY GUITAR) had to console
herself with the golden guy already occupying her mantle when voters
decided to reward newcomer Anne Bancroft for her scene-stealing
underplaying in DEMETRIUS AND THE GLADIATORS.
Vincent Price's SON OF SINBAD performance amply filled the Best
Supporting Actor slot, so Will Geer (SALT OF THE EARTH) and
Alexander Knox (THE SLEEPING TIGER) will have to try again another
year, as will Jack Carson (at least he got to pose with his A STAR
IS BORN co-stars holding their Best Actor and Best Actress
statuettes).
--Robert Keser
23547
From: filipefurtado
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:53pm
Subject: Re: Re: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
> >
> > I am in the weird position of being lukewarm on THE GUN HAWK and
> WAKE OF
> > THE RED WITCH, but rather liking the totally unheralded THE
> FIGHTING
> > SEABEES. Still haven't explored his work nearly enough. - Dan
I'm very fond of The Fighting Seabees, but I also like Red Witch a good deal. Ludwig isn't on the Fuller/De Toth level but he was very talented, too bad nobody knows him. Even among Wayne fans Seabees and Red Witch seem to be pretty obscure. I remember being in a used videostore with a friend who pointed thr Red Witch copy and asked me if I had seeing it and then told me that I should really bought it. If I weren't with him that day, I guess I would never heard about Ludwig previously to this discussion.
I'm also glad someone mention Fragonese's The Raid, a personal favorite of mine. Another very underated guy. He and Ludwig are among the big omissions on The American 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]
23548
From: Peter Henne
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:56pm
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
The key word here is "provocation." I've walked out on plenty of films, almost all without regret, because they were boring. The films which outrage me are a different matter, and I try to stick with them. Sometimes I've made it to the end no less infuriated than I was in the middle of the film, but time to think away from the screen allowed me to gain a second opinion. Yoko Ono's and John Lennon's "Rape" is an example. Not far into the film, the woman who is followed by a man wielding a camera is tussled around in a way that didn't look acted, and I must admit I wondered if the whole thing were staged or if she were actually a randomly selected target. As the film gave no respite from the cameraman's/stalker's point of view, and made few cuts, I jumped to the conclusion that it was assuming my identification with the camera, and I felt indignation at what I thought was an unearned conceit. But, the next day, after bending the ear of a friend who had only heard of the film, I
realized that the root of my reactions was concern for the woman. My identification hadn't been with the man, but with her--and that realization, that I imagined myself (so far as a film may afford) in the place of a female stalking and rape victim, was a little growing experience. I don't think I want to see the film again, plus I don't think it would work well armed with foreknowledge of its production. But I think it does what it is supposed to do for men.
I feel divided on Haneke's "Funny Games." David Cairn is onto something when he writes that his problem is with the worth of the film's goals. Apart from responding to the horror movie genre, how meaningful is the film? Does it amount to a critique of representation, class and/or gendered roles, or is it principally a blast at just one kind of popular film, the bloody horror flick? It seems like the film is fairly concentrated on this second goal, and the direct-to-camera asides weren't long enough--they didn't run into "dead time" where we would really feel the suspense and narrative are dragging. Haneke retains the momentum of suspense throughout, which is cheating. It's still a good tonic for this particular genre, but I'm hard put to see where the greater ambition is.
Peter Henne
Exactly! I haven't seen any of Funny Games (although I liked Code Unknown very much), but I read through this thread with a growing sense of the pointlessness of basing a debate on the judging of partly-seen films -- a reasonable topic in itself -- on the somewhat unreasonable example of a film that apparently has the provocation and expectation of walkouts built right into it...
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23549
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:57pm
Subject: Fregonese
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "filipefurtado"
wrote:
> I'm also glad someone mention Fregonese's The Raid, a personal
favorite of mine. Another very underated guy. He and Ludwig are among
the big omissions on The American Cinema.
Jean-Pierre Garcia showed a retro of Fregonese's American and
Argentine films at Amiens last year, which I sorely regret misssing.
He tells me the Argentine films turned out not to be very good.
Blowing Wild was a nice surprise, taped off the air, and I'll be
seeing his Lodger remake, Man in the Atic, soon in pursuit of
professional obligations - I'll report. As my onetime guru Greg Ford
said: "The slow pan. That's Fregonese in a nutshell."
23550
From: Hadrian
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:22pm
Subject: Re: thin-slicing movies
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Hadrian" wrote:
>
> He calls this "thin-slicing", and I certainly understood it. from
> > my days of taking home stacks of 10 or 20 movies and watching
the
> first 10 minutes
> > of a bunch of them, until one of them seemed promising.
>
> I hate to be the one to announce this, but from a few days spent
> sitting with a good festival programmer, ten minutes is about how
> much time they give a submitted tape.
If that. I had a couple friends who helped program the short films
at Sundance, and I would push through baskets of 100 tapes or more
with him in a night. It got to the point where tapes were ejected
after 30 seconds (a horror story for filmmakers everywhere). And
while mistakes are made --in fact, my friend got the gig because a
senior programmer found out his short film had been rejected, and
was obviously a great short. However, I can say that at the
beginning of the process we were for more forgiving and patient, and
I can't remember a single time a film saved itself that began in a
hackneyed or inept fashion.
I understand the group's auteurist perspective is largely based on
larger "thick slices" adding meaning to individual films. Let me
say, that thin-slicing is a KIND of expertise, that I respect as
true. I would guess that there would be an inclination to have more
changing opinions of films if your tastes were influenced more by a
meaning-based aesthetic. I lean more towards film for film's sake
kind of enjoyment --if it were music, the question would just
be, "can that boy play?". A quality that can be assessed pretty
quickly if you have a good ear.
Not that it's the only way I enjoy films, it's just the first and
strongest reaction I have....hence perhaps my interest in Haneke,
regardless of the possible reactions to his idealogy. He's a formal
master, and thus his films are for me a pleasure to watch. I'm
impressed and ENJOY his ability to make me uncomfortable.
Hadrian
23551
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:30pm
Subject: Re: Re: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
--- filipefurtado wrote:
Even among Wayne fans Seabees
> and Red Witch seem to be pretty obscure.
hich is surprising because Wayne's confrontation with
a giant octopus in WAKE is far more interesting than
most Western gunbattles.
I have very vivid memories of WAKE as it used to show
a lot of daytime TV in New York in the 50's. On two
separate occasions I was home from school with a cold
and watched WAKE. Both times the excitement was so
much for me as to induce vomiting.
In Godard's "Made in U.S.A." Anna Karina goes in
search of a "Dr. Edward Ludwig" at one point in the
action. Godard was a big fan of "Gun Hawk" and
included it on his 1964 Top Ten for CdC.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
23552
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:33pm
Subject: Re: Fregonese
> Jean-Pierre Garcia showed a retro of Fregonese's American and
> Argentine films at Amiens last year, which I sorely regret misssing.
Me too. When will we ever get a chance to see those films again?
> Blowing
> Wild was a nice surprise
I haven't seen BLOWING WILD in years, but I think of it as the other major
Fregonese, along with THE RAID. My recollection is that, unlike THE RAID,
its ending doesn't deliver on the tension set up by the rest of the film.
Other fine Fregonese films are APACHE DRUMS, BLACK TUESDAY, and, if memory
serves, the serio-comic MARK OF THE RENEGADE. From his late period,
SAVAGE PAMPAS is quite nice. And SADDLE TRAMP is memorable for its
wonderful final scene: one of the few instances in cinema where I actually
buy the idea that the direction is subverting the message of the script.
> I'll be seeing his
> Lodger remake, Man in the Atic, soon in pursuit of professional
> obligations - I'll report.
It didn't wow me when I saw it, but please do report back.
> As my onetime guru Greg Ford said: "The slow pan. That's Fregonese in a
> nutshell."
He's more! Fregonese is one of those directors who cares about the
expressive quality of space and masses: his visuals have great integrity.
- Dan
23553
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:50pm
Subject: Re: Re: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "filipefurtado"
wrote:
"Even among Wayne fans Seabees and Red Witch seem to be pretty
obscure."
In Wayne biograhies WAKE OF THE RED WITCH receives a few paragraphs
because it was during this picture that he decided to form his own
company, Batjak.
In answer to J-P's query about writing on Ludwig in English, I once
read a comparison of the novel and the film with some discussion of
Ludwig's contribution. I'm not sure if this is what you had in mind,
but it's all I've ever come across on Ludwig (other than his
relations with Wayne in various biographies.)
Richard
23554
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:54pm
Subject: Re: Fregonese
> Other fine Fregonese films are APACHE DRUMS
APACHE DRUMS is a very interesting film which contains a scene that
Cyril Endfield later 'remade' - virtually shot for shot - in ZULU.
23555
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:03pm
Subject: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
At least Cairns saw 30 minutes
> of pieceashit FUNNY GAMES.
The irony is that FUNNY GAMES makes pretty much all the points it has
to make in the first 30 minutes, then simply goes on repeating them
for another hour and whatever. Of course, you wouldn't actually know
this unless you had sat through the whole film. And the repetition is
part of the point.
23556
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:09pm
Subject: Re: Re: Ludwig (Was: David E's Oscar Predictions)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Modiano"
wrote:
>
>
> In answer to J-P's query about writing on Ludwig in English, I
once
> read a comparison of the novel and the film with some discussion
of
> Ludwig's contribution. I'm not sure if this is what you had in
mind,
> but it's all I've ever come across on Ludwig (other than his
> relations with Wayne in various biographies.)
>
> Richard
It was not my query, but a good one. As far as non-English
writings, Ludwig got a fairly long entry in every edition of my book
with Tavernier ("50 ans de cinema americain" in its latest
incarnation). JPC.
23557
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:09pm
Subject: Re: Ludwig
Bertrand Tavernier is another Ludwig fan. In FILM COMMENT March/April
1992, he wrote:
"I resaw a film I'd seen when I was 14 - WAKE OF THE RED WITCH. I
still love it. I adore that film. Here is a director I would like to
know more about: Edward Ludwig, a quite mysterious and interesting
director. I said to myself, "Oh, I was right to see it three times
when I was 14!" I have seen it three times since.
23558
From: Brandon
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:35pm
Subject: Samuel Fuller
I've been in completist mode, trying to catch up with everything by Samuel
Fuller, good and bad. I've been skimming the careers of hundreds of
directors at once for the past few years, and thought it about time to go
in-depth with some of them... picked Fuller first, since I've been wanting
to read his autobiography as well. It's been a fun ride, but I've run out
of easily-available titles now, and am about to spend a bundle on the
internet to obtain a few rarities. Thought I'd ask you guys for help first.
These are the titles I can't find anywhere:
Day of Reckoning
Madonna and the Dragon
TV episodes of The Iron Horse and The Virginian
Fixed Bayonets (played this weekend in D.C., but I'm in Atlanta)
Park Row (have seen listed before on ebay, and I think Turner has played it)
Baron of Arizona (ebay for $75, but I'm not willing to spend that much)
And the ones that I've found for sale online:
Hell and High Water (superhappyfun.com DVD, $15)
The Crimson Kimono (ebay VHS, $25)
I Shot Jesse James (ebay VHS, $25)
Already found these:
Tigrero (DVD)
Street of No Return (DVD)
The Big Red One (reconstructed version coming 5/3 to DVD)
Dead Pigeon on Beethoven Street (coming in April to DVD)
Shark! (haven't bought yet, but I know it's available)
The Naked Kiss (DVD)
Shock Corridor (DVD)
Forty Guns (got UK DVD - U.S. version comes out 5/24)
Run of the Arrow (Turner Classic Movies)
House of Bamboo (saw cropped VHS, DVD coming in June)
Pickup on South Street (DVD)
Merrill's Marauders (VHS rental)
Verboten! (VHS rental)
China Gate (VHS rental)
The Steel Helmet (VHS rental)
Thieves After Dark (VHS)
White Dog (VHS)
Underworld USA (VHS)
Any advice on the first two columns is appreciated... willing to buy 'em
for reasonable prices, or trade with list members if that's an option. I
hope I'm alright in posting this - checked the list's "statement of
purpose" and didn't see anything against discussing trades/commerce
on-list. It's all for the strengthing of my auteurist understanding!
Note for anyone thinking of undertaking similar projects: don't start with
Samuel Fuller!! Sheesh, his films are impossible to find on video. I've
got Fritz Lang up next - and Turner Classic is playing three of my
previously missing Lang titles on March 16th (plus I haven't watched those
Spiders and Die Nibelungen DVDs I bought yet).
Brandon Bentley, list-lurker
23559
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:48pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Peter Henne wrote:
the woman who is followed by a man wielding a camera is tussled around in
a way that didn't look acted, and I must admit I wondered if the whole thing
were staged or if she were actually a randomly selected target. >
A short that won my year on the SF Film Fest's doc/short jury has the woman
turn on the camera stalker, denounce it/him and beat and kick him/it to a pulp.
It was made to showcase the X-Cam, whivh the director had invented - a
camera in a clear plastic sphere which can be thrown around, bounced off
walls, etc. - but it was also political, in a kind of obvious way. Film School
strikes again. I keep looking to see if the X-Cam will ever make it into the
industry's tech arsenal.
> I feel divided on Haneke's "Funny Games."
I guess I'll have to see it if it's a serial killer film.
BTK, just arrested in Wichita, was so-called because his method was "Bind,
Torture, Kill." He was a churchwarden, recalling Lacan's observation, inspired
by L'Age d'Or and El, that Sade's fantasies seem particularly at home in
Christian mindsets.
As the genre goes, there's worse stuff out there. Those direct-to-video films
bearing the names of famous killers are disturbing - and often well-made...but
to what end? Chuck Parello (Henry 2) has done a couple: Ed Gein is the best,
but I can also recommend (to fans of the Haenke, at least) The Hillside
Stranglers and Ted Bundy (the latter dir. by Matthew Bright, of Freeway fame).
The sheer neutrality of the depictions is as disturbing as what's depicted,
which can be quite grim.
23560
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:49pm
Subject: The Jacket
Has anyone seen it? I have to decide whether or not to for review purposes.
23561
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:52pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
I strongly reccomend "The Baron of Arizona." Based on
atrue story it's indescribably weird. A Jorge Luis
Borges Western so to speak.
There's much late Fuller that's hard to see in any
form -- like"Madonna and the Dragon." Never seen that
one. But grab "Thieves After Dark" should it come your
way. Far from perfect, but very interesting with a
great Morricone score.
"The Crimson Kimono" which I saw in its original
relase made me a Fuller fan before I knew who Fuller
was.
And "White Dog" is a masterpiece. I was on the set for
a week, and watching Fuller direct was a thrill beyond
measure.
--- Brandon wrote:
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
23562
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:53pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Brandon wrote:
I have all the films you need but the tvers and the full Jesse James, which was
cut when I taped it off tv - right now my second VCR is on the fritz. And as
others here will testify, I'm slow to get to the PO. There's also a tver about
truckers and goofballs that I haven't seen, but if you e-mail Doug Brodoff at
brodoff@h... in Paris, he'll point you straight.
23563
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:07pm
Subject: Speck/Haenke (Sp?)
I'm sorry no one picked up on my description of "The Private Tapes of Richard
Speck." It's one of those homegrown items Fred's always championing (for
other reasons, I imagine), and it raises questions I suspect Haenke never
even thought of - without killing anyone (on-camera).
23564
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:14pm
Subject: Re: The Jacket
Haven't seen it. Scott Foundas loathes it.
But John
http://ehrensteinland.com/htmls/g001/maybury.html"
is a very great film artist.
This was an assignment -- not scripted by him -- taken
up after many years of trying to get his Christopher
Marlowe film off the ground.
It's supposed to be abit like "La Jetee."
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> Has anyone seen it? I have to decide whether or not
> to for review purposes.
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
23565
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:29pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
like"Madonna and the Dragon." Never seen that
> one.
It's a masterpiece, easily the best of Fuller's post WHITE DOG films.
The full onscreen title (at least on the version I saw, which was in
English with Japanese subtitles) is TINIKLING OR "THE MADONNA AND THE
DRAGON".
THE DAY OF RECKONING is actually a 30-minute episode of a TV series
variously known as LES CADAVRES EQUIS DE PATRICIA HIGHSMITH, CHILLERS
and PATRICIA HIGHSMITH'S TALES. Fuller's ep has a few nice ideas, but
is nothing special.
23566
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:38pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
For completeness, include John McNaughton's Girls in Prison, cowritten by
Sam and Christa. I have that too if we work out a way of getting stuff to you,
Brandon.
23567
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:45pm
Subject: Re: Ludwig
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> Bertrand Tavernier is another Ludwig fan. In FILM COMMENT
March/April
> 1992, he wrote:
>
> "I resaw a film I'd seen when I was 14 - WAKE OF THE RED WITCH. I
> still love it. I adore that film. Here is a director I would like
to
> know more about: Edward Ludwig, a quite mysterious and interesting
> director. I said to myself, "Oh, I was right to see it three times
> when I was 14!" I have seen it three times since.
Wasn't Luther Adler in this giving a great performance? Although
Ludwig had a good actor in the cast, he did manage to get Rory
Calhoun to give his greatest performance in THE GUN HAWK.
Tony Williams
23568
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:47pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
> wrote:
> >
> For completeness, include John McNaughton's Girls in Prison,
cowritten by
> Sam and Christa. I have that too if we work out a way of getting
stuff to you,
> Brandon.
I would also recommend trying to see Fuller in scope rather than
the croppoed versions around on VHS. CHINA GATE desperately needs a
DVD release in its original format similar to the recent DVD release
of HOUSE OF BAMBOO.
Tony Williams
23569
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:12pm
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "peckinpah20012000" <
peckinpah20012000@y...> wrote:
Wasn't the China Gate VHS cassette letterboxed?
Sam was a 'Scope pioneer. Zanuck and Skouras asked him to make Hell and
High Water to show that the process - which Fox owned - could work w. a
moving camera. He wasn't enthusiastic aboutr the project because he knew
nothing about the Navy, but he went down in a sub to see how it looked from
the inside. I believe it was also his first color film. When Spielberg came to see
the Fullers he had a print of it in his trunk. Baron of Arizona, however, was a
youthful favorite of Coppola and his buddies, who saw it many times in first
run. That says it all, doesn't it?
I like Day of Reckoning for the great nightmare sequence, and also because it
closes a circle - Sam's first and last films were about concentration camps.
Leotard is badly dubbed, but I think it's a nice little film. And I agree with The
Brad that Madonna and the Dragon is a masterpiece. (See my comment on
one shot in it as the culmination of the ideas of the City and the Zone, in a
reply to Mike.) Street of No Return would be on the same level if the producer
hadn't screwed it up in the editing. And I love Thieves After Dark. What's not to
love? Sam had a great late period, with one parody- Dead Pigeon - that's
enormous fun (with specific references to medieval carnaval forms) and
another - Shark - that was wrecked by the producers. And of course White
Dog and (finally) The Big Red One.
I asked Christa if the white dog was a serial killer and she wrote back: "I'm not
a psychoanalyst of white dogs."
23570
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 0:10am
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
> I feel divided on Haneke's "Funny Games." David Cairn is onto something
> when he writes that his problem is with the worth of the film's goals.
See, I feel as if the film's true goal was making the audience
uncomfortable, period. I just think Haneke's sadism, never adequately
controlled, ran away with him, and I register any highfalootin' arguments
about critiquing this or that as pure rationalization. - Dan
23571
From: Hadrian
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 1:12am
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
> Day of Reckoning
If any one has this, email me.
> Madonna and the Dragon
I could get it for you, or you could get one from Craig Ledbetter, Eurotrash .
> TV episodes of The Iron Horse and The Virginian
Nope. But if any has them, please email me.
> Fixed Bayonets (played this weekend in D.C., but I'm in Atlanta)
Email me.
> Park Row (have seen listed before on ebay, and I think Turner has played it)
Email me. Or buy from Video Search of Miami (www.vsom.com).
> Baron of Arizona (ebay for $75, but I'm not willing to spend that much)
Email me. Or buy from Hollywood's Attic.
For the record, I believe the China Gate vhs to be pan-and-scan, letterboxed only for
credit sequence.
Hadrian
23572
From: Jess Amortell
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 1:15am
Subject: Re: Ludwig
> As far as non-English
> writings, Ludwig got a fairly long entry in every edition of my book
> with Tavernier ("50 ans de cinema americain" in its latest
> incarnation). JPC.
Indeed you are quoted on Fighting Seabees on a French web site
(http://www.dvdclassik.com/Critiques/dvd_alertemarines.htm):
''Tavernier et Coursodon ont parlé de "pire histoire guerrière tournée
par la Républic", il est difficile de leur donner tort ! Navrant !''
Sounds like you didn't like it...
Nonetheless, this has finally convinced me to dust off whatever's left
of my student French and get that book.
--
monterone@m...
23573
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 1:56am
Subject: Re: Ludwig
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jess Amortell"
wrote:
> > As far as non-English
> > writings, Ludwig got a fairly long entry in every edition of my
book
> > with Tavernier ("50 ans de cinema americain" in its latest
> > incarnation). JPC.
>
> Indeed you are quoted on Fighting Seabees on a French web site
> (http://www.dvdclassik.com/Critiques/dvd_alertemarines.htm):
> ''Tavernier et Coursodon ont parlé de "pire histoire guerrière
tournée
> par la Républic", il est difficile de leur donner tort !
Navrant !''
>
> Sounds like you didn't like it...
>
> Nonetheless, this has finally convinced me to dust off whatever's
left
> of my student French and get that book.
>
>
Get it by all means, Jess, I sure need the money (just kidding).
I've never seen "Seabees", so that must have been Bertrand writing.
He's more of a Ludwig fan than I am, especially Re: Red Witch.
Thanks for the link anyway... JPC
>
> monterone@m...
23574
From: samfilms2003
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 3:25am
Subject: Re: my Oscar predix
> Some cried "foul" over the Best Director win by Sternberg
> since SAGA OF ANATAHAN qualified as English-language only by virtue
> of the director's own voiceover narration.
On the other hand, in the Short Sublect category who wasn't pleased to
see "The Way To Shadow Garden" give Stan Brakhage his first Oscar win,
trumping odds-on favorite Norman McLaren. (sorry, JPC)
-Sam
23575
From: Craig Keller
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 3:42am
Subject: 'Roma' Cut on DVD?
Apparently the MGM US disc release of Fellini's 'Roma' is missing nine
minutes from the theatrical cut. Does anyone know when or why this was
done, and what specifically has been excised?
craig.
23576
From: Noel Vera
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:06am
Subject: Re: 29th Hong Kong Film Fest lineup
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Raymond P." wrote:
>
> People seem to be only halfway through this film for some reason
> (heh). I have a director friend who is also somewhere along the 6-
> hour mark...he's going to finish the rest of it in Hong Kong.
> Luckily, Lav Diaz is coming. The Q&A session will definitely be
> interesting - if anyone's left at the end, that is...
>
> Raymond
I'm on the final four or so hours, I think.
Lav can be a good talker. He provoked the shit out of the most
popular festival in the country, the Metro Manila Film Festival, by
calling it a 'festival of idiots.'
Problem was, he was really quoting ME, and never thought to give
credit accordingly. Ah, fame.
He's a nice guy, actually, very approachable...if they aren't
swarming around him by then.
23577
From: J. Mabe
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:26am
Subject: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
I felt very Mike Grost-ian this weekend as I watched
Kira Murtova’s Asthenic Syndrome. The day before I
had gone to an open screening at the Millennium Film
Workshop and the majority of the work was
unrelentingly bleak and, even worse, video. My bad
reaction to the Murtova might not have been so severe
if I hadn’t been so turned off by the clumsy, puerile
angst of the videos at the open screening (the clumsy
but enjoyable angst of a truely weird-ass new Mike
Kuchar video is another matter). The one real
highlight was a overlong super8 on video piece called
“Kay Ke, Where is She?” which featured the eponymous
girl jumping, floating, running, and dancing across
New York City streets with the help of some stop
motion live animation. By the end the camera was
doing single frame cartwheels around Kay Ke making her
outstretched body into some kind of blurry
mandala-like figure. But back to Asthenic Syndrome...
I can’t quite say why I hated the film so much, but it
certainly had something to do with a gut level
distaste for all her mean, petty, loud, angry
characters. The worst of it is, she builds in a lot
of humor around the films events, so I suppose we’re
never supposed to take it all so seriously, making
such a negative gut level reaction to the film seem
like I just don’t get the joke. But I hated this one
enough to walk out about an hour and a half into it.
I can stomach mean characters and depressing events if
it’s good cinema (Fassbinder or Tarr, for example),
but Muratova didn’t seem to have anything going for
her. It’s enough to put me off ‘serious dramatic
cinema’ for a while. I’ll allow myself to go see
Million Dollar Baby this week, but I need a healthy
dose of Nick Dorsky and the Farrely Brothers before I
can let another filmmaker shove my face in the mud.
I attempted to see two Godards in a day, first
catching Masculin Feminine. I liked it mildly, but I
think I figured out I prefer Godard when he shuts up.
Gimmie something like Soigne ta droite, Passion, or
the Histories where I’m left with a thousand images
and sounds but can’t remember a single line of
dialogue. My second attempt was thwarted when I tried
to see Notre musique at the Makor theater. I paid my
$9 and asked if the film was going to be projected in
35mm. I was told yes, but it was clearly video, and
not even good video projection. I hope that it was
simply a mistake on the part of the projectionist and
that he didn’t think I couldn’t tell the difference.
I walked out as soon as I noticed (after about 3
credits had appeared - maybe 30 seconds), and asked
for a refund as I was lied to. I was refused a refund
and argued with the staff member for a few minute
before I decided to cut my losses and just see what I
could in the shitty projection. When I went back up I
realized that the video was being projected in either
1.85 or 1.66 (I didn’t stay long, so I didn’t have a
good look - it looked like 1.85). How can you fuck up
aspect ratio in video projection? At that point I
just left the theater, telling the guy selling the
tickets that they should at least properly advertise
when they plan to ruin a show so completely.
My two days in New York weren’t a complete wreck
though, as I go to see some friends, eat good food,
and wander around aimlessly for hours around The
Gates. I headed off to DC for the rest of my trip
($30 Greyhound round trip makes a single city trip to
the Northeast almost seem like a waste). There I got
to see Fixed Bayonets, which might contain some of the
greatest editing I have ever seen, especially around
the walk though the minefield. I also saw Peter
Kubelka speak and present his Metaphoric Films. This
is the third time I’ve seen him speak and my viewings
of each of his films (except for Poetry and Truth)
probably number around a dozen apiece. Each time I
hear him speak he speaks on entirely new subjects and
subsequently, each time I see his films they seem like
entirely new works. I still don’t “get” or enjoy
Pause, but other that that it was a joy to see. I’m
fantasizing about quitting school and just following
him around the country on his tour in a van like a
Phish fan.
Back in hot weather but cinematic cold of South
Carolina,
Josh Mabe
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
23578
From: Craig Keller
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:36am
Subject: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
> My second attempt was thwarted when I tried
> to see Notre musique at the Makor theater. I paid my
> $9 and asked if the film was going to be projected in
> 35mm. I was told yes, but it was clearly video, and
> not even good video projection. I hope that it was
> simply a mistake on the part of the projectionist and
> that he didn’t think I couldn’t tell the difference.
Where would they have gotten a video source for this? You know the
entire ten-to-twelve-minute opening sequence is all transferred from
video, right?
craig.
23579
From: Josh Mabe
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:41am
Subject: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller >
Where would they have gotten a video source for this? You know the
> entire ten-to-twelve-minute opening sequence is all transferred
from
> video, right?
>
> craig.
I don't know where they got the video, but I saw some parts of the
film-film (Godard talking to an man in an airport) and it was
clearly video. I even put my nose up to the glass of the projection
booth to be sure, and I saw the video projector running.
23580
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:48am
Subject: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "J. Mabe" wrote:
> I attempted to see two Godards in a day, first
> catching Masculin Feminine. I liked it mildly, but I
> think I figured out I prefer Godard when he shuts up.
> Gimmie something like Soigne ta droite, Passion, or
> the Histories where I'm left with a thousand images
> and sounds but can't remember a single line of
>My second attempt was thwarted when I tried
> to see Notre musique at the Makor theater. I paid my
> $9 and asked if the film was going to be projected in
> 35mm. I was told yes, but it was clearly video, and
> not even good video projection. I hope that it was
> simply a mistake on the part of the projectionist and
> that he didn't think I couldn't tell the difference.
> I walked out as soon as I noticed (after about 3
> credits had appeared - maybe 30 seconds), and asked
> for a refund as I was lied to. I was refused a refund
> and argued with the staff member for a few minute
> before I decided to cut my losses and just see what I
> could in the shitty projection. When I went back up I
> realized that the video was being projected in either
> 1.85 or 1.66 (I didn't stay long, so I didn't have a
> good look - it looked like 1.85).
You clearly weren't paying attention to Masculine Feminine, Josh - or
you'd have known how to handle the situation!
23581
From: Craig Keller
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:55am
Subject: Re: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, at 12:41 AM, Josh Mabe wrote:
> I don't know where they got the video, but I saw some parts of the
> film-film (Godard talking to an man in an airport) and it was
> clearly video. I even put my nose up to the glass of the projection
> booth to be sure, and I saw the video projector running.
That's crazy. You should have stormed the booth!!
cmk.
23582
From: Peter Henne
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 5:59am
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
SPOILERS IN THIS POST
Then we're mostly in agreement. I finished by saying it did not really critique anything outside of its genre, and even the way "Funny Games" faces off its own genre was less than honest because it retained the conventions of suspense. Haneke is such a control freak that I don't think the conception got away from him once he started making the film or midway in writing the script, rather it had flaws from the very beginning that he left unexamined. My impression is that he came up with the idea of hostage taking punctuated by direct-address interludes, with the remote control episode as a climax to this dimension that lies outside of the story; wrote it all up, carried it out to a T, but the particular self-reflexive gestures he chose didn't do much to cut against the fiction. It's a matter of degree. If there had been only one or two direct-address moments, the film would have been even less successful and the instances of speaking to the camera might have appeared merely quirky.
There are more than one or two, and I think they cue us to begin pulling back from the narrative. But they are not prevalent or forceful enough to really move outside all of the manipulative traps of horror. I definitely think that is where Haneke wants to take us, but he didn't arrive there. Simply put, his tools don't work as well as he thinks they do.
I don't know anything about Haneke's working methods, and that is why I said "my impression." But it's evident from the film's compositions and the structure of the script that it was arranged with a mind to organization (which doesn't mean it all comes out of a piece).
Peter Henne
Dan Sallitt wrote:
See, I feel as if the film's true goal was making the audience
uncomfortable, period. I just think Haneke's sadism, never adequately
controlled, ran away with him, and I register any highfalootin' arguments
about critiquing this or that as pure rationalization. - Dan
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23583
From:
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 1:01am
Subject: Re: Re: Need/critical ethics (Was: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES)
In a message dated 2/28/05 1:09:28 PM, hotlove666@y... writes:
> Every time I learn that a favorite afb poster has "gone public," I
> feel a sense of pride that another cherished seedling we have perhaps
> helped nourish here is sprouting to full life
>
I am humbled.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23584
From:
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 1:12am
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
In a message dated 2/28/05 2:06:02 PM, peterhenne@y... writes:
> the direct-to-camera asides weren't long enough--they didn't run into "dead
> time" where we would really feel the suspense and narrative are dragging.
> Haneke retains the momentum of suspense throughout, which is cheating.
>
Excellent point, Peter. Of course, had it run into "dead time," many of its
supporters would have probably ignored it. And it would have looked more like
HIROSHIMA MON AMOUR. Or SHOAH maybe.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
23585
From: Yoel Meranda
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 6:36am
Subject: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
J. Mabe wrote: "I also saw Peter Kubelka speak and present his
Metaphoric Films. This is the third time I've seen him speak and my
viewings of each of his films (except for Poetry and Truth) probably
number around a dozen apiece. Each time I hear him speak he speaks
on entirely new subjects and subsequently, each time I see his films
they seem like entirely new works. I still don't "get" or enjoy
Pause, but other that that it was a joy to see."
I'm jealous since I haven't had the chance to see any of Kubelka's
films more than four times although I had many chances to
inspect "Unsere Afrikareise" frame by frame.
I've seen "Pause" only once and it is one of his films that affected
me most deeply. It also was the key film to my appreciation
of "Poetry and Truth".
Repetitions of similar images or sounds has not been explored by many
people in cinema. The reason "Pause" is so unique is the fact that
Kubelka keeps repeating an almost absurd "happening" with only minute
changes so we are basically presented the same "form" again and again
although the way it affects us changes gradually as the
film "progresses". The fact that there is no way to make sense of
what the guy is doing only adds to the experience since after a while
we realize that we are presented an unsolvable and disturbing puzzle.
There is something that relates to the human suffering in what the
guy is doing and the fact that it is repeated again and again makes
the experience unbearable.
The "Poetry and Truth" also has some of that and I felt something
very similar in that film. The film keeps repeating similar (but not
exactly the same) images many times but something is changing in our
minds.
In his lecture in New York, Kubelka said something like "Bach is my
therapist" and I believe Bach is one of his influences in adapting
the idea of variations to cinema.
"I'm fantasizing about quitting school and just following him around
the country on his tour in a van like a Phish fan."
I love the idea! Imagine a van filled with Truth, Poetry and Bach
instead of Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll...
Yoel
23586
From: Aaron Graham
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 6:48am
Subject: Re: Speck/Haenke (Sp?)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
>
> I'm sorry no one picked up on my description of "The Private Tapes
of Richard
> Speck." It's one of those homegrown items Fred's always championing
(for
> other reasons, I imagine), and it raises questions I suspect Haenke
never
> even thought of - without killing anyone (on-camera).
Bill, just to let you know that I picked up on it. I've seen clips of
this on an A&E Biography of Speck, and it is indeed disturbing
imagery on several levels -- especially when he takes off that shirt.
His nonchalant attitude towards the killings must have been haunting
for the victim's families when it was released after his death, but
the nervousness apparent in Speck throughout seems to hint at the
fitting punishment he served in prison of fearing for his life.
-Aaron
23587
From: Fred Camper
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 6:53am
Subject: Re: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
Yoel Meranda wrote:
>
> J. Mabe wrote:
> "I'm fantasizing about quitting school and just following him around
> the country on his tour in a van like a Phish fan."
>
> I love the idea! Imagine a van filled with Truth, Poetry and Bach
> instead of Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll...
Well, also, it would be easier to actually talk to him outside of his
screenings than it would be to talk to "the band," once he knew you were
really doing this, and you wouldn't have to sleep with him in order to
talk with him either. The tour is listed at
http://www.fredcamper.com/M/Kubelka.html, as I posted earlier. A fall
tour is likely too, though to different cities.
Two wonderful texts are the old interview with him in Film Culture,
issue number in the mid-to-late-40s, and the transcripts of his lectures
at NYU published in Sitney's "The Avant-Garde Film: A Reader of Theory
and Criticism," which is a terrific book not just for the Kubelka texts.
This was the first time he taught a course on his own films, 1972; I was
there, and it was great.
Kubelka often says that his films give the most pleasure to those who
know them by heart. The times I've come close to memorizing one verify
that this is true.
Fred Camper
23588
From: Jason Guthartz
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 7:21am
Subject: Re: my cinema weekend - fuller, kubelka, muratova, godard
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Yoel Meranda"
wrote:
> Repetitions of similar images or sounds has not been explored by many
> people in cinema. The reason "Pause" is so unique is the fact that
> Kubelka keeps repeating an almost absurd "happening" with only minute
> changes so we are basically presented the same "form" again and again
> although the way it affects us changes gradually as the
> film "progresses".
First, a correction: the title of the film is "Pause!" -- this is one
case where punctuation matters!!
"Pause!" is an incredibly great film. Following Yoel's comments about
repetition and Kubelka's musical influences, I'd compare this film's
aesthetic to some early 20th-century sound poetry, e.g., Kurt
Schwitter's "Ursonate" and Tristan Tzara's "(brüllt)"; versions of
each, performed by Jaap Blonk, can be heard here:
http://www.ubu.com/sound/blonk.html
I'm eagerly counting down the hours 'til the Kubelka programs here in
Chicago!!!
--Jason Guthartz!!!!
23589
From: Hadrian
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 8:11am
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
Realized this was a bit unclear. I can get you any of the fuller's
on your list but:
> > TV episodes of The Iron Horse and The Virginian
> > Day of Reckoning
>
23590
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 9:35am
Subject: Re: Speck/Haneke
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Graham"
wrote:
>
> Bill, just to let you know that I picked up on it. I've seen clips
of
> this on an A&E Biography of Speck, and it is indeed disturbing
> imagery on several levels -- especially when he takes off that
shirt.
> His nonchalant attitude towards the killings must have been
haunting
> for the victim's families when it was released after his death, but
> the nervousness apparent in Speck throughout seems to hint at the
> fitting punishment he served in prison of fearing for his life.
It has many levels. Who's making the tape? What for? How coerced is
his participation? There are no unambiguous answers to any of those
questions, and I suspect that the ambiguity of the dispositif is what
is really unsettling - even more than the breasts. Who is behind the
camera, and what is their agenda?
Is Speck being punished despite his claim that he's having fun, or
has becoming a woman brought him peace, revealing some truth that was
behind the crimes (hatred of that part of himself)? When he says that
the girl he forced to undress "didn't have anything he wanted"
(although the record shows he raped her), for whose benefit is he
speaking? Given that he told a psychiatrist in 1966 (after he was
convicted) that he blacked out during a burglary and committed his
crimes, are his recollections of that night the truth at last, or as
fake as (presumably..) the cocaine and marijuana that is being
flaunted on the tape?
My name for it is Jail Television: a "broadcast" engineered by some
of the inhabitants of a maximum security prison that is as fictive,
propagandistic, controlling and ambiguous as the jut-jawed moralistic
A&E reportage encasing it -- that is, in fact, a distorting mirror
held up to Normal Television. Given all the talk of Speck getting
away with murder and maybe even being set free, it is ironic that it
was taped around the same time that the Willie Horton ads were
greenlit for broadcast by our current Thief of State, when he was
head of his father's presidential campaign against Michael Dukakis.
23591
From: thebradstevens
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 10:26am
Subject: Re: Samuel Fuller
> > > TV episodes of The Iron Horse and The Virginian
> > > Day of Reckoning
> >
Fuller's episode of THE VIRGINIAN ("It Tolls for Thee") is a superb
piece of work. THE VIRGINIAN ran in a 90-minute (with adverts) time
slot, so Fuller's episode runs something like 75 minutes. A few
fragments of the Fuller episode can be found in the film THE MEANEST
MEN IN THE WEST (1972). This edits together the Fuller episode (which
starred Lee Marvin) with an episode directed by Charles S. Dubin
(starring Charles Bronson), along with a lot of newly shot material
(by an anonymous director) that is intended to connect the two
segments. This film is available on DVD, but should be avoided at all
costs - only something like 15 minutes of the Fuller ep are included,
and most of it has been edited in a way that totally changes its
meaning.
23592
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 11:44am
Subject: Re: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
> Haneke is such a control freak that I don't
> think the conception got away from him once he started making the film
> or midway in writing the script, rather it had flaws from the very
> beginning that he left unexamined.
Yes, absolutely. By the way, I didn't mean to stifle conversation: I
sniff suspiciously at Haneke's stated reasons for making the film, but I
don't want that to be taken as a refusal of the discussion.
> but the
> particular self-reflexive gestures he chose didn't do much to cut
> against the fiction. It's a matter of degree. If there had been only one
> or two direct-address moments, the film would have been even less
> successful and the instances of speaking to the camera might have
> appeared merely quirky. There are more than one or two, and I think they
> cue us to begin pulling back from the narrative. But they are not
> prevalent or forceful enough to really move outside all of the
> manipulative traps of horror.
The direct address partakes of the same tone as the drama. My general
sense is that reflexivity doesn't so much change a film in itself as it
does give the filmmaker a chance to introduce new perspectives or tones.
- Dan
23593
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 0:28pm
Subject: Re: pieceashit FUNNY GAMES
> See, I feel as if the film's true goal was making the audience
> uncomfortable, period. I just think Haneke's sadism, never
adequately
> controlled, ran away with him, and I register any highfalootin'
arguments
> about critiquing this or that as pure rationalization. - Dan
To me the film does have a couple more goals, though it's arguable
they are secondary to the task of simply mistreating the spectator.
1) Haneke wants to show us "what violence is really like". THis fails
for me to be rewarding since, like most people who have experienced
childhood, I KNOW THIS ALREADY.
2) He wants to show how this differs from what we normally get in
movies. Again, I KNOW THIS.
It may be true but it's not interesting, Mr Haneke.
In a film I admire which also uses distanciation, HOW I WON THE WAR,
the intention is to do a similar thing for the war movie. But here I
get far more involved in the argument because, for one thing, the
argument that PATHS OF GLORY, for instance, is actually a pro-war
movie, is an unusual one not often aired. The arguments involved in
showing that so-called anti-war films actually make the audience want
to see good guys kill bad guys are actually quite complex. Plus, the
alienation attempts combine shock with amusement and moments of
bafflement that are never less than stimulating to experience.
Comparing this with PIECEASHIT FUNNY GAMES, we find that the film is
an attack on conventional horror/thrillers -- films which nobody
would argue are condemnations of violence. The violence in PULP
FICTION is movie violence and Tarantino doesn't trouble to condemn it
because he knows that we accept it as such. OBVIOUSLY if junkie
hitman Travolta was seriously being offered as an admirable character
in realistic terms, the film would be abhorrent, but Tarantino and
his audiences are not that dumb. I worry that Haneke may be.
D Cairns
23594
From:
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 8:36am
Subject: Loren D. Estleman in EQMM (OT)
It's OT, but:
Famed Michigan mystery writer Loren D. Estleman has a story in the new, May
2005 issue of Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine (EQMM) that might amuse most
a_film_by-ers. It is part of his continuing series of detective tales, in which
the sleuth is a UCLA film preservationist who solves mysteries involving old
movies. This story is called "Shooting Big Ed" - "Big Ed" is the name of a
fictitious 1931 gangster flick.
Edward D. Hoch's "The Theft of the Empty Paint Can" in the same issue is
good, too.
Mike Grost
23595
From:
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 8:41am
Subject: Bart Vegter website
Have learned that Dutch abstract filmmaker Bart Vegter has a website. It is
called:
Long Canal
and is at:
http://www.bave.luna.nl
There are stills here from his latest film, "Zwerk" (2004). This is an
abstract film, made up of patterns of colored light. Just saw this film at MediaCity
film festival in Windsor, Ontario.
Mike Grost
23596
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 2:14pm
Subject: More on "The Aviator"
http://people-vs-drchilledair.blogspot.com/
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
23597
From: samfilms2003
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 3:25pm
Subject: Re: More on "The Aviator"
> http://people-vs-drchilledair.blogspot.com/
"Why, in the name of gawd, would anyone want to go to a movie about women
beating the crap out of one another? (Now, mud wrestling. . .that's another matter.) "
Diogenes can put down the flashlight, One honest critic in the US !!!!
p.s. The 2 strip is faked, you can't really do 2 strip or 3 strip now.
Essentially Impossible.
-Sam
23598
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 3:57pm
Subject: Paths of Glory
the
> argument that PATHS OF GLORY, for instance, is actually a pro-war
> movie, is an unusual one not often aired. The arguments involved in
> showing that so-called anti-war films actually make the audience
want
> to see good guys kill bad guys are actually quite complex.
Do you think this to be the case, DC? Because it's about as antiwar
as you can get. Even Douglas's heroism is undercut by showing him
preparing to lead his men back to the front.
23599
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 4:08pm
Subject: Re: More on "The Aviator"
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003" wrote:
"p.s. The 2 strip is faked, you can't really do 2 strip or 3 strip
now. Essentially Impossible."
It's faked alright, but it's not imposssible to do either one, or so
says John Erland who gave a discourse on color, optics and foolish
decisions made by Technicolor Corp. not to explore color technology
when there was interest by the majors. He also said that Technicolor
makes 2 or 3 dye transfer prints at the director's request if they
get the run. I saw one of those for THE AVIATOR when it was screened
for the sci-tech crowd at the Goldwyn Theater. Needless to say it
was stunning.
Richard
23600
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Mar 1, 2005 4:14pm
Subject: Scorsese/Rivette (Was:More on "The Aviator")
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "samfilms2003" wrote:
>
>
> Diogenes can put down the flashlight, One honest critic in the
US !!!!
>
> p.s. The 2 strip is faked, you can't really do 2 strip or 3 strip
now.
> Essentially Impossible.
>
> -Sam
And if I understand Noel's structures, should be called two-color,
not two-strip. I enjoyed the piece too - talk about "thin-slicing!"
I'd like to add that I just rewatched Bringing Out the Dead and loved
it even more the second time. Scorsese is in an interesting place,
not unlike Rivette post-Filles du feu: no longer trying to shoot the
moon, just making movies. This may cause regret among admirers of
Raging Bull and Last Temptation, but I'm sure it will make for a
pleasanter life for the director, and a longer one, where he can
bless us with films as good as Dead and Aviator once a year, and
occasionally a great one like Casino. The fact that Gangs went as
badly as it did, for whatever reasons, will only encourage him to
stop trying to recapture his earlier mode and continue exploring the
new one.
Like La belle noiseuse, Bringing Out the Dead seems to me to be an
apologia pro vita sua - ie an ironic apology by the filmmaker for
still being alive. It is also a wonderful film about NY, a visual
treat with more ideas per minute than most films manage in two hours,
and very funny.
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact