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.
15101
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 3:04pm
Subject: Re: Re: Multi-Region DVD Players
You know, when the CyberHome turned out to be so cheap (my wife got it for
me for about $40) I thought about adding a second one -- we have two VCRs
and two TVs. Then it dawned on me, I'm not using it to record and I can only
watch one movie at a time. (I know, it's a flaw in my critical technique.)
So the question, then, is: why would I need a second DVD player?
But thanks anyway,
g
What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible.
-- Theodore Roethke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Keller"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [a_film_by] Re: Multi-Region DVD Players
>
>
> On Friday, September 3, 2004, at 05:29 PM, Dave Kehr wrote:
>
> > --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
> > wrote:
> >> I don't know about the PAL NTSC thing -- hasn't come up for me yet.
> >>
> > You do need to buy a player that converts PAL to NTSC as well as
> > removes the region protection. I have a Malata but they aren't hard
> > to find on e-bay or the Asian DVD sites.
>
> I have a Malata as well -- very happy with it. George, since you're in
> New York, you can also buy one at Kim's on St. Mark's (that's where I
> got mine), but it might be cheaper to order online. I'm not sure.
>
> cmk.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
15102
From: Robert Keser
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 3:33pm
Subject: Re: Okay America
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
> Anyone ever see the above-referenced Tay Garnett? It's playing at
> Cinecom. Same year as Her Man.
Unfortunately, I can't say I've seen Okay America, but Clive
Hirschhorn's book on Universal calls it "dreary", though you wonder
whether he actually saw it. Jean-Pierre in "American Directors I"
seems more enthusiastic, comparing it to proto-fascist spectacles
like This Day and Age and Gabriel Over the White House. (JPC can, of
course, speak for himself!).
--Robert Keser
15103
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:08pm
Subject: Re: Another roast for Dave Kehr - REBECCA vs. SHADOW OF A DOUBT
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> Purely on the level of drama, Shadow is much tighter than Rebecca.
I think
> the latter suffers when The Law, the court proceedings and the more
pronounced
> presence of Max, returns for the last half hour or so. But without
The Law, the
> Disney aspect of the film wouldn't be so magical.
>
> Kevin John
It's a magical tale -- Hitchcock was influenced by Du Maurier
throughout his career. For a Disneyesque Hitchcock film made under an
RKO loan-out contract that didn't permit DOS to set foot on the sound
stage or even view rushes, see Notorious (aka Snow White and the
Seven Dwarves). I should have mentioned a great piece on Shadow by
Ronnie Scheib that appeared in Film Comment about 30 years
ago, "Charlie's Uncle." Never reprinted as far as I know.
15104
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:12pm
Subject: Re: History is made by "What?" (was: anachronistic language ..)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jess Amortell"
wrote:
Definitely an Ur-What.
I wonder what What Polanski was using in the title of my (guilty)
favorite Polanski film.
15105
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:18pm
Subject: Re: Re: History is made by "What?" (was: anachronistic language ..)
--- hotlove666 wrote:
>
> I wonder what What Polanski was using in the title
> of my (guilty)
> favorite Polanski film.
>
>
I love it too -- a perfect combination of "The
Exterminating Angel" and "Little Annie Fannie."
Whatever became of Sydne Rome anyway?
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15106
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:19pm
Subject: Re: Multi-Region DVD Players
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "George Robinson"
wrote:
> You know, when the CyberHome turned out to be so cheap (my wife got
it for
> me for about $40) I thought about adding a second one
Tipped by Cinefile's Hadrian Belove (aka habelove) that Best Buys was
selling them for $90 a few years ago and didn't know they were multi-
regional, I threaded my way through towering piles of other brands to
the almost exhausted Cyberhome section (word gets around) and bought
my first DVD player. That Christmas I gave one to my ex- , for whom
it opened a world of DVDs from home and American films with French
tracks (her latest discovery: Albert Brooks' Mother, "Better than
Pagnol!"). Last year I bought one from Hadrian for my stepson who had
been constantly borrowing mine and forgetting to give it back. Peace,
it's wonderful!
15107
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:20pm
Subject: Re: Okay America
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Keser" wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
> wrote:
> > Anyone ever see the above-referenced Tay Garnett? It's playing at
> > Cinecom. Same year as Her Man.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't say I've seen Okay America, but Clive
> Hirschhorn's book on Universal calls it "dreary", though you wonder
> whether he actually saw it. Jean-Pierre in "American Directors I"
> seems more enthusiastic, comparing it to proto-fascist spectacles
> like This Day and Age and Gabriel Over the White House. (JPC can,
of
> course, speak for himself!).
>
> --Robert Keser
But where is he? Hiding from Frances? Hope he's okay...
15108
From: Ruy Gardnier
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:21pm
Subject: Re: Brown Bunny
Gallo's loathers and lovers should read his interview (in french) for Les
Inrockuptibles (cover: himself and Jim Jarmusch). He talks about the Cannes
print and his final one, his own, which is 30-minutes shorter. I love the
film and have written about it for Contracampo on Sept-Oct-2003. It reminded
me also of Bob Rafelson's "Five Easy Pieces". So the reference on Jack
Nicholson gets even more amusing, Bill.
ruy
----- Original Message -----
From: "hotlove666"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 2:44 AM
Subject: [a_film_by] Brown Bunny
> So what's not to like? It's a painter's film -- I like every shot.
> Actually, it the visual quality drops at the end, but at least that
> part's honest. I remember Monte Hellman's comment on the Buffalo 66
> script, which he'd have loved to direct -- he said that Gallo had the
> potential to be a better actor than Jack Nicholson because, as
> evidenced by that script, he had a capacity to be honest about
> himself that Nicholson lacked. (For those who haven't seen it -- like
> me! -- he plays a manic loser who's afraid to take his underwear off
> to bathe, but is saved by love anyway.) Bunny is replete with Two-
> Lane Blacktop tributes, but it isn't in any way a Hellman film.
> Cheers to Cannes for even showing it.
15109
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 4:22pm
Subject: Re: History is made by "What?" (was: anachronistic language ..)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> Whatever became of Sydne Rome anyway?
Actually, she was drawn by Harvey Kutzman for that production and now
hangs in Carlo Ponti's rumpus room.
15110
From:
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 0:47pm
Subject: Re: History is made by "What?" (was: anachronistic language ..)
Excellent post, Monty. I'm on a mission now for similar whats strewn
throughout cinema history.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15111
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 5:05pm
Subject: Re: History is made by "What?" (was: anachronistic language ..)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> Excellent post, Monty. I'm on a mission now for similar whats
strewn
> throughout cinema history.
>
> Kevin John
>
Try the films of Arthur Ripley, whose uncredited rewrites are
responsible for the avant-garde aspects of History Is Made at Night.
Any excuse to re-see Thunder Road is good, right?
15112
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 5:09pm
Subject: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
Can anyone explain the "I went gay all of a sudden" line in BRINGING
UP BABY? 'Gay' is clearly being used in its modern sense, to
mean 'homosexual' - the word simply has no other meaning in the
context of this scene (in which Cary Grant is being asked why he is
wearing a woman's dressing gown).
Did the word gay already mean homosexual in certain circles during
the 30s? Or does the modern meaning actually derive from BRINGING UP
BABY?
15113
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 5:15pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- thebradstevens wrote:
> Can anyone explain the "I went gay all of a sudden"
> line in BRINGING
> UP BABY? 'Gay' is clearly being used in its modern
> sense, to
> mean 'homosexual' - the word simply has no other
> meaning in the
> context of this scene (in which Cary Grant is being
> asked why he is
> wearing a woman's dressing gown).
>
Correct. No other meaning.
> Did the word gay already mean homosexual in certain
> circles during
> the 30s? Or does the modern meaning actually derive
> from BRINGING UP
> BABY?
>
>
It already meant homosexual.
And the line was an ad lib.
Chapter One of my book "Open Secret: Gay Hollywood
1928-2000" (William Morrow/HarperCollins) is entitled
"Gay All of a Sudden."
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15114
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 5:55pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
> > Did the word gay already mean homosexual in certain
> > circles during
> > the 30s? Or does the modern meaning actually derive
> > from BRINGING UP
> > BABY?
> >
> >
>
> It already meant homosexual.
>
> And the line was an ad lib.
This is based on VERY spotty research, but reading Production Code
files on Hitchcock films, I got a sense that you had to hit them over
the head with the idea that a charcater was gay for them to react.
It's explicitly stated re: Leonard in Lehman's script of NBNW and was
accordingly flagged by Shurlock before the start of production, with
a warning not to make it too obvious. But Chandler's initial drafts
of Strangers on a Train, which were all vetted by the PC folk,
contain broad visual and dialogue hints about Bruno that simply were
not noticed.
A famous case of the PC not knowing what a slang word meant
is "gunsel" re: Wilmer in The Maltese Falcon. In underworld slang it
meant "boy toy," but Hammett got away with it in the book and Huston
got away with leaving it in the movie because no one knew.
15115
From: Richard Modiano
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 6:23pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
"A famous case of the PC not knowing what a slang word meant
is 'gunsel' re: Wilmer in The Maltese Falcon. In underworld slang it
meant 'boy toy,' but Hammett got away with it in the book and Huston
got away with leaving it in the movie because no one knew."
"Gunsel" is actually a Yiddish word, and a Yiddish dictionary says
it's meaning is cognate with catamite. A Hammett biography (I forget
which one, maybe Nolan's) says the PC objected to the line "How long
you been off the gooseberry lay" (and this *was* an underworld
expression)reading a sexual connotation into it when it refers to
stealing from old ladies. It was duly explained by Hammett and
stayed in the picture. On the other hand, Nick Charles remark about
having an erection was deleted from the pre-Code THE THIN MAN.
Another Cary Grant ad lib in a Hawk's picture occurs in HIS GIRL
FRIDAY: "You know what happened to poor Archie Leitch!"
Richard
15116
From:
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 2:24pm
Subject: Thunder Road (was :History is made by "What?")
Thunder Road left me a bit cold. I dug it fine but I didn't feel "the
white-hot juncture of fact and legend" (Richard Thompson via Dave Kehr). I guess I
expected something a bit more visceral, more junky. But the presence of Jim
Mitchum blew my mind. His scenes with Pops were almost like Dead Ringers. And what
a cutie! Woof-woof!!
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15117
From: Joseph Kaufman
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 6:38pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
>It already meant homosexual.
It shows up with that meaning in a 1935 slang dictionary, according to the OED.
--
- Joe Kaufman
15118
From:
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 3:00pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
In a message dated 9/4/04 1:47:05 PM, tharpa2002@y... writes:
> Another Cary Grant ad lib in a Hawk's picture occurs in HIS GIRL
> FRIDAY: "You know what happened to poor Archie Leitch!"
>
A classic. But how do we know these were ad-libs? By comparison with what
exactly? Published scripts? Various drafts? Anecdotes? Biographies?
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15119
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 7:13pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
. But how do we know these were ad-libs? By
> comparison with what
> exactly? Published scripts? Various drafts?
> Anecdotes? Biographies?
>
Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
15120
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 8:24pm
Subject: Re: Class Relations in H'wd (not OT, IMO)
> By LAURA WIDES, Associated Press Writer
> September 3, 2004
>
> LOS ANGELES - A Filipino woman who won $825,000 in a lawsuit
claiming
> a Hollywood executive and his wife enslaved her said the case
should
> be a warning to others.
Good for her!
A good film on Filipino domestic workers is Tikoy Aguiluz's "Bagong
Bayani" (The Last Wish), a docudrama on Flor Contemplacion, the
housemaid hanged by the Singaporean government for allegedly
murdering a fellow Filipina. It's a fairly evenhanded account of
what happened (okay, Aguiluz believes she was innocent, but he shows
both versions), and tries to situate the story in a larger context.
15121
From: Noel Vera
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 8:30pm
Subject: Re: Another roast for Dave Kehr - REBECCA vs. SHADOW OF A DOUBT
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
> Purely on the level of drama, Shadow is much tighter than Rebecca.
I think
> the latter suffers when The Law, the court proceedings and the
more pronounced
> presence of Max, returns for the last half hour or so. But without
The Law, the
> Disney aspect of the film wouldn't be so magical.
Shadow is a masterpiece of a kind, what with Hitchcock successfully
recreating the texture and feel of ordinary small-town life in
America, and the kind of malevolent shadow that can stalk its
outskirts.
Rebecca is something of a flub; I remember the final sequence in the
book (which is heavily influenced by Jane Eyre) to be much more
haunting. Plus you really need the opening sequence of the two
living together in a kind of exile to really complete the picture.
15122
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 8:59pm
Subject: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
Jon Jost has published a press release on his web site that's riddled with lies. Worst of
all, the threat of a film on his various phony accusations:
http://www.jonjost.com/press/clarafilm.html
Check it out just to see how far out there this guy is, selling himself as the person
responsible for "exposing" this alleged Portuguese pedophile ring scandal.
Gabe
15123
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 9:23pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
Thanks for linking this, gabe. I hadn't heard about
any of this before. It sounds like a classic custody
dispute, magnified and distorted beyond all
recognition by the fact that both parents are
filmmakers.
I feel really sorry for the girl.
--- Gabe Klinger wrote:
> Jon Jost has published a press release on his web
> site that's riddled with lies. Worst of
> all, the threat of a film on his various phony
> accusations:
>
> http://www.jonjost.com/press/clarafilm.html
>
> Check it out just to see how far out there this guy
> is, selling himself as the person
> responsible for "exposing" this alleged Portuguese
> pedophile ring scandal.
>
> Gabe
>
>
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15124
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 10:08pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, David Ehrenstein
wrote:
>
> --- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> . But how do we know these were ad-libs? By
> > comparison with what
> > exactly? Published scripts? Various drafts?
> > Anecdotes? Biographies?
> >
>
> Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.
I haven't seen a Girl Friday script, but the line about "going gay"
isn't in the Baby script, any draft. In fact, quite a bit isn't. The
production reports at UCLA note faithfully that the morning of most
shooting days was spent "Rehearsing and lining up" -- ie improvising,
trying stuff and rewriting the script -- particularly when they moved
to the soundstages representing "Connecticut," where virtually
nothing got shot till the afternoon. That's where the "gay" line
popped out. Whose idea was it? We need other info for that, but Grant
seems the likeliest suspect.
15125
From: hotlove666
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 10:17pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Gabe Klinger"
wrote:
> Jon Jost has published a press release on his web site that's
riddled with lies. Worst of
> all, the threat of a film on his various phony accusations:
>
Just a reminder to the young bloods: Jon has been a great filmmaker --
I don't know if he still is, because I haven't seen anything he has
done since All the Vermeers in New York, which I didn't like. See
Last Chants for a Slow Dance and Slow Moves if you haven't, Gabe.
He's also entitled to carp at anyone else's description of himself
as "independent" -- he absolutely was the real thing when he made
those two films, something few can claim. (I don't know about that
thoroughbred ranch Paolo is supposed to own -- I'll ask my niece to
look it up.) And for what it's worth, he spent a lot of time in jail
for draft resistance during the Vietnam War. I gather he has been
making wild statements about this matter, but let's please keep Jon
Jost, filmmaker and political activist, in some kind of historical
perspective.
15126
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 10:28pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "What?")
--- hotlove666 wrote:
Whose idea was it? We need other info
> for that, but Grant
> seems the likeliest suspect.
>
>
But of course. And thereby hangs a tail that only
tangentially includes Randolph Scott.
Orry-Kelly was far more important to furthering Cary's
career.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15127
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 10:39pm
Subject: Pet's Potemkin
Re. our recent Eisenstein discussion:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2004/09/02/bmpet02.xml
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
15128
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 11:10pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
"Just a reminder to the young bloods: Jon has been a great filmmaker"
He certainly isn't my idea of a great filmmaker. His films reek of
self-satisfaction. Teresa Villaverde, on the other hand, is one of
the greatest filmmakers currently working. AGUA E SAL ('Water and
Salt') remains among my favourite films of recent years: a
masterpiece fully the equal of anything by Hou Hsiao-hsien or Abbas
Kiarostami.
Still, that press release does criticize Paolo Branco by pointing out
that "Mr Branco's films never make money", so I guess Jon at least
has a sense of humor!
15129
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 11:42pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
> "Just a reminder to the young bloods: Jon has been a great
filmmaker"
>
> He certainly isn't my idea of a great filmmaker. His films reek of
> self-satisfaction. Teresa Villaverde, on the other hand, is one of
> the greatest filmmakers currently working. AGUA E SAL ('Water and
> Salt') remains among my favourite films of recent years: a
> masterpiece fully the equal of anything by Hou Hsiao-hsien or
Abbas
> Kiarostami.
I don't know which Jost films you've seen, Brad, but I certainly
don't think LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE and REMBRANDT LAUGHING reek
of self-satisfaction--even if JJ, in the tradition of his mentor
Godard, is sometimes limited by his self-imposed isolation. He and
Villaverde are both important filmmakers to be reckoned with
(although I'm still hoping to catch up with AGUA E SAL).
15130
From: George Robinson
Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 11:57pm
Subject: OT, but very useful: Country search engines and Regional Search Engines
This is an almost hilarious tribute to Internet excess, but many of us
will find
it useful.
Nearly 2100 hundred search engines for 216 countries and regions.
I dare you to look for "film AND/OR movies" in all of them. (If you have
a lifetime or two to spare).
George (excess is my middle name -- that's why I did my master's thesis
on Minnelli) Robinson
http://www.philb.com/countryse.htm
--
Fiction was invented the day Jonah arrived
home and told his wife he was three days
late because he had been swallowed by a whale.
-- Gabriel Garcia Marquez
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15131
From: peckinpah20012000
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 0:04am
Subject: Re: Multi-Region DVD Players
-Thanks Everyone for responding to my question and giving me reliable
information.
Tony Williams
15132
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 3:53am
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan Rosenbaum"
wrote:
> I don't know which Jost films you've seen, Brad, but I certainly
> don't think LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE and REMBRANDT LAUGHING
reek
> of self-satisfaction
And let me add, as Jost films you may want to check out, Brad, Bell
Diamond, Chameleon and Angel City. Maybe when you have seen those and
the three JR and I already listed, you'll want to do your next book
about Jon Jost!
15133
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 4:13am
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
Bill: 6 EASY PIECES and MURI ROMANI are the last (and only) films of his I've seen. I
thought both were awkwardly presented, and may have worked more effectively as
gallery installations.
Brad: Is it fair to say that Jost sabotaged AGUA E SAL with all of the bad press at the
time? I remember he even moved that the Biennale not show it, on the grounds that
Villaverde is a criminal, etc. One of the only articles I've read on the film, in the
Argentine El Amante, merely noted the scandal around Clara Jost. Did the film even
open in France? I saw it in Brazil, on a very OK screener at the offices of the Mostra.
Anyway, I'm glad you like it!! For a while there I thought I was the only one holding the
torch. Now my friends will believe me... maybe. God help us one of these days
someone will bring back her teen rebellion flick, OS MUTANTES. And A IDADE MAIOR,
starring ... yup ... Vinnie Gallo.
15134
From: hotlove666
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 7:02am
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Gabe Klinger"
wrote:
> Bill: 6 EASY PIECES and MURI ROMANI are the last (and only) films
of his I've seen. I
> thought both were awkwardly presented, and may have worked more
effectively as
> gallery installations.
I have no idea -- I haven't seen his video work, although I believe I
could rent those two at Rocket Video. IMO, Jon suffered from being
picked up by the wave of conventionally financed indie filmmaking
when he got that producer in the late 80s, early 90s (I also didn't
see Rembrandt Laughing, BTW), and he may have been led further astray
by moving to Portugal, then by the digital revolution. I just haven't
seen any of that stuff.
A perhaps parallel example: I've only been able to see one of the
dozen films Robert Kramer made after he left the states, Doc's
Kingdom, and it certainly wasn't much compared to Ice, which I resaw
recently, and Milestones, which I saw once at Lincoln Center and will
never forget. Not being a frequenter of festivals, however, it's hard
for me to even see enough of the work of these filmmakers to make a
judgement.
You really should try to see Last Chants for a Slow Dance, which
probably isn't all that much easier to get hold of than the films
you're talking about by Jon's ex-wife. When I saw it, he was
literally hand distributing it by selling copies after college
screenings. Ditto Slow Moves (with a score composed and sung by the
filmmaker) and the others I mentioned. I bought a bunch and made the
mistake of sending Last Chants to a festival director friend in
France -- never heard anything, and never got it back. It is a
brilliant film, which I really need to re-see, BTW, for my SK book.
I doubt if Jon sabotaged the release of his ex-wife's latest film in
France, where he has never even been shown as far as I know. He made
the mistake of pissing a few people off when he met them at
festivals -- Daney, most notably -- and I could never sell him to
them. If Paolo produced the film, Jon's jeremiads would have zero
effect on her distribution. Paolo himself might be all the sabotage
needed. One curious thing about him, I'm told, is that he's really
more interested in getting the films made than he is in getting them
seen, which makes him the reverse of H'wd, driven by marketing.
Anyway, just being on the juries at Venice and Torino 2 years running
enabled me to see lots of great indie films -- Giravolte, Benzina, My
Nation, Noite, O Fantasma -- of which only the latter made it to
Paris and the US (though Benzina was briefly supposed to be getting
some kind of release here, and I think My Nation, which we
unanimously voted to give the prize to, was shown in NY). Getting
distribution, or even festival space, for independent work is very
hard, period.
15135
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 9:52am
Subject: re: Jost & Villaverde
I must add my voice to the swelling chorus: Jon Jost IS a great filmmaker.
For me, his 'Tom Blair Trilogy' (named after the lead actor) of LAST CHANTS
FOR A SLOW DANCE, SURE FIRE and THE BED YOU SLEEP IN constitute one of the
absolute summits of American cinema (and I mean including commercial,
avant-garde, animated, documentary, everything). And there are other great
films of his, like ANGEL CITY.
In Australia, we were lucky: through Festivals and leftie-run film courses
(god bless 'em), films like ANGEL CITY (a true 'American Godard'
achievement) were mother's-milk for first year media-studies students! - and
we got to follow his work all the way up to about 1993. (I haven't been able
to catch much of the subsequent video period.) To watch THE BED YOU SLEEP IN
with a uniformly shaken and WEEPING full-house audience of young cinephiles
at the Melbourne Cinematheque was one of the great viewing experiences of my
life.
Jim Hillier, going very much against the drift of MOVIE magazine, wrote an
excellent piece on Jost there in the late '70s. Jost is, equally, completely
outside the Carney-approved vision of American Indie cinema, because he is
so radical on every level, from ideology to on-set creativity to financing
and self-marketing. Not to mention the even more blinkered Sundance-approved
vision!
There's no need to take sides: Villaverde is also an important filmmaker;
one of her films came on TV here and I was spellbound. I wish we could all
see more of both their films.
Adrian
15136
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 11:10am
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
"Is it fair to say that Jost sabotaged AGUA E SAL with all of the bad
press at the time? "
To be honest, I'd imagine that Jost's hate campaign might have served
to draw some attention (albeit the wrong kind of attention) to AGUA E
SAL, and make people curious to see it. But even that doesn't seem to
have been the case - the film has just disappeared. I saw it at the
London Film Festival (with English subtitles), and subsequently
picked up the video from Portugal (there doesn't seem to be a DVD).
Would love to get hold of a subtitled copy.
OS MUTANTES is another masterpiece, as is I IDADE MAJOR (at least if
I can judge from the German-subtitled copy I saw).
15137
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 11:33am
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
"I don't know which Jost films you've seen, Brad, but I certainly
don't think LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE and REMBRANDT LAUGHING"
I saw several of Jost's films when Channel 4 ran a retrospective
(which included LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE and ANGEL CITY) in the
mid-80s, and subsequently saw ALL THE VERMEERS IN NEW YORK and maybe
a couple of others. SPEAKING DIRECTLY is unintentionally hilarious,
since it's basically a 'straight' remake of DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY,
complete with a scene in which the filmmaker's best friend mounts a
direct-to-camera critique of the project.
15138
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 11:50am
Subject: McGilligan's Hitchcock
Am reading, and enjoying, McGilligan's Hitchcock biography. Some
susrprising new revelations and insights into Hitchcock's life and
marriage.
There's an error I want to point out though in case it gets repeated
and accepted. McGilligan's account of Bernanrd Herrmann's departure
from TORN CURTAIN suggests that Hitchcock fell into an argument
resulting in the composer's quitting, while listening to "the first
recording" of the score. The implication is that the two men were
sitting listening to a rough tape of the score.
In fact, the event was the actual recording session of the score, and
the argument took place in front of a full orchestra. Herrmann
pleaded with Hitch to let him finish recording the score, since the
orchestra, hall, technicians etc were all paid for anyway, and
Hitchcock refused.
I can see how the mistake has been made - McGilligan has read
somewhere that the director and his composer fell out while Hitch was
listening to the recording of the score, and mistaken this
for "listening to A recording of the score."
His adding of word "first", to make it "the first recording" suggests
that he believes scores are routinely performed and recorded (at
massive expense!) then rewritten and re-recorded, which betrays a
worrying ignorance of film industry practices.
Firing Herrmann(or goading him until he quit) in front of his
orchestra is obviously more hurtful than doing it privately, and
previous Hitch's tetlgram to Herrmann, which McGilligan reproduces,
seems to hint that the thing may have been premeditated.
The mistake by McGilligan is a sad missed opportunity, since it comes
at a pointn when many of Hitch's long-term collaborators dying. Why
did Hitch seemingly divest himself of John Michael Hayes, Saul Bass
and Bernard Herrmann around this time? A proper examination of this
question is impossible with the facts so confused.
15139
From: cairnsdavid1967
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 11:52am
Subject: Re: Malcolm McDowell on Lindsay Anderson
I saw McDowell's Edinburgh show and would recommend it to anyone who
can catch it in London.
McDowell doesn't seem capable of a really in-depth analysis of the
work, but he quotes correspondence and memoirs from Anderson and many
of his collaborators to create a rounded picture.
It's also VERY funny in places.
15140
From: Fred Camper
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 3:45pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
Whatever the merits, or absence of merit, in Jost's films (I'm not much
of a fan), he can be highly problematic as a person. The hysteria of the
tirade Brad linked to was matched by numerous tirades he sent out
against a producer he had had years ago, and his behavior on FrameWorks
(an avant-garde film email list) some years back was troubling to say
the least: he violated the basic protocols of 'Net communication,
posting others' (my own) writing without permission and with numerous
errors his mistyping introduced, forwarding off list communications to
the list without the writer's permission, mounting unprovoked attacks on
issues that had been discussed long ago, using the list to try to get
its members to pay a good sized fee to see his videos, and mounting an
arguably bigoted anti-gay attack against a gay list member who irritated
him by stating that said list member had apparently been hoping to have
sex with Jost but then had been disappointed to find that he was
straight (the list member replied that this was totally false, but even
if true, it wouldn't mean anything, as "some of the very best people
have bad taste in men"), and on and on and on. As a result of all this,
I would not trust any communications emanating from Mr. Jost At the same
time that he may be obnoxious in person is no reflection on the possible
merits of his work, as anyone who has known great but highly obnoxious
artists can testify to.
On a more amusing note, I saw Jost present his early short films at a
Museum of Modern Art Cineporobe circa 1975. In their theater, you more
or less had to use a microphone. He announced (quotes are from memory
and necessarily inexact), "Microphones are authoritarian instruments"
(which I sort of agree with, actually) and told us he refused to use
one. Then he said, "So everyone had to move up to the first ten rows so
that you can hear me," and when people didn't do that, he kept insisting
that everyone move up. The irony of his "insistence" resulting from his
anti-authoritarianism apparently escaped him. Later he abruptly
interrupted the discussion by suddenly asking, "Is there a doctor in the
house." There was silence, and I think people were embarrassed or
otherwise puzzled. Then he explained that he was living on a very low
income and pointed to a large boil on his face that he said needed
treatment.
Fred Camper
>
>
15141
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 3:54pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- Fred Camper wrote:
> Whatever the merits, or absence of merit, in Jost's
> films (I'm not much
> of a fan), he can be highly problematic as a person.
> The hysteria of the
> tirade Brad linked to was matched by numerous
> tirades he sent out
> against a producer he had had years ago, and his
> behavior on FrameWorks
> (an avant-garde film email list) some years back was
> troubling to say
> the least
Can a collaboration with Vincent Gallo be far behind?
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15142
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 4:55pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
SPEAKING DIRECTLY is unintentionally hilarious,
> since it's basically a 'straight' remake of DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY,
> complete with a scene in which the filmmaker's best friend mounts
a
> direct-to-camera critique of the project.
I'm not sure how much you're aware, Brad, that DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY
is much more derivative of the French New Wave than SPEAKING
DIRECTLY is or even could have been, given Jost's isolation. (Jost,
who sees very few films, largely became acquainted with Godard by
serving as his and J-P Gorin's west coast driver when they were
touring the west coast in the early 70s--during which time Godard
insisted on various theaters playing one of Jost's shorts before
TOUT VA BIEN and praised his work in interviews. The odds of Jost
having been influenced in any way by DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY are very
close to zero.) Whether you find it hilarious or not--and frankly I
found the same sequence hilarious when I saw the film in Edinburgh
in the mid-70s, after Peter Wollen programmed it, thougn for reasons
different from yours, and wrote about some of those reasons in
my "Edinburgh Encounters," reprinted in Placing Movies)--SPEAKING
DIRECTLY has a political lucidity and importance that isn't shared
by McBride's films, despite their many countercultural charms--or
even by many of Godard's, in my opinion.
I'm not trying to defend Jost's behavior outside his talent and
importance as a filmmaker, the latter of which are indisputable in
my opinion. His traumatic relation to his parents--which is touched
on in SPEAKING DIRECTLY, relating to the fact that his father was
both a military professional and, somewhat later, a Jesus freak--has
left many scars, and his relations to women over the years have
tended to end disastrously (the breakup with Teresa was more
cataclysmic because of their child, but it isn't the only time he's
emerged from a relationship with public charges and accusations
against the woman involved). But as someone who's known Jost since
the late 70s, I can also say that he's shown generosity and
thoughtfulness towards film students and younger filmmakers on many
occasions. At the same time, as with Godard, his self-imposed
isolation has often made it impossible for him to deal with other
people, as Fred's examples show.
15143
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 4:55pm
Subject: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
I know that several of Jost's most prominent defenders are pretty
hostile towards Woody Allen. But what, essentially, is the difference
between Jost's imitations of Godard and Allen's imitations of Bergman?
15144
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 5:15pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
"DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY is much more derivative of the French New Wave
than SPEAKING DIRECTLY is or even could have been"
Not sure what you mean by 'derivative' - McBride's film is clearly in
the 'nouvelle vague' tradition, but it's not the work of somebody
trying to simply imitate films he happens to admire.
"Jost, who sees very few films, largely became acquainted with Godard
by serving as his and J-P Gorin's west coast driver"
Did you read Jost's article about Nicholas Ray in the Spring 1981
SIGHT AND SOUND? Jost actually boasts that "I had never seen a Nick
Ray film". According to Bernard Eisenschitz's Ray biography, Ray
watched Jost's LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE. In other words, Ray, who
was dying, actually bothered to screen one of Jost's films, but Jost
didn't have the courtesy to return the favor.
"The odds of Jost having been influenced in any way by DAVID
HOLZMAN'S DIARY are very close to zero."
I never meant to imply that Jost had stolen ideas from DAVID
HOLZMAN'S DIARY. Quite the contrary. Nobody who had seen DHD could
have so unselfconsciously indulged in precisely the kind of narcissim
McBride was parodying.
15145
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 5:36pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
Sort of out-of-line with the rest of this thread, but small question --
how is "Jon Jost" pronounced? Two hard English/American "J"s, or "Yon
Yost," or some combination thereof? And is the "o" in "Jost" an "ah"
or an "oh"?
craig.
15146
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 6:00pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
> I know that several of Jost's most prominent defenders are pretty
> hostile towards Woody Allen. But what, essentially, is the
difference
> between Jost's imitations of Godard and Allen's imitations of
Bergman?
The diferences are immense. The importance of Jost's political
analyses in SPEAKING DIRECTLY are what he says politically--not a
few of the tools he happens to use in order to articulate them,
which are strictly incidental. Do you sincerely think that either
Woody Allen or Bergman have original or important things to say
about politics? I assume you don't. So why compare either of them
with a filmmaker working absolutely alone, without a crew or any
industrial system to back him up, trying to grapple with what's
happening in the U.S. in relation to both the world and his own life
at that point in time?
Art may be "eternal," but historical grounding is crucial, and your
comparisons all seem to show indifference to the existential,
political, and social situations of the filmmakers in relation to
their audiences. I would argue that these things are equally
important factors in what I value about Jost and don't value about
Allen.
15147
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 6:07pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
> "DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY is much more derivative of the French New
Wave
> than SPEAKING DIRECTLY is or even could have been"
>
> Not sure what you mean by 'derivative'
What I mean is that McBride's film could never have been made
without the New Wave.
>
> Did you read Jost's article about Nicholas Ray in the Spring 1981
> SIGHT AND SOUND? Jost actually boasts that "I had never seen a
Nick
> Ray film". According to Bernard Eisenschitz's Ray biography, Ray
> watched Jost's LAST CHANTS FOR A SLOW DANCE. In other words, Ray,
who
> was dying, actually bothered to screen one of Jost's films, but
Jost
> didn't have the courtesy to return the favor.
I was living two blocks from Ray in New York while he was dying, and
lent the Nicholas Ray issue of Movie to Jost at the time he and Ray
were contemplating work together. (He never returned it, by the way.
And, for whatever it's worth, I don't think Jon was boasting about
not having seen a Ray film--just telling the truth, although you're
certainly entitled to feel appalled about this.) Susan Ray found
Jost so negative that she more or less gave Jost his walking papers,
and, under the circumstances, I believe she was right to have done
this.
15148
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 6:08pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Craig Keller
wrote:
>
> Sort of out-of-line with the rest of this thread, but small
question --
> how is "Jon Jost" pronounced?
Two hard English/American "J"s and an "oh".
15149
From: thebradstevens
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 6:41pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
"Do you sincerely think that either Woody Allen or Bergman have
original or important things to say about politics? I assume you
don't. So why compare either of them with a filmmaker working
absolutely alone, without a crew or any industrial system to back him
up, trying to grapple with what's happening in the U.S. in relation
to both the world and his own life at that point in time?"
If I really felt that Jost was trying to do this, I would value his
work highly. It's the films' general air of narcissism which makes me
suspect his motives. Of course there's a difference between Bergman
and Godard (though I would be the last person to suggest that the
director of PERSONA had nothing original or important to say about
politics). But I don't see any essential difference between Jost and
Allen (aside from the fact that Allen works with a crew and industry
backing): both directors are motivated by a desire to show that they
can make films just like those of the European auteurs they admire -
the role models are very different, but the impulses behind the work
are absolutely identical. Which is another way of saying that I don't
believe Jost's politics are sincere - his work simply reeks of
insincerity and self-satisfaction, and the more he goes on about how
low his budgets are (see especially the introduction to ANGEL CITY),
the more he reminds me of a used car salesman telling a potential
customer about this unbelievable bargain that's just appeared on the
lot (an accusation I don't think anyone could make of the equivalent
scene at the start of Godard's TOUT VA BIEN).
15150
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 7:12pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Villaverde
Bill:
> You really should try to see Last Chants for a Slow Dance, which
> probably isn't all that much easier to get hold of than the films
> you're talking about by Jon's ex-wife.
I've been waiting for the opportunity to come up, especially since Jost is from Chicago
and when I moved back here five years ago there were (are) several adamant fans --
and still high off the BED YOU SLEEP IN. His films have been shown with semi-
regularity at Doc Films (University of Chi), though I've never been around when they
were happening.
Facets has several on tape (more than I expected). One can do an entire Jost weekend.
> I doubt if Jon sabotaged the release of his ex-wife's latest film in
> France, where he has never even been shown as far as I know.
> Paolo himself might be all the sabotage
> needed.
...
>Getting
> distribution, or even festival space, for independent work is very
> hard, period.
True dat.
That Jost's tirade brought the wrong kind of attention to the film is a more than
reasonable way of looking at it. I don't really hold anything against him; never met
him, I had heard of his Frameworks trouble long ago; but as Adrian once wrote on
another troublesome figure in film history, I don't think that because of his solitude
(and family history) we should be (any more or less) forgiving of his malevolence. He
just comes off as an obnoxious, possibly dangerous guy.
15151
From: Fred Camper
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 7:45pm
Subject: Re: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
I never thought I would find myself defending the work of Jon Jost,
since the most I've ever found it was vaguely "interesting," but, but, but.
Virtually everything I've seen of his shares with much of the
avant-garde a certain type of modernism, and one which I value highly.
The viewer is placed in an active position, a position of trying to
piece together the parts, a position of interrogating those parts for
meaning. How much I value a film in the end depends on the results of
that interrogation, but one could argue that this form itself is
inherently "political" in that it seeks a different role for the viewer
than the passive-receptor position assigned by much mainstream narrative
cinema. And I do argue this. I'm no expert on Woody Allen, and have seen
only a few of his films (and that was more than enough for me), but I am
prepared to say that I saw *none* of this quality in, say, "Annie Hall"
or "Manhattan." There may have been superficial moments of syllogistic
disconnection, but they struck me as mannerisms rather than stabs at a
structure that would call for an active viewer.
Fred Camper
15152
From: Craig Keller
Date: Sun Sep 5, 2004 10:14pm
Subject: Dreyer tonight
Program note: tonight on TCM, 'Carl Theodor Dreyer - Min métier,'
followed by 'La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc,' followed by 'Vampyr.'
cmk.
15153
From: Chris Fujiwara
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 2:44am
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
Last Chants for a Slow Dance, a terrific film, has about as much in
common with Woody Allen as Too Early, Too Late does with It's a Mad
Mad Mad Mad World.
15154
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 3:33am
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Fujiwara"
wrote:
> Last Chants for a Slow Dance, a terrific film, has about as much in
> common with Woody Allen as Too Early, Too Late does with It's a Mad
> Mad Mad Mad World.
True nuff.
I hear Brad's critique of narcissim, but the only film in which Jon
appears is Speaking. Last Chants is about a serial killer played by a
great actor -- no Jon in sight. It definitely contains a scene of a
pool game in a bar that could be accused of narcissism in that Jon's
use of the camera and source-lighting there, combined with the great
country tune he wrote, strums and sings on the soundtrack during the
sequence, catches your eye and ear (not just the music, BTW), but
only in the sense that every great virtuoso sequence from Ray to
Godard to Kiarostami calls attention to the filmmaker's talent and
vision. Many, many directors have chosen to appear in their films as
directly as Jon in that one film you so dislike, which is a personal
statement: Moullet is just the first who comes to mind -- add
Dwoskin, Akerman, McBride (in Pictures from Life's Other Side),
Cassavetes, Monteiro, Ray, Godard and many avant-garde masters others
could list better than I.
The narcissism charge came up recently with The Brown Bunny. There's
a good answer to it in the June Cahiers. Michael Moore gets it too,
paradoxically. It's rarely well-founded, IMO, for reasons that might
be worth exploring here.
Jon has never seen much except Godard. Phillipe Garrel, when he was
making his first films, told the Cahiers the same thing. "Every time
I try to see a film a friend says is great, I just say to myself, 'I
already saw that in a film by Jean-Luc' and get up and leave." I
don't know if that still applies to either Jost or Garrel. In any
case, Last Chants and Slow Moves don't look anything like Godard
films. They're very American, and could only be the work of Jon Jost.
Regrettably, that's not true of Interiors, Another Woman and
September. And apparently -- per Jonathan -- when he made the films I
love, he hadn't even SEEN Godard.
15155
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:00am
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
Read somewhere (perhaps Jonathan Katz's "Gay American History") that the
expression "to go gay" was 1930's Hollywood slang for "having a homosexual
awakening". It is not clear whether "to go gay" derived from the general term "gay",
or whther "to go gay" came first.
In addition to its use in "Bringing Up Baby" (1938), have also run across
this phrase in a prose mystery novel. Anthony Boucher's "The Case of the Solid
Key" (1941) tales place among actors in a little theater near Hollywood. To
quote one of the characters (see the end of Chapter 13):
"I ... changed my manners, my mannerisms. I had 'gone gay', as we say in
Hollywood".
Mike Grost
15156
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:03am
Subject: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
"A Touch of Pink" (Ian Iqbal Rashid) is a civilised comedy-drama. Like "Danny
Deckchair" (Jeff Balsmeyer), it has a warmth largely missing from
contemporary Hollywood film. Try not to miss it during its brief commercial run.
Mike Grost
15157
From: thebradstevens
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 11:25am
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
"the only film in which Jon appears is Speaking. Last Chants is about
a serial killer played by a great actor -- no Jon in sight."
Try watching LAST CHANTS alongside TWO-LANE BLACKTOP. The two films
have a similar tone, but the Jost has an atmosphere of intense
complacency, unjustified intellectual superiority and snide self-
satisfaction which is completely missing from the Hellman.
Now I haven't seen the film for 20 years, and couldn't really justify
this opinion with close reference to detail. But that's the
impression I took I away from the film. It's the impression I took
away from all the Jost films I saw.
"apparently -- per Jonathan -- when he made the films I love, he
hadn't even SEEN Godard."
Yeah, ANGEL CITY does kind of feel like a film made by somebody who
had read descriptions of WEEKEND and ALPHAVILLE but never actually
bothered to see them!
15158
From: Adrian Martin
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 3:36pm
Subject: Crime question
I can't bear reading any more heresy about the great Jon Jost, so here's a
quiz question especially for Mike, or indeed for any other crime-reading
specialists amongst us:
What well-known crime writer put, in the first chapter of a mid '50s novel,
the words Marxism, nymphomania, and mise en scène ???
Adrian
15159
From: jpcoursodon
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 4:41pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> Read somewhere (perhaps Jonathan Katz's "Gay American History")
that the
> expression "to go gay" was 1930's Hollywood slang for "having a
homosexual
> awakening". It is not clear whether "to go gay" derived from the
general term "gay",
> or whther "to go gay" came first.
> In addition to its use in "Bringing Up Baby" (1938), have also run
across
> this phrase in a prose mystery novel. Anthony Boucher's "The Case
of the Solid
> Key" (1941) tales place among actors in a little theater near
Hollywood. To
> quote one of the characters (see the end of Chapter 13):
> "I ... changed my manners, my mannerisms. I had 'gone gay', as we
say in
> Hollywood".
> Mike Grost
The most amazing thing about Grant's "Bringing Up Baby" exclamation
is that it passed the Code of Production's scrutiny. In its
subdivision on SEX the Code stated: "Sex perversion or any inference
to it is forbidden." Further on under "Perversion" we find: "Sadism,
homosexuality, incest, etc., should not even be hinted at in motion
pictures."
15160
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 4:58pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
Anthony Boucher's "The Case of the Solid
> Key" (1941) tales place among actors in a little theater near
Hollywood. To
> quote one of the characters (see the end of Chapter 13):
> "I ... changed my manners, my mannerisms. I had 'gone gay', as we
say in
> Hollywood".
> Mike Grost
Great sleuthing, Mike! Solid Key is a Boucher I'm saving for my olfd
age. Interesting that this sophisticated guy, who also edited The
Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction and reviewed ,ysteries for
the NY Times, knew the phrase. He was based in Berkeley, wasn't he?
15161
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:00pm
Subject: Re: Jost and Woody Allen (was: Jost and Villaverde: The Shit Hits the Fan)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "thebradstevens"
wrote:
>
> Yeah, ANGEL CITY does kind of feel like a film made by somebody who
> had read descriptions of WEEKEND and ALPHAVILLE but never actually
> bothered to see them!
Brad, I salute your unflinching loathing of Jon Jost and all his
works. A good film critic has to know how to hate. I certainly do!
15162
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:03pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "hotlove666"
wrote:
JP - Re: PC cluelessness, see my earlier post on Grant's ejaculation,
15114.
Where have you been? Were you in harm's way w. the storm?
15163
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 1:19pm
Subject: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
Mike, I have to respectfully disagree with you again. I was disappointed with
Touch of Pink. The Cary Grant conceit had a lot of potential. But instead of
diving into a queer wrestle with classical Hollywood cinema, Rashid simply
grafted a cookie-cutter coming out story onto it. I even had problems with the
last encounter with "Cary Grant," lovely though it was on another level. But
Jimi Mistry is divine. He WILL be my husband!
Ugh, GL (BT?) cinema is so sad. What's my beloved François Ozon doing lately?
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15164
From: Fred Camper
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:29pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
jpcoursodon wrote:
>--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
>
>
>The most amazing thing about Grant's "Bringing Up Baby" exclamation
>is that it passed the Code of Production's scrutiny....
>
It doesn't surprise me. "Gay" as a code for "homosexual" was very much
an underground word in 1938, and for quite a while afterwards. Also
Grant's line is spoken very fast.
The OED citation that someone mentioned found "gay" in a 1935
encyclopedia of prison slang; since "gay" had come to mean prostitution
by then I inferred that it would be natural to use for homosexuals in
prison since they are the ones most likely having sex. But it turns out
there are earlier usages, and the origin of the use of the term to mean
homosexual is cloudy; see, for example, http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Gay
Fred Camper
15165
From: hotlove666
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 6:02pm
Subject: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> Ugh, GL (BT?) cinema is so sad. What's my beloved François Ozon
doing lately?
>
> Kevin John
Dunno. I've been renting all his films for Vero, who likes them. Have
you seen the shorts? Cinefile has them -- I can make you a copy to
tide you over if you haven't. I assume you've seen See the Sea, Drops
etc.
15166
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 6:14pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- Fred Camper wrote:
> >
> It doesn't surprise me. "Gay" as a code for
> "homosexual" was very much
> an underground word in 1938, and for quite a while
> afterwards. Also
> Grant's line is spoken very fast.
>
It's not just speed, it's context. What we're looking
at on screen is Grant in a frilly nightgown -- in
short, looking utterly ridiculous.
There were all sorts of ways of getting around the
code on any number of issues. What it was put in place
over was the sexual blatancy of films like "Baby Face"
and the unmistakable innuendo of Mae West.
Mae's system, of course, was to lard her script with
lines she knew the censors would object to the better
to "slip them past the goalie" on the ones she wanted
to keep in. As a result Mae West never really stopped
being Mae West.
Where things get truly interesting is with "Rope." The
censors objected to the original play claiming lines
like "My dear boy" constituted "homosexual dialogue."
So Arthur Laurents was hired -- ostensibly -- to take
such "objectionable" phrases out.
But sending Arthur Laurents to "de-gay" a script is
using gasoline to put out a kitchen fire.
And so with Hitchcock's full apporval, Laurents
crafted the gayest film ever made in Hollywood.
Nothing even remotely like it (not even "The Boys in
the Band" in many ways) until the "New Queer Cinema"
of the 90's -- and that was an indie phenom.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
15167
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 6:19pm
Subject: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> Ugh, GL (BT?) cinema is so sad. What's my beloved
> François Ozon doing lately?
>
Like Almodovar ( the NYT Sunday magazine piece played
havoc with my blood pressure) he's really not
interested in doing gay movies -- just movies with
actresses directed by a gay man.
And when it comes to movies with actresses I much
prefer the metrosexuality of Jacques Rivette.
For me gay means Gus, Todd, and Patrice Chereau.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15168
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 6:58pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
wrote:
>
> The most amazing thing about Grant's "Bringing Up Baby" exclamation
> is that it passed the Code of Production's scrutiny. In its
> subdivision on SEX the Code stated: "Sex perversion or any
inference
> to it is forbidden." Further on under "Perversion" we
find: "Sadism,
> homosexuality, incest, etc., should not even be hinted at in motion
> pictures."
I wonder if the Hays (later Breen) Office ever dealt with the
presence of such nelly character actors as Franklin Pangborn and
Grady Sutton -- wouldn't their appearance in a picture consitute a
hint of homosexuality?
15169
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 7:05pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- Damien Bona wrote:
> --- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, "jpcoursodon"
>
> I wonder if the Hays (later Breen) Office ever dealt
> with the
> presence of such nelly character actors as Franklin
> Pangborn and
> Grady Sutton -- wouldn't their appearance in a
> picture consitute a
> hint of homosexuality?
>
>
Actually they wouldn't. They're quite asexual in their
dealings with everyone. The only exception is "Only
Yesterday" in which Pangborn plays an actual gay
character, complete with boyfriend.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15170
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 8:20pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
> Also
> Grant's line is spoken very fast.
I don't know about that: my memory is that he says "Because I went..." a
little slower than usual, then jumps in the air, stretches out his arms,
and yells "Gay!" You can't draw much more emphasis to a line than that.
Maybe straight culture has to be prepared quite a lot before it even
perceives gay content. Recently I reread Rod McKuen's poem/song "A Cat
Named Sloopy," which I knew pretty well when I was 13 or 14. There's a
passage that reads:
I never told her
but in my mind
I was a midnight cowboy even then.
Riding my imaginary horse
down Forty-second Street,
going off with strangers
to live an hour-long cowboy's life,
but always coming home to Sloopy,
who loved me best.
I never had a clue what McKuen was talking about. Lots of hippies were
reading this poem, which is one of McKuen's most popular - I never heard
anyone point out the homosexual content. (The poem precedes the movie
MIDNIGHT COWBOY, but follows the book - I don't know when the phrase
took on its gay meaning.)
I also remember rumors about Rock Hudson's gayness making their way into
the straight, small-town world every so often in the 60s and 70s. My
distinct recollection is that straight people didn't really want to
believe them, and discounted them.
In short, I think there used to be a semi-conscious forgetfulness, or
repression, of gay signification in the American mainland. It's not
that way now: gay gossip works like any other gossip, sticking to the
gossipee. - Dan
15171
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 8:31pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
> Maybe straight culture has to be prepared quite a
> lot before it even
> perceives gay content.
What it has to be prepared for is acceptance of the
fact that it's not the only game in town.
>
> I also remember rumors about Rock Hudson's gayness
> making their way into
> the straight, small-town world every so often in the
> 60s and 70s.
And as I point out in my book they were there from the
very beginning of his career.
My
> distinct recollection is that straight people didn't
> really want to
> believe them, and discounted them.
>
The operative term is "want."
> In short, I think there used to be a semi-conscious
> forgetfulness, or
> repression, of gay signification in the American
> mainland.
Not even repression so much as elision. It was noted
but "passed over in silence."
It's not
> that way now: gay gossip works like any other
> gossip, sticking to the
> gossipee.
Not sure what you mean by that.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
15172
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 4:32pm
Subject: Re: Anthony Boucher (was: "I went gay all of a sudden")
In the late 1930's and early 1940's, Anthony Boucher's dream was to become a
Hollywood scriptwriter. He moved to LA, auditioned at the studios, but never
managed to break through and get a movie contract. Instead, he became a big
success in scripting radio. Radio was a medium far more interested in employing
mystery writers than was the film industry - in the 1940's it employed Ellery
Queen and John Dickson Carr, as well as Boucher. Boucher wrote the American
radio adventures of Sherlock Holmes, as well as the later radio episodes of
Ellery Queen.
Boucher was very similar to the later New Wave in France, in that he was a
movie crazy young person with dreams of joining the cinema. Only Boucher's point
of view was literary, not directorial. His mystery novels are set in LA - his
private detective hero Fergus O'Breen has a sister Maureen who is head of
publicity for Metropolis Pictures in Hollywood. She gets him involved in a lot of
his cases.
The big mystery conference each year is called the Bouchercon. It will be
held in Toronto this year, and the Anthony awards will be handed out for best
mysteries of the year during it. So Boucher is still highly remembered, in both
the fields of mystery and science fiction.
Mike Grost
15173
From: Fred Camper
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 8:38pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
Dan Sallitt wrote:
>I don't know about that: my memory is that he says "Because I went..." a
>little slower than usual, then jumps in the air, stretches out his arms,
>and yells "Gay!" You can't draw much more emphasis to a line than that.
>
>
I don't want to belabor this, but I think he jumps when he says "gay,"
saying it quickly, which rather than emphasizing meaning turns the scene
into pure rhythm, which would be characteristic of Hawks's comedies of
the 30s and 40s. Also has David points out, he's wearing a frilly
bathrobe -- "frilly" doesn't do it just it, it's pretty hilarious in
itself, and is another distraction. The whole point of the scene,
including this line, and Hawks's use of rhythm, is to unsettle the
viewer in one way or another, akin to the way David (Grant) gets driven
off on the sideboard of a car, moving through space with no control over
his movements. I think a lot of people might miss the line the first
time, but also very few would have known what "gay" meant.
Fred Camper
15174
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 4:42pm
Subject: Re: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
Bill, I've seen some of the shorts. Truth or Dare and A Summer Dress are
particular faves. I've seen all the features except for this new one, 5X2 and I
love them all to varying degrees.
David, I think Ozon is very much interested in doing gay movies. Even less
explicitly gay films like Swimming Pool and 8 Women (which really is the
masterful flip-side to the equally masterful Far From Heaven) are informed by a
fiercely gay aesthetic or rather, a repulsion with trad gay aesthetics. And
actually, those latter two are still pretty gay on the level of content. A programmer
I know calls Ozon's films bisexual cinema. Not sure where exactly to go with
that idea but it gets at the films' refreshingly infuriating ambiguities.
And for the record, I adore Rivette, Van Sant, Haynes, and Chereau (even
Almodovar in light doses).
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15175
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 8:48pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
>>In short, I think there used to be a semi-conscious
>>forgetfulness, or
>>repression, of gay signification in the American
>>mainland.
>
> Not even repression so much as elision. It was noted
> but "passed over in silence."
I think it was more than elision: I think that straight middle America
wanted Rock Hudson, for instance, to be straight, more than they enjoyed
the gossip value of pegging him as gay. My recollection is that the
prevailing attitude was something like, "It's a shame that people spread
damaging rumors like that."
> It's not
>>that way now: gay gossip works like any other
>>gossip, sticking to the
>>gossipee.
>
> Not sure what you mean by that.
Well, I suspect that many more people in middle America believe that Tom
Cruise is gay (whether he is or not) than ever believed that Rock Hudson
was back in the day. That "gentlemen's agreement" that helped keep
Hudson's gayness out of the open doesn't seem to operate today. Some
kind of acclimation has occurred, I think. - Dan
15176
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 9:03pm
Subject: Re: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> David, I think Ozon is very much interested in doing
> gay movies. Even less
> explicitly gay films like Swimming Pool and 8 Women
> (which really is the
> masterful flip-side to the equally masterful Far
> From Heaven) are informed by a
> fiercely gay aesthetic or rather, a repulsion with
> trad gay aesthetics.
Well then let me just say that I'm more than a tad
impatient with gay "aesthetics." I want actual issues
-- not reflections in the rear view mirror as the car
speeds away.
And
> actually, those latter two are still pretty gay on
> the level of content.
Not enough for me.
A programmer
> I know calls Ozon's films bisexual cinema. Not sure
> where exactly to go with
> that idea but it gets at the films' refreshingly
> infuriating ambiguities.
>
Are you familiar with "Savage Nights"? How about
"Confusion of Genders"?
> And for the record, I adore Rivette, Van Sant,
> Haynes, and Chereau (even
> Almodovar in light doses).
>
Almodovar is unquestionably talented. But I've never
really been all that impressed with his work. When he
first burst upon the scene his supporters -- like Kael
-- were always going on about how "daring" he was. Yet
I've never found anything at all daring in any of his
films, even "Law of Desire."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15177
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 9:12pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- Dan Sallitt wrote:
>
> I think it was more than elision: I think that
> straight middle America
> wanted Rock Hudson, for instance, to be straight,
> more than they enjoyed
> the gossip value of pegging him as gay. My
> recollection is that the
> prevailing attitude was something like, "It's a
> shame that people spread
> damaging rumors like that."
>
Meaning that at heart they knew it was true. At the
time of his death there was no end of feigning
"surpriuse" that he was gay, with story after story
after story about how "No one knew his secret!"
Such baloney.
Before he became ill it was widely expected that he
would come out. Armisted Maupin was encouraging him to
do so.
There was even an incident at a performance of
"Camelot" (Hudson was touring as King Arthur) where at
the curtain call a bouquet of flowers was sent up to
him from a male admirer -- which he accepted with a
laugh and a wink.
>
> Well, I suspect that many more people in middle
> America believe that Tom
> Cruise is gay (whether he is or not) than ever
> believed that Rock Hudson
> was back in the day.
I'm not so sure about that. Rock Hudson never thought
he had much in the way of talent and was always quite
gracious to the public that made him a star and loved
him. He was very outgoing and warm, and the people who
worked with him all have pleasant memories of what fun
he was and how professional. Tom Cruise is about as
warm as a formica table top. As for his sexual life
after careful study I do believe he's in a deep
abiding relationship with himself.
That "gentlemen's agreement"
> that helped keep
> Hudson's gayness out of the open doesn't seem to
> operate today. Some
> kind of acclimation has occurred, I think.
Well what's occurred is nobody's buying Kevin Spacey's
pathetic bearding any more. The "I was walking my dog"
story met with loud guffaws world-wide.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15178
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 5:55pm
Subject: Re: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid)
Getting back to "A Touch of Pink", I got caught up in the characters, story
and themes of the movie. This is an experience I often have with pre-1975 film;
it is much less common with today's movies, of all kinds. I was rooting for
the characters, and hoping they would succeed with their struggles.
The characters in this film are intended to be "psychologically complete".
They represent "real people", depicted consistently. This too is quite different
from a lot of modern film. In Hollywood movies, the characters are often just
excuses for violence and action; in art house fare, the characters are often
stick figures wandering around in some conceit. "A Touch of Pink" is a movie
that actually works as a movie.
Kevin John is right that this film does not try to deconstruct old Hollywood
films along some theoretical level. The characters and the director simply
like old Hollywood movie stars, and think about them on the same level as a 1942
Photoplay fan piece. This did not bother me at all. It is one way to think
about traditional Hollywood stars, such as Cary Grant and Doris Day, both of whom
are much discussed in this film.
Mike Grost
15179
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 10:14pm
Subject: Re: Anthony Boucher
> In the late 1930's and early 1940's, Anthony Boucher's dream was
to become a
> Hollywood scriptwriter.
The big mystery conference each year is called the Bouchercon. It
will be
> held in Toronto this year, and the Anthony awards will be handed
out for best
> mysteries of the year during it. So Boucher is still highly
remembered, in both
> the fields of mystery and science fiction.
>
> Mike Grost
I'm proud to say that I knew Boucher through correspondence (I still
have his letters!) when I was 13, and even met him one afternoon in
Berkeley, at his home, during a family trip to California in 1956,
after I sold a short story to The Magazine of Fantasy & Science
Fiction (which they eventually published in 1957). The magazine's
editorial address in Berkeley, on Dana, turned out to be his home
address, which is how we managed to track him down (most of my
family was in tow). We didn't have a phone number for him, so we
turned up unannounced, but he was nice enough to invite us all in
for an hour or so (my pareents, one or two of my brothers, and me).
He was a wonderful person, and one of the first authentic bohemians
I ever met who answered the door barefoot--which sounds pretty mild
now, but seemed pretty far out to me at the time. I still fondly
remember his pipes, his opera records (he had a radio show devoted
to opera), and his cat--or was it cats?. I like to think I would
have gone on writing for the magazine if he hadn't resigned as
editor shortly afterwards.
Jonathan
15180
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 6:52pm
Subject: Bisexual form/content (Was: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid))
In a message dated 9/6/04 4:30:59 PM, cellar47@y... writes:
>
> Well then let me just say that I'm more than a tad impatient with gay
> "aesthetics." I want actual issues -- not reflections in the rear view mirror as
> the car speeds away.
>
Assuming you think the representation of homosexuality is an issue, and an
important one at that, then I'm surprised you're not more taken with Water Drops
or Criminal Lovers or Sitcom or A Summer Dress or 8 Women or even Under The
Sand (Swimming Pool, I'll give you).
<>
First off, yes. Love the former, was unmoved by the latter. But second, by
bisexual, I meant a structural bisexuality or a bisexual esprit, if you will,
not merely a bisexual character. Bisexual form and not (necessarily) bisexual
content (if indeed the two can even be separated; some theorists claim it's a
pipe dream.). I'm interested in the way Ozon's films (others?) can be called
bisexual in the way that The Night of the Hunter or Queen Bee or Torch Song or
Ruby Gentry or Cobra Woman or Beyond The Forest can all be called gay films,
which I think is perfectly reasonable.
It's not without a certain amount of trepidation that I write the above
either. My use of the word "merely," for instance, gives me pause. I'm fully aware
of the elision of actual gay or bisexual characters (actors?) in the cinema of
our supposedly more enlightened era. One of the only problems I have with
Reed's fabulous Down With Love is that now that we can discuss homosexuality
openly in cinema, we can also know for sure that David Hyde Pierce's character is
not gay. Whereas in the Doris Day-Rock Hudson comedies, there is nothing so
absolute with the Tony Randall characters, as Mark Rappaport so assiduously
points out in Rock Hudson's Home Movies.
Nevertheless, I cringe at the suggestion that repulsive, offensive films like
But I'm A Cheerleader and Camp (Todd Graff's not Warhol's) are gay/lesbian
movies simply because they include gay/lesbian characters and that Ozon doesn't
make gay movies but rather "movies with actresses directed by a gay man." And
at the end of the day, 8 Women features Catherine Deneuve and Fanny Ardant
sloppily locking lips. That's lesbian enough for me.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15181
From: Damien Bona
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 10:54pm
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> I never had a clue what McKuen was talking about. Lots of hippies
were
> reading this poem, which is one of McKuen's most popular - I never
heard
> anyone point out the homosexual content. (The poem precedes the
movie
> MIDNIGHT COWBOY, but follows the book - I don't know when the
phrase
> took on its gay meaning.)
>
> I also remember rumors about Rock Hudson's gayness making their way
into
> the straight, small-town world every so often in the 60s and 70s.
My
> distinct recollection is that straight people didn't really want to
> believe them, and discounted them.
>
> In short, I think there used to be a semi-conscious forgetfulness,
or
> repression, of gay signification in the American mainland. It's
not
> that way now: gay gossip works like any other gossip, sticking to
the
> gossipee. - Dan
The context in which I first heard stories of Rock Hudson being gay
was the rumor going around (I'd say it was probably 1968 or so) that
he and Jim Nabors got married -- everone in my Catholic parochial
school heard it and we all had a good laugh about it (I was in 7th or
8th grade at the time).
Funny that you mention Rod McKuen and Hudson in the same post, Dan,
because a Hollywood lawyer who knew them both told me that it was
McKuen who started the Rock and Gomer Pyle tale, even going so far as
to send out faux wedding invitations.
15182
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 11:25pm
Subject: Re: Bisexual form/content (Was: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid))
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> First off, yes. Love the former, was unmoved by the
> latter.
Well the latter is a comedy. The former gave me the
creeps. It's a teriffic movie, but it gave me the
creeps.
But second, by
> bisexual, I meant a structural bisexuality or a
> bisexual esprit, if you will,
> not merely a bisexual character. Bisexual form and
> not (necessarily) bisexual
> content (if indeed the two can even be separated;
> some theorists claim it's a
> pipe dream.)
Can't quite feature that.
I'm interested in the way Ozon's films
> (others?) can be called
> bisexual in the way that The Night of the Hunter or
> Queen Bee or Torch Song or
> Ruby Gentry or Cobra Woman or Beyond The Forest can
> all be called gay films,
> which I think is perfectly reasonable.
>
Well I don't. Queen Bee, Torch Song, Ruby Gentry and
Cobra Woman are all camp. Torch Song, being that it as
directed by a gay man is REALLY camp.
The Night of the Hunter is an incomparable work of art
-- the greatest American film ever made -- directed by
a gay man.
Will John grow up to be gay? I certainly hope so for
Miz Cooper's sake. The son she threw out of the house
years before was obviously gay. She has devoted her
life to making up for rejecting him.
So it's a sort-of-gay movie.
I'm fully aware
> of the elision of actual gay or bisexual characters
> (actors?) in the cinema of
> our supposedly more enlightened era. One of the only
> problems I have with
> Reed's fabulous Down With Love is that now that we
> can discuss homosexuality
> openly in cinema, we can also know for sure that
> David Hyde Pierce's character is
> not gay.
Whereas we know that David Hyde Pierce IS -- unlike
Tony Randall.
Whereas in the Doris Day-Rock Hudson
> comedies, there is nothing so
> absolute with the Tony Randall characters, as Mark
> Rappaport so assiduously
> points out in Rock Hudson's Home Movies.
>
Because he'sa side issue. Public knowledge, albeit
clandestine, of Rock Hudson's gayness was the driving
force behind Pillow Talk and Lover Come Back.
> Nevertheless, I cringe at the suggestion that
> repulsive, offensive films like
> But I'm A Cheerleader and Camp (Todd Graff's not
> Warhol's) are gay/lesbian
> movies simply because they include gay/lesbian
> characters and that Ozon doesn't
> make gay movies but rather "movies with actresses
> directed by a gay man."
Well that's not a valid comparasion. Ozon should be
judged alongside Chereau.
Guess who wins?
And
> at the end of the day, 8 Women features Catherine
> Deneuve and Fanny Ardant
> sloppily locking lips. That's lesbian enough for me.
>
Fine. Now when do I get my HOT MAN-ON-MAN ACTION?
Not from Ozon.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15183
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 11:27pm
Subject: Re: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- Damien Bona wrote:
>
> Funny that you mention Rod McKuen and Hudson in the
> same post, Dan,
> because a Hollywood lawyer who knew them both told
> me that it was
> McKuen who started the Rock and Gomer Pyle tale,
> even going so far as
> to send out faux wedding invitations.
>
>
I would tend to doubt that. Rock and Rod were pretty
good friends. Rock even cut an album for Rod's Stanyan
record label.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15184
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 8:13pm
Subject: Ozon - a negative view
For what its worth, after seeing a little Ozon, am puzzled by his huge
reputation.
"8 Women" seems stagy, and without much sense of visual style or
inventiveness. If a director arranged his actors randomly, then picked a simple camera
position to cover them, you would wind up with a film that looks like "8 Women".
Words like "visually crude" come to mind here.
Am I missing something? Are other Ozon films a triumph of visual style?
In addition, the film mainly seems like a series of disconnected vaudeville
routines. I never got the sense of real characters or meaningful emotions,
events or ideas anywhere in this. Just some simple conceits - and some amateur
hour style musical routines.
Consequently, the debate over the percentage of gay content here seems beside
the point. This film is too crude, visually, dramatically, thematically, to
have any significant content or form. So what does it matter what is in the
film?
Mike Grost
15185
From: Gabe Klinger
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:02am
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> For what its worth, after seeing a little Ozon, am puzzled by his huge
> reputation.
Me too, Mike. Ozon started as an assured -- if not hugely talented -- new voice, and
has since become a glib mannerist whose elusive plots (and bankable female stars)
are irresistible to the book club crowd.
SITCOM was intriguing, but whatever he had then has been well-worn out since.
CRIMINAL LOVERS, UNDER THE SAND, and SWIMMING POOL, all similar in tone, were
some of the most overrated films of their respective years. The one I like, not
necessarily for the Fassbinder text (though it helps), is WATER DROPS ON BURNING
ROCKS. But it doesn't hide its slightness, and is mostly amusing for the performances
of Ludivine Sagnier and Bernard Giraudeau.
Isabelle Huppert is great in 8 WOMEN, but that's no surprise.
15186
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:09am
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
--- MG4273@a... wrote:
> For what its worth, after seeing a little Ozon, am
> puzzled by his huge
> reputation.
> "8 Women" seems stagy, and without much sense of
> visual style or
> inventiveness. If a director arranged his actors
> randomly, then picked a simple camera
> position to cover them, you would wind up with a
> film that looks like "8 Women".
> Words like "visually crude" come to mind here.
> Am I missing something?
Actually yes. What Ozon is doing here is a very
deliberateexercise in "filmed theater." It's stagey
for its own sake - along the lines of certain sacha
guitry films. But the opening shot is a hommage to the
closeing shot of Sirk's "All That Heaven Allows."
He's too smart for his own good.
Are other Ozon films a
> triumph of visual style?
Both "Under the Sand" and "Swimming Pool" are visually
adroit. The former a bit like Losey, the latter more
than a bit like Polanski.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
15187
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 9:19pm
Subject: Re: Bisexual form/content (Was: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid))
In a message dated 9/6/04 6:25:45 PM, cellar47@y... writes:
> The son she threw out of the house years before was obviously gay.
>
Not obvious to me. I'll definitely keep that in mind, though, next time I see
it.
<< Fine. Now when do I get my HOT MAN-ON-MAN ACTION?
Not from Ozon.>>
Oh please. If there isn't enough hot man-on-man action for you in Water Drops
or Sitcom or, especially, A Summer Dress, you need to start pitching to Adult
Video News instead of LA Weekly.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15188
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 9:19pm
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
I will check out "Under the Sand" and "Swimming Pool".
Thanks for the advice!
I did not mean my post to be the last word on Ozon - have only seen 2 of his
films.
More viewing is clearly in order!
Mike Grost
15189
From: Jonathan Rosenbaum
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:20am
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
>
> Isabelle Huppert is great in 8 WOMEN, but that's no surprise.
I'd also make some claims on behalf of Charlotte Rampling in UNDER
THE SAND--far and away Ozon's best film, IMO. But maybe you have to
be middle-aged or older in order to like it.
15190
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:26am
Subject: Re: Bisexual form/content (Was: A Touch of Pink (Ian Iqbal Rashid))
--- LiLiPUT1@a... wrote:
>
> Oh please. If there isn't enough hot man-on-man
> action for you in Water Drops
> or Sitcom or, especially, A Summer Dress, you need
> to start pitching to Adult
> Video News instead of LA Weekly.
>
LOL! Yes it's true -- I'm a complete slut.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15191
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:29am
Subject: Re: Re: Ozon - a negative view
--- Jonathan Rosenbaum
wrote:
> I'd also make some claims on behalf of Charlotte
> Rampling in UNDER
> THE SAND--far and away Ozon's best film, IMO. But
> maybe you have to
> be middle-aged or older in order to like it.
>
>
I quite agree with you about UNDER THE SAND.
And I'm damned proud to be a middle-aged fart!
Rampling has truly "raised the bar" in recent years.
Even in her brief turn in "I'll Sleep When I'm Dead"
she burns a hole right through the screen.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15192
From:
Date: Mon Sep 6, 2004 9:43pm
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
In a message dated 9/6/04 7:15:04 PM, MG4273@a... writes:
> In addition, the film mainly seems like a series of disconnected vaudeville
> routines. I never got the sense of real characters or meaningful emotions,
> events or ideas anywhere in this.
>
In addition to what David said, let me add that the above assessments are
100% correct. The difference is clearly that you hold those to be negative
attributes whereas I don't. And if you dis disconnected vaudeville routines in toto,
you're missing out on buckets of amazing musicals, including this one.
Also, Ozon allows mise-en-scene and music to take over 8 Women's narrative.
It doesn't tell a story (sorta like Mulholland Drive which I insist does NOT
tell a story). It's the mirror image of Far From Heaven. Far From Heaven says
everything; 8 Women says nothing (which is different from concluding that it has
nothing to say).
To Gabe, I don't recall Criminal Lovers and Swimming Pool getting such rave
reviews. And the book club crowd? I'm not 100% certain I know what you mean by
that.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15193
From: Bret B.
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 2:27am
Subject: Gay form/content (was: Bisexual form/content)
>Fine. Now when do I get my HOT MAN-ON-MAN ACTION?
>
>Not from Ozon.
Kudos to David Ehrenstein for finally bringing up a
subject in sore need of discussing: the paucity of
actual, tangible, non-shitty gay things in our
so-called "gay cinema".
It truly terrifies me that at this point in time
(2004), serious discussion of gay film still has not
yet left the arena of camp values and/or formalist
wankery (excluding the success of Haynes' "Far From
Heaven.")
Where's the exploitation films with drive and panache,
the ones that should be embodying the spirit of the
drive-in era? The only scraps to be found are the
crappiest of the crappy straight-to-video productions
with no vision or style. And where's the exciting art
house fare that actually challenges AND arouses,
without using gay subject matter as a pawn to draw in
a larger audience? For this, we have to look backward
-- for me, I have to keep going all the way back to
Toshio Matsumoto's stunning "Funeral Procession of
Roses" (1969).
To respond to Kevin John -- in an earlier post, he
wrote:
"> Nevertheless, I cringe at the suggestion that
> repulsive, offensive films like
> But I'm A Cheerleader and Camp (Todd Graff's not
> Warhol's) are gay/lesbian
> movies simply because they include gay/lesbian
> characters and that Ozon doesn't
> make gay movies but rather "movies with actresses
> directed by a gay man."
This must truly be a generational thing, but again,
this is 2004 -- yes, very sorry, but a film like "But
I'm A Cheerleader", regardless of what one thinks of
its artistic merits (or lack thereof), happens to be a
gay film because of its: 1) gay themes; 2) gay
protagonists; 3) homophobic villains; and 4) gay
filmmaker behind the camera. These are some pretty
heavy defining characteristics -- this is not
arbitrary.
And what exactly is so repulsive about "But I'm A
Cheerleader?" It seems quite tame and harmless when
compared to the majority share of dreck that spews
forth from queer film festivals and trickles down to
the public, via shoddy home video and theatrical
distribution companies like Strand, Wolfe, Picture
This and Water Bearer.
bret b.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
15194
From: David Ehrenstein
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 2:43am
Subject: Re: Gay form/content (was: Bisexual form/content)
--- "Bret B." wrote:
For this, we have to look
> backward
> -- for me, I have to keep going all the way back to
> Toshio Matsumoto's stunning "Funeral Procession of
> Roses" (1969).
>
>
Wow, now that's really a blast from the past!
Peter, who played the Fool in Kurosawa's "Ran" starred
in that one.
But seriously sexuality -- of any kind -- is no simple
thing to depict on screen.
John Cameron Mitchell, however, is taking a big plunge
off the deep end with it for his new film.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
15195
From: Damien Bona
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 3:58am
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, MG4273@a... wrote:
> For what its worth, after seeing a little Ozon, am puzzled by his
huge
> reputation.
For me, as time goes on, Ozon seems more and more minor. I liked
Water Drops On Burning Rocks a great deal. While delving into pure
Fassbinder themes -- the role playing and power trips involved in
personal/sexual relationships and, metaphorically, societal/political
structures -- the film does so in a much more boisterous, more
obviously campy way, and as such is less rigorous than Fassbinder and
also less profound (and the mise-en-scene is much less meaningful in
and of itself than RWF's). If the pleasures of the highly agreeable
Water Drops are more on the surface -- the sets are costumes are
impeccable in conveying the worst of late 60s/early 70s clothing (oh
those colors!) and décor (oh that shag rug!). Jeanne Lapoirie's
bright, neon cinematography is remarkably evocative of the era -- and
the overall effect slighter than that of almost any Fassbinder, Ozon
does have a much more cheerful and brighter point of view than RWF,
so the film comes off almost as a lark.
I missed Under The Sand, but 8 Women is a very dry take-off on 50s
melodramas - at times it looks like a Sirk movie, although
thematically it doesn't have much at all to do with Sirk. Ozon shows
considerable comic inventiveness and wit in individual scenes, but
didn't create a cohesive whole and the movie is ultimately primarily
just an exercise in style. While it may be rather empty, I'd rather
have a movie deal with the "unmasking of ugly truths" in a campy
comic setting such as this than within the context of a kitchen sink
drama. Even though it's rather minor, 8 Women is very enjoyable and
is beautifully acted -- especially by Isabelle Huppert and Ludivine
Sagnier. And as 21st cebtury hommages to mid-50s Universal-
International melodramas go, it's a lot more accomplished, incisive,
moving and fun than Far From Heaven, and much less arch.
Being middle-aged doesn't guarantee liking Swimming Pool, which
admittedly has a notably languid unfolding of its narrative and a
notably carnal Ludivine Sagnier. But the film veers into David Lynch
territory, and whereas Lynch's melange of reality and
imagination/fantasy is representative of a deeply-held world view,
Ozon's twists seem just to be half-baked plot devices which are there
for no other reason than to be plot twists.
Right now, it seems to me that Ozon will probably be remembered as a
minor stylist, someone in the tradition of, say, George Miller or
Irving Cummings.
15196
From: Dan Sallitt
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 4:08am
Subject: Scene identification
A friend of mine is trying to identify a famous scene in an old American
film in which the hero, feeling defeated in some struggle, is screaming
his frustration at the top of his lungs, and hears his own words echoed
back to him. When he screams "I can't do it!", his echo says, "Do it!
Do it! Do it!" I'm thinking this might be some Capra film (MR. SMITH?),
but those films aren't fresh in my mind. Can anyone give me an ID?
Thanks. - Dan
15197
From:
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 0:22am
Subject: Re: Re: Ozon - a negative view
In a message dated 9/6/04 11:00:36 PM, damienbona@y... writes:
> thematically it doesn't have much at all to do with Sirk. Ozon shows
> considerable comic inventiveness and wit in individual scenes, but didn't create a
> cohesive whole and the movie is ultimately primarily just an exercise in
> style.
>
I think it has everything to do with Sirk. If the music and mise-en-scene in
some key Sirk films attempt to convey what the narrative cannot, the music and
mise-en-scene in 8 Women froth up to and eventually over the narrative. Thus
8 Women is ostensibly about what can and cannot be said via cinema at certain
historical junctures. And that, of course, raises the question of what's being
said to whom which raises the question of cultural labor which I'd rather
leave for another time.
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15198
From: Matt Teichman
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 4:55am
Subject: Re: Ozon - a negative view
Mike Grost wrote:
>"8 Women" seems stagy, and without much sense of visual style or
>inventiveness. If a director arranged his actors randomly, then picked a simple camera
>position to cover them, you would wind up with a film that looks like "8 Women".
>Words like "visually crude" come to mind here.
>Am I missing something? Are other Ozon films a triumph of visual style?
>
>
_8 Women_ is one of the Ozons I missed. But of what I've seen, I'd say
Ozon is one of France's better stylists (of a certain generation, in any
case). _Under the Sand_, for example, pays a good deal of attention to
things such as color and mise-en-scene--though I think the real strength
of this film is in its rhythm. The same goes for _Water Drops_--here
Ozon has an extraordinary sense of how to counterpoint the movements of
his actors via a cut or camera move at the appropriate moment. However,
his work does tend to be uneven--other films such as _Criminal Lovers_,
_Swimming Pool_, and _A Summer Dress_ are considerably weaker in this
respect (though they are often engaging in others), so it wouldn't
completely surprise me to hear that _8 Women_ was "visually crude."
His use of bodies in general is also rather interesting (and rather
strange), but I suppose that isn't quite the same topic.
-Matt
15199
From: hotlove666
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 5:00am
Subject: Re: "I went gay all of a sudden" (was: History is made by "Wh...
--- In a_film_by@yahoogroups.com, Dan Sallitt wrote:
> > Also
> > Grant's line is spoken very fast.
>
> I don't know about that: my memory is that he says "Because I
went..." a
> little slower than usual, then jumps in the air, stretches out his
arms,
> and yells "Gay!" You can't draw much more emphasis to a line than
that.
>
> Maybe straight culture has to be prepared quite a lot before it
even
> perceives gay content.
When Columbus arrived the Indians couldn't see the ships because they
had no concept of them, until a wise medicine man noticed that the
waves were running differently.
15200
From:
Date: Tue Sep 7, 2004 1:01am
Subject: Re: Gay form/content (was: Bisexual form/content)
In a message dated 9/6/04 10:11:00 PM, eggcity101@y... writes:
> Where's the exploitation films with drive and panache, the ones that should
> be embodying the spirit of the drive-in era?
>
Bound, my beloved (David, please close your eyes) Showgirls, The Closet. Not
sure how exploitative The Talented Mr. Ripley is but it's hardly art house
fare. And I find it a landmark in gay (can I get a bisexual?) cinema. My fave gay
film is The Gay Deceivers from the same year as Funeral Procession of Roses
and much better IMO. Starring the great Michael Greer. The equally great Vito
Russo got it all wrong.
<<
arouses, without using gay subject matter as a pawn to draw in a larger audience?>>>
No need to, ugh, look backward. Urbania, Porn Theatre, Hustler White
(although this and others by La Bruce may fit in the exploitation category), The
Sleepy Time Gal and three of the finest shorts of the last ten or so years:
Amerikanos, Roof and A War Story.
<
very sorry, but a film like "But I'm A Cheerleader", regardless of what one
thinks of its artistic merits (or lack thereof), happens to be a gay film>>
First off, I never said Cheerleader wasn't a gay film. I was questioning the
inelasticity of the term. Second, since I have no idea who you are, I have no
idea what you mean by "a generational thing." But I assume you know my age. So
am I too old or too young in this scenario?
<>
Here's a chunk of what I wrote at the time for a now defunct GLBT Milwaukee
mag. (And for the record, I loathe most of what I have seen from Wolfe and
Picture This although Strand and Water Bearer have some fine offerings.):
Because heterosexuality is presented as a pea-brained idealization in pink
and blue, director Jamie Babbit never gives you the impression that she has any
idea how it's actually lived, e.g. in the lives of Megan's (Natasha Lyonne)
high school friends. It's a measure of how glib her conception is that we never
get to see Megan apply the lessons she's learned (and unlearned) back at
school. By ignoring this site of the origin of normalization, Babbit never brings
her "deconstruction" full circle which would have aimed it right back at
heterosexuality where it belongs.
Instead, we get a flabbergastingly impoverished view of homosexual
resistance. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the scene where Graham (Clea DuVall)
and some other inmates escape after lights out. Megan reluctantly joins them
but freaks out when she discovers that they took her to a gay bar. "Where else
would we go?" Graham replies. Where else, indeed! All this scene accomplishes
is the reinforcement of a tired myth – the bar/club as actually constitutive of
gay identity. Watching it in Milwaukee is doubly depressing given how so many
gays and lesbians in this city do not even feel gay or lesbian if they
haven't sufficiently barhopped over the weekend. The impossibility of imagining gay
life outside of these smothering bearers of gayness is a formidable obstacle
for queer identity politics. That But I'm A Cheerleader steers clear of this
confrontation shows up its utter conventionality and ultimate uselessness.
Grade: D-
Kevin John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
a_film_by Main Page
Home Film
Art
Other: (Travel, Rants, Obits)
Links About
Contact