Welcome Back Blogger - Have some Chaplin

I've been trying to think of an adequate topic in which to resurrect my blog. I tired myself out in the process of writing my 'Favorite Films of the Aught's' series and wanted to get back to just writing about misc movies. With the release of Criterion's 'Modern Times' on blu-ray, I feel like I've a found a suitable topic to do this.

Released in 1936, Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times was a “silent” film in a time where sound films had completely taken over theaters. The film is a powerful socialism fueled comedy with healthy doses of pathos, slapstick, politicizing, and romance. In what Chaplin envisioned to be his final adventure with his “Tramp” character, we find that indelible man working in a factory at the film's onset. In this blog entry, I will discuss the factory scenes only.

In a set that echoes the great dystopian factories of Lang's Metropolis and Clair's A Nous a Liberte (more on this film and the controversy with Modern Times later), we see large grizzled workers pulling knobs and turning levers. Instructions are broadcasted from an angry be suited man in an office via a large video screen. During this part of the film is most of the dialogue is spoken and given the futurist setting, this is apt.

We see the Tramp, one or two feet shorter than the other workers, mindlessly using a couple wrenches to turn two screws on a random piece of machinery on a neverending assembly line. He often gets distracted, misses a few pieces, and then has to scramble to catch up. As always, Chaplin's amazing ability to perform natural slapstick is clever and humorous. The man next to him on the assembly line clearly isn't happy with the tramps performance and takes his job very seriously whereas the Tramp realizes the ridiculousness of the scenario.

Chaplin invented the tramp in the mid 1910's and described him as a free thinker and sophisticated gentlemen, despite his clownish appearance. His cane is his only piece of his normal wardrobe that suggests his “nobility” and in the factory, there is no cane or usual bowler hat. His factory attire is black pants a white shirt, similar to the other workers though his costume is markedly baggier than that of his more burly coworkers. In all of the factory exploits, the point is driven home that Chaplin does not belong in this world and serves as a nuisance to those who do.

In a particularly amusing sequence of factory dystopia, a man arrives with a machine to feed employees while they work. The machine drives up to the worker and via a series of bulky levers and inaccurate movements shoves food into the faces of the workers thus allowing them to remain on the station. Yeah, it doesn't work. In fact, it malfunctions and Chaplin ends up with food all his face and clothing. Again, the “suits” get angry with Chaplin himself rather the ridiculous machine.

Though anyone who sees any pictures from or the cover art to Modern Times DVD cover notices Chaplin in the gears of the machine spinning around. While helping an engineer fix machines he gets caught in the gears and embarks on a daft journey spinning around a seemingly never ending series of gears and circuits. Surely this sort of machine would have crushed a normal man and even the normally unflappable Tramp looks panicked. Through his multiple experiences in the gears compounded with the other various machines, he cracks, grabs his wrenches and begins a whimsical dance around the factory turning any two things that look like screws; nipples, mustaches, it's all fair game. The factory becomes a dance and the workers an elaborate set, making this place a bastion of art.

What I love about the factory of Modern Times is the scathing indictment of the this culture. This is a time in society after the robber barons where workers were beginning to develop rights and unions were transforming the work spectrum. Still, many workers were forced to thrive in these mundane and repetitive jobs. Lunch machines probably weren't so far off from ideal, as many bosses did want their workers to be robots. Even the workers themselves seem to have no repoire with each other suggesting more robotic sentiments.

Throughout the film, there are sly signs of worker unrest, the most notable being when the tramp inadvertently becomes the leader of a workers rights protest. Worker unrest is a timeless theme and there will always be conflict between worker-boss. Especially in this economic climate the idea of scaring a worker into dutifully remaining placid on the job is especially relevant.

Earlier in the post, I mentioned 'A Nous A Liberte,' a 1931 film by french director Rene Clair. Modern Times at points is remarkably similar to this film, especially during Chaplin's gear adventures. During the time, Chaplin swore up and down he had never seen the film though later in life, he back-peddled a bit and reportedly even said that Claire's film was better. I've seen both and while the Clair film is a classic in its own right, Modern Times is far superior and a lot funnier. Chaplin probably did steal ideas from Clair, but he improved on them immensely. I personally find Liberte a bit boring, mostly unfunny, and while that film is factory-centric, Modern Times really becomes a masterpiece in the second half with the integration of an incredibly sweet and inspiring love story. Conveniently, on the DVD, there is a nice little featureless on this.

Modern Times is unquestionably a masterpiece and a fitting retirement for the Tramp. At the close of the film, during his usual walk down the road into the sunset away from society, he finds a mate and presumably, will go and continue to make his way. What I love most about the Tramp is his spirit and his indelible optimism despite living a world not designed for him. Despite his poverty and continual rejection from society, he remains cheerful and hopeful as he literally walks down the road of life.

Modern Times is currently out on DVD via the Criterion Collection on standard and blu-ray. BUY

revisiting bergman

a few months, i revisited my first moment film snobbery and recently, i decided to continue my trip down memory lane. ingmar bergman and the seventh seal was the first art house movie i saw and from that moment i was hooked. i gobbled up bergman like leftover stuffing and soon i saw his entire catalog. over the years, i rewatched virtually all of his movies and maintained that i still love him. however, i realized i hadnt watched the original 5 hour versions of SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE or FANNY AND ALEXANDER; two of his most legendary works that when broadcast on PBS brought bergman back into the american movie going mind.

after watching versions that are some two hours longer than the movie releases, i was left wanting even more. scenes from a marriage is such a painful, excrusiatingly honest piece of film-making that it hurt me to watch at times. the story is very simple, two people's marriage is set up, ended, and somewhat reconciled many years later. the dialogue is so honest and real that it hardly seems like a movie. the arguments the two leads have resonates with married folks of all ages. btw, the two leads are erland josephson and liv ullman, two of bergman's regulars and its hard to believe that this was their first movie in which they shared more than a scene together.

for every bit as stark as scenes was, FANNY AND ALEXANDER is a lush, vibrant, and beautifully done masterpiece of a film. if scenes was a chamber drama, this was an epic. the film is about the ekdahl's, a family of actors whose patron dies suddenly leaving the theatre and family without a leader. fanny and alex, the two children, then have to live with a bishop who marries their mother in a house of strict punishment and complete religious piety. in the film version, what is most interesting is the depiction of the bishop. in the film version, he appears more evil but in the TV version he just appears to be very strict and unfair.

without question, my favorite part of any bergman movie is in fanny. not when uncle carl farts out a candle though that is pretty awesome. no, i am talking about the magic jew. erland josephson (again!) plays the said magic jew who is able to transport the goyem by shouting towards the heavens into a chest and then make them disappear. its an awesome scene and intentionally magically and mysterious. the film after all, is considered a fantasy.

both of these films were amazing outstanding works of art and if youre going to give them a watch, i recommend the original TV versions. they give you more incite the characters and to the story. and after all, more bergman is always gooder!

masaki kobayashi's the human condition: reissue of the year

over the years, ive made no secret of my opinions on gritty war films, especially japanese ones. kurosawa is one of my favorite directors of all time and i find ran, kagemusha, and seven samurai to be masterpieces. i love kon ichikawa's fires on the plain and am a sucker for ozu's sentimental tales of japanese post war insecurity.

when i initially heard about THE HUMAN CONDITION, a 9 1/2 hr 6 part epic from masaki kobayashi (director of the outstanding SEPPUKU), i was intrigued but daunted by the undertaking of yet another epic film. but since this one starred tatsuya nakadai, i rolled up my sleeves, ordered a disc a week and dove in.

since i became an extreme cinephile, i can tell whether or not im going to fall head over heels in love with a movie in the first 20 minutes or so. and with this one, i was entranced in the first few minutes. ever since i met kaji, the main character (played by nakadai), i knew that i was going to enjoy spending 10 hours with him.

kaji is a pacifist, a socialist, and incredibly naive. he seems himself as the voice of reason and humanity in an insane time. he is madly in love with his wife, michiko but not enough to go back on his ideals. throughout the ten hours, we follow kaji through being the boss in a chinese labor camp to being sent to the front of the war for his ideals and finally, as a POW in a russian war camp. in each step of his harrowing struggles, we see the pain and frustration of war and what it does to a human being. each part of the film, he has to endure some crisis of faith and conscious.

while the things kaji is doing are awful, it is all in the name to return to michiko and to find a good life for the both of them. despite all the killing and struggle to survive, never does kaji waver from his central core of beliefs. what is painful is watching him see that humanity isnt as good as he thought. throughout the first 3 parts of the series, kaji believed in the communist philosophy and that his new life was meant to be in russia with people who were more civilized and fair. but like the japanese and chinese, the russians too were brutal and violent. so he continues to search and make his way back to michiko despite all these forces against him.

SPOILERS BEGIN

he doesnt make it but the final scene of him lying dead in a desolate plane is so heartbreaking and beautiful (in a sad and gut wrenching way)

SPOILERS OVER

the execution of the above is painful to watch and left me feeling incredibly empty inside. i was so moved by the final scenes and the love in kaji's heart. i didnt cry. i couldnt. i just felt cold and empty. i needed to cuddle a cat but there werent any cats so i watched cartoons.

however, what the movie taught is that love can survive in the hardest and lonliest places. at the same time, since kaji never betrayed his own ability, one cant help wonder if things would have been easier for him. but then again, i guess that this isnt the point of the movie. the point is to embrace the struggle of humanity.

if you cant tell, i was completely floored by this movie. im not sure how its been out of the mainstream for so long but THE HUMAN CONDITION needs to return to the collective conscious of the movie-going public. or at least be fawned upon by critics and filmies alike (which looks like its happening!) this is definitely my favorite DVD watch of 2009 and among my favorite films of all time. absolutely amazing.

i need to go cuddle a cat.

curious about curious

years ago, i watched I AM CURIOUS YELLOW a 1967 genre mixing swedish film that combines frank sexual politics, gender roles, and fiercely political socialist rhetoric. i must admit that i initially rented it because i heard about the boatloads of nudity and sex in it. it was one of the first major films to depict sexuality in such a way and i was curious (har har). the film is not a sexy one and at times is very dull and if youre not interested in gender roles and socialism, then this movie is not for you.

luckily, i am.

the star of the film lena nyman delivers one of the bravest performances in film history. her frank sexuality and openness with her body was remarkable for 1967 and director vilgot sjoman managed to create a film that was marketed as pornographic but is way more political than anything else. it even features a quick interview with martin luther king, jr about his views on civil disobidience! for a film that a lot of people initially wanted to watch for tits, this is a pretty big departure.

despite all this admiration i had for this blue, i didnt really enjoy it very much. flashforward ahead 2 years later and i watched THIS IS CURIOUS BLUE, the follow-up film done the year after. its a continuation of the ideals and politicisizing of the first time but with a decidedly more bitter and ironic tone. to be honest, i really preferred this one.

with both of the films, there are elements are staged documentary and filmed sequences and in this one the film between fiction and non-fiction was blurrier. my favorite scene was a staged conversation betweeen sjoman and lena about wavering committment to the film. it was a staged scene but the feel was so natural and completely shatters the fourth wall of cinema.

there are even some michael moore-like displays of civil disobidience and literally tearing down the walls of western political society in favor of a socialist regime. BRILLIANT! any idea what i just said? no well...ummm...lena nyman is naked a bunch of times again. believe me, you see everything. open and spread-bare political rhetoric and all!

RECENT WATCHING 2nd Half of September

ive been busy and would like to blog a few of these things, especially in some of sort of film noir round up, but meh...here is a recap of my recent watching i dont feel like expounding on full time

MAN'S CASTLE - a suprisingly well done exercise in early sound film (1933) directed by early american master frank borzage and starring a young spencer tracey and loretta young, two stars who will obvious do much better. this early work is a nice indication of things to come for all

MONA LISA - the breakthrough film by famed irish director neil jordan (the crying game), this one stars bob hoskins, robbie coltrane, and a particular bad ass turn by michael caine. its a noir-ey, twisty crime film that is filled intrigue and whatnot. hoskins in crime movies is pretty much always a must watch

CARL TH DREYER: MY METIER - a criterion doc on the life and unique style of the great danish direcor carl theodor dreyer (passion of joan of arc, ordet). very surprisingly, this was very poorly done and not terribly informative. dreyer was a fascinating personality and this doesnt do him justice.

COUP DE TORCHON - i was shocked i enjoyed this film. i normally find french post new waver bernard tavarnier's to be incredibly boring but this one was exciting and sorta felt like claude chabrol instead. a young and oft naked isabelle huppert stars in this thriller of a serial killer/moralist living french occupied algeria prior to the breakout of the war.

A COLT IS MY PASSPORT - one of the films in the newly released Nikkatsu Noir collection from Eclipse; this is a tarantino esque noodle western from the 60s (...japan). not much of a cohesive or interesting plot, but this had great music and some cool camera work

GENERAL IDI AMIN DADA - a 90 minute interview with general idi amin and a profoundly interesting look into a charismatic and completely insane director. i can honestly see how the people of uganda were so taken with him. he is so swarthy and well spoken cannibal!

THE NAKED AND THE DEAD - this is a gritty war movie from the late 50s that seemed like it would be pretty ahead of its time. however, now it just looks like every 'war is heck' overlong films from the 50s. by no means bad but by no means interesting

RANCHO NOTORIOUS - fritz lang's worst film. i cant even remember if i wrote about this already. lets just say that germans probably the best choice to direct pleasant western flix

THE LONG NIGHT - now this is one hell of a film noir! starring henry fonda and directed by the great anatole litvak, this dark tale tells in flashback the events that led to the murder of a magician (wonderfully played the always entertaining vincent price). dare i say this is "smoldering?" an absolute must watch for noir fans!

SCANDAL SHEET - '...she didnt get married, she got murdered.' yup,, another smoldering film noir from the 50s. though not as good as THE LONG NIGHT, this is still a pretty entertaining flick. broderick crawford plays a tough as nails newspaper editor with something to hide and john derek is the rookie with a nose for the truth. OOOH! directed by phil karlson who also did...

THE PHENIX CITY STORY - ive been wanting to see this one for a while but was very disappointed with the true crime feel of the film. that genre is really hard to pull off and unless its in the ultra auteur hands of sam fuller to jules dassin, it just comes off as boring. and this unfortunately is really dull.

THE HUMAN CONDITION TRILOGY - will blog about this VERY VERY soon..

maybe i shouldnt watch films i loved twice...

kon ichikawa's THE BURMESE HARP struck a chord with me immediately. it is a beautifully shot, intense, and well acted Japanese anti-war film from the 50s. the film centers around Mizushima, Shoji Yasui, a soldier who stumbles upon a loot while fighting in Burma. he learns to play it and his music inspires his unit but his convictions keep him from going home and he remains in Burma to live as a monk.

when i first saw it, i was floored by its intensity. i had just seen ichikawa's mesmerizing fires on the plain which was one of the darkest war films ive ever seen and a powerful statement on war in general. harp was a pleasant surprise after seeing fires and the visual imagery remained with me for a couple years. when it popped up on ifc, i DVR'd it to watch it again.

unfortunately, it didnt have nearly the same effect on me as it did the first time. i find that this is an occasional problem and has prevented me from watching certain films twice. i really want to watch lilja-4-ever and make way for tomorrow again but im afraid that a second viewing would take away the magic from the first watching. i would already know what was going to happen and some of the power would be removed.

granted, ive rewatched most of kurosawa and bergman's films and my appreciation of them has only grown. while i still maintain that the burmese harp is an outstanding film, it might not have been as brilliant as the first time i watched it.

the first impression of a film is important to me and

the last of my shilling for criterion for now

seduced and abandoned, fishing with john, lord of the flies, double suicide

another film canon i am actively working on is to see the entire criterion collection. this one is going to take a while. the problem is that criterion has a tendency of releasing discs with a lot of stuff and i need to watch all of it (john laurie commenting on fishing!? WHY NOT!). i am shameless lover of the criterion collection, eclipse, and janus films. in fact, im a total whore for them. i need to buy a shirt. since my netflix queue is ordered into adding bursts (a bunch of j horror, new releases, eric rohmer, etc) i had a crapload of random criterions arrive and here is quick round up ordered from favorite to least favorite:

FISHING WITH JOHN

plot: john laurie fishes around the world with celebrities (willem dafoe, jim jarmusch, dennis hopper, matt dillon, tom waits)

results: hilarity

this is basically watching a jim jarmusch film that wasnt written or directed by the man himself. instead it was all laurie who was an integral star of jarmusch's most celebrated works (stranger than paradise and down by law). this was a TV series that aired on PBS in the early 90s and still holds up as a funny, clever, and original anti-sports sporting show.

also, gotta love that theme song (fiiiiiiiiiiishiiiiiing wiiiiiiith joooooohn. fiiiiiiiiishing wiiiiiiiiith joooooohn, etc.)

SEDUCED AND ABANDONED

im suprised i waited so long to watch this pietro germi italian comedy. i loved his previous film, divorce italian style and greatly admired it for its fellini-lite madcapness. like divorce, seduced was a madcap social satire. equal parts laugh out loud comedy and dry subtle wit, germi is really a great underappreciated director.

corpulent star saro urzi is perfect as a paranoid patriarch of an italian family obsessed with maintained their honor after their daughter agnese is knocked up by their other daughter's fiance. agnese is played with tragic fare by the beautiful stefania sandrelli who also starred in divorce italian style.

i dont really care for the works of mario monicelli perhaps because its too subtle but germi is very accessible and has stood up very well over time

LORD OF THE FLIES

peter brook did an admirable job of adapting this very disturbing novel onto the screen without a gloss or sheen that later hollywood adaptions had. using non professional actors and island shooting the film had a practical realism to it. the de-evolution into savages by the choir is elegantly stated and the death of piggy is adequately tragic.

the film seems short though. not much else to say about it.

DOUBLE SUICIDE

i was really disappointed i found this film so boring. after digesting a bunch of imamura and oshima, i was really looking forward to this important film of japanese 60s cinema. stylically, it was admirable and i liked the direction but nothing else really jumped out at me.

and so ends this edition of shilling for criterion

ingmar bergman died almost 2 years ago...

...and im still waiting for more suprises from the master of art films. with only about 2/3 of his collection available on region 1 dvd, i know i have some more suprises ahead of me. perhaps i will eventually see from the from the life of marionettes, brink of life, or maybe face to face, the most major work of his i havent seen. however, i know the time will come where i have seen all of his films and there wont be any more completely undiscovered bergman to witness.

bergman started my obsession with film canons. imdb's top 250 was my renting bible and i was knocking off all the american classics like chinatown, the sting, and of course, citizen kane. after that, i realized that there were a bunch of foreign films i was vaguely familiar with that i should see. the seventh seal wasnt the first one i watched (that honor belonged to yojimbo) but after seeing it, i saw cinema in a different way. the film drops you straight into a surrealistic scene of a -too comfortable for sitting on a rocky beach- max von sydow with a chessboard, waiting expectedly. then death appears and the wheels of motion for the film are set. i didnt see it as the bleak depressing tale that many do. i looked at it as an analysis of the cycle of life. with death, there was life and a child is saved. there is a reason to fear death but it will come for all of us. there is an inevitability to it.

among the many iconic images in this film, my favorite is the look of ectasy and fear of inga gill (the deceased blacksmith's nameless) when death appears to take the sydow, bjornstrand, andersson, and co. away. afterwhich came the shot of the five of them dancing happily in the distance. as wonderful as the dance was, it was the look on gill's face that astounded me. it was perfect. it was beautiful. as i would come to learn, it was pure bergman.

i was devastatingly sad when he died because it meant there would be no more films. however, he was already retired, over the age of 80, and lived on a secluded estate in the faro islands so he wasnt going to come to the US nor would he make anything else. however, he was alive and for some reason, i more hope in cinema. his death marked the demise of the last of cinema's great 3, along with the already gone kurosawa and fellini. the problem is i dont see anyone to take their places and i dont think its possible to replace them or even succeed them.

for the two year anniversary of his death, i wanted to learn about bergman the man and what drove him. i have seen interviews and listened to all the DVD commentaries available but with the release of BERGMAN ISLAND, i saw another opportunity to learn about the director i admire so much. that was the first of three films i watched to prep this blog entry.

what i learned was that he was a driven and intense filmmaker whose principal concern was beauty and achieving his vision. he was not however, a good person in his private life. in fact, he was self centered, womanizing, a self admitted terrible father, and prone to fits of rage. somehow, this fit the vision i had of him even before i learned about him. to achieve what he did, i cant see how he could lived a normal well adjusted life. from bergman island, we learned the extent of which fanny and alexander was inspired by his childhood and truth about the dreamlike visual imagery of cries and whispers. in many ways, this was the first interview he gave as normal guy rather than a filmmaking discussing his films.

he made up a lot of what he said in interviews to make his stories sound more complicated than what they were. in the 70s, he claimed the 4 women in white in a red red room that began cries and whispers were 4 different versions of his mother. It was not. It was a vision he had and liked it. in fact, most of his films were ideas of his and given his international reputation, bergman received free reign on his films. he lamented this and was sorrowful about the lack of genuine criticism for his films. bergman never had a true critic he could trust and later in life, it bothered him greatly.

vilgot sjoman's INGMAR BERGMAN MAKES A MOVIE (featured on the bonus disc to Criterion's Faith trilogy) follow bergman through the entire production process of the silence. in the pre-production, sjoman follows bergman working out blocking, getting subtleties in the dialogue correct, and making ingrid thulin put on different costumes to get her character look right. for a bergman fan, this is the best way to watch him work. he looked focused and confident behind the camera and in the 70s he was at his creative peak. he yelled at the set people and appeared aloof in sjoman's interviews. he even stressed the importance of not listening, reading, or talking to critics. it was a fantastic comparison to the reserved old man on faro.

[on a side note, i didnt really care for the doc. i dont really care for sjoman's direction style and i didnt really like i am curious yellow (curious blue is on the q though).]

in his waning years, bergman the snooty filmmaker gave way to bergman, the man who made films. he was remarkable and self reflective and has a frankness about his past years that is unapologetic yet aware of his mistakes. throughout his life, it seemed bergman was happiest as a loner. in both interview sets, he makes the points of stressing the lonliness of life and predictably, god's silence, the theme of the silence, naturally. in bergman, he discusses the relaxation and joy of not talking to anyone for days on end.

The final and somewhat tangential exploration of bergman was a documentary on Sven Nykvist, Light Keeps Me Company. Nykvist was Bergman's director of photography/cinematographer for the bulk of his career and was key in creating the starkness of persona and the vivacity of fanny and alexander (at least the beginning. its stark again in the second half).

Like bergman, nykvist was a man prone to anger driven by vision and beauty. however, he was a man who valued family so much so that the death of his Ulla, put a dampener on his career. in the documentary, they say that he never fully recovered emotionally from her death. still, during those years, he managed to lens some spectacular looking films including crimes and misdemeanors, the unbearable lightness of being, and tarkovsky's amazing ofret (the sacrafice). they were good friends and one influenced the other though and while each of them were different people, they shared enough a similar eye toward film.

would there have been a bergman without a nykvist? probably, but his films wouldnt have looked so good.

through bergman's films, i learned that movies could be way more than entertainment. he taught me that a movie can transport you to a world of the inescapable beauty, intensity, sadness, and drama. i know there are some more adventures he and i are going to have together and im sure that when ive seen all his films, it will take me the rest of my life to find all the other hidden treasures of the amazing ingmar bergman.

movies i saw over the weekend round up

sometimes, i see a movie and dont really react too much either way. the purpose of this blog isnt to review movies but to use a film as a springboard to talk abou things. its secondary purpose is a reminder to chart what movies ive seen and what i thought of them. i will return to the first tomorrow when i discuss twilight but for now, im just gonna quickly sum up my weekend watching

THE LONG GOOD GOODBYE

ive always liked bob hoskins and have always found helen mirren ridiculously hot and any opportunity to see both of them is a treat. this is hoskin's breakout role and he doesnt look exceptionally young. he, like spencer tracy and walter matthau, was born old looking and proceeded not to really age that much. anyway, good british gangster film with an especially performance from its leads

THE MADNESS OF KING GEORGE

another helen mirren film though nigel hawthorne is what made this exceptionally interesting play on film work. i particularly watching the film from a historical perspective. my wife is a big fan of reading books involving things that happened in the past so she was impressed at its historical accuracy. hawthorne was fantastic and deserved his oscar nod but this did not need to included on the new york times top 1000 (ditto long goodbye as reviewed above)

THE KILLER IS LOOSE

you ever rent or DVR a movie and then slowly realize youve seen the movie before? yup. i totally saw this joseph cotton film noir. luckily, i enjoyed it quite a bit the first time i saw and was happy to watch it again. i forgot who costarred but he was exceptionally creepy. just click on the link and it was the guy who WASNT the great joseph cotton. like many b film noirs, the ending is cut wicked short so you have denoume, resolution, and conclusion is about 3 minutes.

WOMEN IN LOVE

another british film! i havent seen any ken russell but i heard he's pretty good. ive been meaning to see the devils (my fave hockey team, natch. NJ rokz) but havent been able to get a good torrent of it and since it will get released on DVD, its my only means. anywho, a bit dull but not a bad movie. well shot and well acted, the highlight of it is a hot full on nude wrestling match between alan bates and oliver reed. homoerotic to the max! also, i believe glenda jackson is a memeber of hte british government and she is naked too. so for everyone who wanted to see a member of the government (i.e. no one), this one is for you

THE MARRYING KIND

this one i will talk about a little more and actually deserves an entry all on its own. i take that back, judy holliday deserves a blog entry on her own (illl rewatch adams rib and post it). this was a very interesting film that was told in flashback. it begins with a couple going through divorce proceedings (as played by holliday and hot new star aldo ray) telling their stories of misery to the counselor but through the flashback you can see that the experiences werent that miserable and they inside love each other very much. the juxtaposition of the angry current voiceovers and the visuals of the events as they happened told a very interesting story of a marriage. i actually think this one almost belongs on the new york times best of list (which it is included on but ill give them this one)

i do want to say a bit about judy holliday who i believe was one of the golden age of hollywood's saddest stories. she rocketed to fame in adam's rib and later won an oscar for born yesterday, an excellent film that she made after the marrying kind. she didnt make a lot of movies but the ones she was in were memorable. she perfected the blonde bimbo and i think was genuinely more talented than marilyn monroe. she had a sadness and charisma that monroe never managed to get. holliday was pretty and played dumb but she always made the viewer think that she was capable of more and always illicited sympathy.

anyway, after she born yesterday and a couple other films she was on a list of actors and questioned by the anti-american hearings at the government (mccarthyism). while she was not blacklisted from movies she was blacklisted from radio and TV which tainted her career for a while and just as she was getting back to her previous stardom she died from breast cancer several weeks before she was to turn 43.

holliday was a gifted oscar and tony award winning actresses whose career was unfairly cut short. in her major years from 1949-1960 she was nominated for either an oscar or golden globe for virtually all of her roles (only 10). i would love see a biopic made about her but im not sure the motivation is there.

ok, thats it for now. ill post my review and thoughts on twilight tomorrow

science and film: fin

this is the theme i started my blog writing about a mere two weeks ago (i watch a lot of movies eh?). while the film RED BEARD is not necessarily about science it is about medicine and the human sprint to understand disease and help people. isnt that what science is? discovery and the truth? yeah i know its a stretch but go with me on this one.

akira kurosawa is one of my favorite directors and red beard is one of my favorite films of his so it is fair to say that this is one of my favorite films of all time. when i saw it was airing on TCM i knew i had to DVR it and watch it again and it is still a masterpiece of unparalleled excellence in my mind.

this it the final kurosawa/mifune collaboration and from watching the film you can kind of see it. the role is understated and an almost-mellow mifune takes a backseat to the film's main character yuzo kayama, who plays the young arrogant doctor. apparently, the lengthy shoot angered mifune who couldnt shave off his beard and work on other films. though the tension works as mifune's character really needed to be a cranky cantakerous doctor with set ways and a tough exterior. basically, red beard was the original house or cox from scrubs.

the plot is fairly: young arrogant is taught what it means to be a real doctor but the way the plot unfolds over the 3 hours is exquisitely done. i think i prefer the first half of the film in which kayama's yatusomoto arrives and resists the ways of red beard. the character development is so well done and flies by. in fact, the entire film flies by and does not feel like a 3 hour film. it just goes to show you that length is relative and with the right subject matter, no movie is ever long

though vastly different from kurosawa's samurai epics, it still bears the mark of the great director. his tales of humanity like ikiru (my favorite of his films) or dodeskaden (also amazing) like red beard have a hope and humanity that is so rare. the plot is never heavy handed or even too intense. it is perfect blend of heart and soul. i should really buy this DVD

criterion docs part 1

a few weeks ago i watched for all mankind. this was the first criterion doc ive watched. there arent many but they all seem interesting so i put a bunch of em on my netflix q and started. the first one i watched on this new endeavor was hearts and minds, a scathing indictment of the vietnam war made in the mid 70s.

yeah, it was good but it was a bit too slanted to be taken seriously. that was at least the first thought i had on the film and i really thought about it; it was supposed to be slanted, right? so, one can make the argument that was one of the first films to present a subject and really point in one director. the vietnam war is pretty unanimously looked at as a mistake and a horrible waste of american lives. and since it was made in the mid 70s there was a startling immediance to its message.

so obviously this sort of film is what michael moore makes. he is a director i never really liked not because i disagree with his politics (i actually agree with a bunch of em) but in the way he interprets a documentary. he makes subversive films that are designed to sway his viewers towards his opinions rather than present an issue and let the viewers decide.

hearts and minds is better and makes a more realistic and even subtler argument against the vietnam war. this is what guerilla filmmaking should be. peter davis. not necessarily michael more.

a short blog entry about killing

thats a kieslowski reference bitches!

two films to discuss in this one. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer and The Honeymoon Killers. i think the link between is obvious (serial killers natch) and of course IMHO neither of them were very good. in fact, they both sucked...pretty hard.

Henry is a tale of a couple white trash serial killers and their innocent and unknowing sister/lover and Honeymoon is about a fat chick and a swarthy italian swindling people out of money and occasionally killing them.

Henry is a prime example of the poorly acted early 90s low budget independent film genre and Honeymoon is a prime example the poorly acted early 70s low budget independent film genre. and both films were directed by people who didnt really have much of a career afterwards though honeymoon had the distinct honor or NOT being scorsese's first feature length film. he was fired after spending too much time filming master shots (shots of the whole scene which are usually shot before close ups). of what could have been.

the early 90s and early 70s both marked returns to independent cinema. with cassavettes in the 70s and soderbergh/hartley in the 9s0, there was definetely a solid movement back to simpler character driven films. unfortunately, these were not the best of the genre

when you dont like a movie youre supposed to like...

youve had that situation before. you are watching a movie that for all intents and purposes you should love and now only are you not enjoying you are hating it. you feel bad for liking something that normally you would go crazy over but for some reason, its just no happening. i guess that this is the joy with free will; you are free to like a diverse set of movies.

im not talking about broad stuff like baby mama or kung fu panda that for the most part everyone liked. im talking about a personal favorite genre that you love and devour everything in existence. maybe you love quirky love stories that interweaves suicide, familial issues, and ghosts (wristcutters?) or dark indie dramas that interweave suicide, familial issues, and (metaphorical) ghosts (in the bedroom?).

for me, i love sparse scandanavian drama. lars von trier? HELL YEAH! bergman! of FUCKING course?! mikael hafstrom? darn TOOTIN

in my continuing quest to see every film in the criterion collection, i rented INSOMNIA. not the al pacino/robin williams film but the original scandanavian one with stellan skaarsgard who i always enjoy the presence of. i had waited a while to rent it because i hated the remake. at the time i credited this to the presence of sell out pacino and the increasingly irritating robin williams. he still owes me an apology for what dreams may come.

anyway, i didnt like the original either! why? it was noir-ish. dark. intruiging. expertly editing well written directed. well acted. so...what was the problem?

i dont know.

but that is the mystery of cinema...why we can catch movies that are essentially identical and love one; hate the other. perhaps if there is a japanese samurai remake of it ill give it a shot

i also didnt like heat. dont know why. didnt care for it.

david lean is a boring director

there. i said it.

he has made some masterpieces: lawrence of arabia, in which we serve, brief encounter, great expectations, and bridge on the river kwai are the ones that come to mind. on the other hand, he has also made some good but boring films including the one i watched last night summertime with katherine hepburn in a role that is virtually identical to her character in the african queen; a gutsy independent, idontneedaman kinda-thing. it was watchable and at times very enjoyable but there is something ultimately unsatisfying about lean.

blithe spirit, hobson's choice, this happy breed, oliver twist are all good films and they are all very well done but they didnt really drag me in. it certainly werent the stories (noel coward and dickens are pretty worthy writers) or acting (guiness in olivier twist! laughton in hobson's!) so i reasoned it must be the direction.

i looked it up last night and he only directed 18 films and of those, ive seen about 12 of them and while only one of them was actually bad (we will get to that in a minute) the rest were merely good said in a non-chalant 'nothing to go crazy over' kinda way. aside from the 4 films i listed above, i wouldnt really recommend any of his other films nor would i tell people to steer clear.

that brings me to ryan's daughter, his biggest failure and an almost unwatchable self indulgent 3 hour plus "epic" without a center. though its nowhere near heavens gate, it tries to be grander than it is. maybe that is the legend of david lean; a director whose projects are grander than what he is capable of stylistically. of course, i subscribe pretty heavily to the cahier du cinema ideals of a director having a stamp visibly on all their films that make it their own (sorry william wyler and george cukor, your work is indistinguishable from each other)

more-a imamura

last night i watched the second film out of criterion's awesome new boxset, pigs pimps and battleships: the films of shohei imamura the insect woman and suprisingly, i didnt enjoy as much as i thought i would. that isnt to say it wasnt excellent film...whcih it it was.

the plot was fairly simple and linnear. a woman named tome is born into an adulterous relationship and despite her best efforts cannot rise herself out of the sexual and political dereliction she is born into. the opening shot of an insect painfully crawling up a hill is juxtaposed at the end as tome is climbing up a similar hill.

imamura is probably the enfant terrible of japanese film. his stuff was daring, socially relevant, and contraversial much like a godard or a resnais. what really dragged into the film wasnt the plot so much as the use of still frames with voice over narration and sparse music. he employed this tactic at key moments through the film which allow the viewer to enter it their own movements of the characters in between still shots.

apparently, this used to be on theyshootpicture's top 1000 which might have been a little overzealous but this is still definetely worth watching

shohei imamura died!? the new criterion set p I

you know when you first start watching a director who has a long and illustrious career only to discover he died? ok, thats pretty rare and im not sure if any of you have had that experience and i since i disabled comments on here (because im insecure and dont want speaking ill of me and my opinions) i will never know. i had that experience recently with the great shohei imamura. i say ballad and narayama and the emporer's naked army marches and was entranced by both of them. i know that the latter was directed by haro kazuo (sp?) but imamura was a strong creative force. i wasnt big on vengeance is mine but i am willing to revisit it. anyway, i know that we was a rebel in the vein of oshima and suzuki but i hadnt seen much of his masterworks (intentions of murder, the insect woman etc). so, thanks again to criterion for releasing something i wanted to watch.

and then i found out he died a couple years ago

damn.

oh well. i guess there wont be any more stuff to miss and i as plow through late godard maybe having an extensive late period isnt necessarily a good thing.

Pigs and Battleships isnt considered one of his best works and isnt listed on the TSPDT top 7000 list but it is still a very good and provocative film. it mixes the stylized sexuality and frustration of post war japan a la oshima and the gangster fascination of suzuki. the film was not terribly subtle but it wasnt meant to be. pigs was meant as a scathing indictment of the US occupation in post WWII and the japanese poor/gang culture.

Jitsuko Yoshimura was very impressive and her role as haruko really made drove this film together. as for the story itself, it was not that well congealed and a bit plodding and for the first hour, i was bored for long stretches. stylalistically, i loved the sharp B&W contrast and the anti-Ozu camera angles. ex. in table scenes, the camera initially is placed knee height and sores up to separate the viewer from the action distinctly. you cant get much more of depature from ozu than that.

spiritually it shares a lot with mizoguchi and his street of shame but without the aire of tragedy. i am looking forward to watching the insent woman and see how that compares

3.5/5

science vs fiction, part I

i know that in my intro to my blog i mentioned that i am a scientist but it wouldnt pop up very often in my entries. well, one post in and the first theme i am going to discuss are a couple films about science and scientists.

Cartesius

this is the last of roberto rossellini's historical films included in ROSSELLINI’S HISTORY FILMS—RENAISSANCE AND ENLIGHTENMENT. Having thoroughly enjoyed Age of the Medici and especially Blaise Pascal, i was excited to sink my teeth into a nearly 3 hour treatment on the life of rene descartes, a man by theological and scientific conflict. He is a man who sought the truth and much like pascal, was one of the great thinkers/scientists to watch the earth.

apparently, i lived in the wrong era. i could totally be a scientist philosopher and i would totally wear awesome robes and a poofy hat. im still bummed i missed out on being a dandy. i would fop with the best of them but i digest...

im probably in the minority when i say that i prefer rossellini's historical films to his neorealist stuff. frankly, i thinkt he subject matter on these is way more interesting and the style and acting is decidedly more french (NO emotion in the acting. NONE). i dont think this was as impressive as rossellini's taking of power of louis xiv (IMHO, the crown jewel in his late period crown) but cartesius is still an excellent and well crafted fascinating film about a unique individual.

4/5 stars

Jean Painleve: Science is Fiction

this is a very criterion-ey post but i am pretty much a criterion fanboy. when this was announced, i was a bit baffled and kind of daunted by the thought of watching 9 hours of french nature docs from the 1st half of the 20th century. when it arrived from netflix i watched the first couple films and was in love. how cool is the birthday of a freakin' jellyfish? um...very much so! seriously. painleve gets his cameras in the oddest of places and brings forth stuff that is impossible to see in normal life. to see these things that are so obscure to the human eye is one of the many gifts cinema can deliver.

i actually havent finished watching the DVDs yet. i am about halfway through the bonus disc of an 8 part miniseries done on him and i still have to watch the amazing yo la tengo accompaniment for 8 of his films (tomorrow). ive never been a big yo la tengo guy but i respect them. any band that does 8 shows for the 8 nights of chanukah in hoboken has my affection forevah.

anyway, the movement of the octopus, the birth of a seahorse, shrimp fighting...all gold.

5/5 -- must rent!

this will be continued. i have kurosawa's red beard on my DVR which i will happily rewatch and discuss here.