project film school

Oh for a book and a shady nook...

2008-07-05T20:33:00.004-04:00

The Grandson: A book?
Grandpa: That's right. When I was your age, television was called books.

Clarisse: But why do you burn books?
Guy Montag: Books make people unhappy, they make them anti-social.

Gaston: How can you read this? There's no pictures!
Belle: Well, some people use their imagination.

Groucho Marx: I find television to be very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go in the other room and read a book.

a mythical revolution of saviors

2008-06-27T16:22:00.003-04:00

Father child
Angels of the night
Silverframe my candlelight

read : http://www.filmref.com/notes/archives/2007/05/le_lit_de_la_vierge_1969.html

A Transsiberian Film Before the Beach

2008-06-24T21:00:00.012-04:00

I was at the Nantucket Film Festival this past weekend to screen Meerkat Media's film Every Third Bite. While there I only caught one film at the actual festival (it seemed a better use of my time to enjoy the outdoors). The film I saw was Brad Anderson's Transsiberian. I've always been a fan of Anderson and usually enjoy his intelligent and uncommon approach to commonplace genres. Perhaps it's been a while since I saw one of his films and in that time my viewing preferences have changed, but I found Transsiberian to be somewhat disappointing in a few ways.

1) Continual flashbacks to remind you of the importance of a moment. Over and over as the story moved forward, Anderson thought it necessary to flashback to the past moment that made the present moment significant. In no way was this needed, when the inspector asks to see the main characters camera after she has lied to him we of course remember (or should) that there is a picture on her camera that proves her story false. I resented him needing to show me. Also, he should simply trust himself as a storyteller, all the information we as an audience need is there

2) Gratuitous use of torture. I found the scene where the main characters confront a woman who has been tortured almost completely without merit. It didn't add to my tension with the story and just made me uncomfortable with the images on the screen. Jonathan Rosenbaum has a nice little piece he wrote about torture in films, perhaps Anderson should have read it :
http://blogs.chicagoreader.com/film/2006/12/14/avoiding-movies-about-torture/

That being said, there are some extremely beautiful images in the film, good performances from Kinglsey, Mortimer and Harrison and some truly thrilling moments. I was definitely on the edge of my seat for parts of the film. Also, the "theater" I saw the film in was actually just a room and the daylight was peaking in in a very real way and the speakers had ridiculous feedback. So it should be noted that the technical ridiculousness that I couldn't stop thinking about when the film started escaped my mind by 20 minutes in- which obviously means the film worked on some level.

Ahh well. I did enjoy my weekend of beaching, eating good food, and the gentle breeze that evened out the sun as I read.

Fassbinder That's Fun?

2008-06-11T15:17:00.002-04:00

Of course he does humiliate a woman - but overall this is light and fun and Fassbinder looks so young!

It's interesting to think that both Godard and Fassbidner got their start by making gangster films based on American cinema and went on to make some of the most political cinema there is - each going to extremes in their own ways:

Meditations on Color, Light and Object in Rainer Werner Fassbinder's Lola

2008-05-19T20:52:00.010-04:00

[This entry is is part of the Production Design Blog-A-Thon, which begins today and runs through May 25th. Please consider joining us with your own post on the topic.]

Fassbinder was always very particular in how his films looked, especially as his career went on. Interestingly enough, as his films got more visual and specific, he stopped using a regular production designer. In terms of consistency, Kurt Raab, along with acting in many Fassbinder films, did production design on a good deal of Fassbinder films during the middle of his career including The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant, Fox and his Friends and Mother Kusters Goes to Heaven.

For Lola though, Fassbinder used Raul Gimenez and Rolf Zehetbauer. Gimenez doesn't have much of resume (although he did act in Lola) and Zehetbauer, who previously worked Fassbinder on Despair, went on to do production design for Querelle ( this makes complete aesthetic sense) and after went on to work in Hollywood.

Lola is a movie of image and action. The story revolves around Lola - a high priced call girl, von Bohm - the town's new building commissioner, and the rest of the town - which mostly consists of corrupt white businessmen and prostitutes. It's a satirical look at capitalism, specifically the effects of the German economic miracle on Fassbinder's homeland of Germany, the images of Lola create a sense of fantasy for what would otherwise be a story of realism. With this, the supposed "happy ending" of the film is called into question and one can begin to read the piece as a satire.

The majority of the action in the film takes place in the local brothel. The brothel is bathed in reds and blues and is decorated with shiny, frilly and blatantly material-esque goods. Lola's room in particular is full of dolls, frill and an overwhelming sense of frivolity. Combine this with the cotton candy hues and you have a visual story that outweighs the practicalities of plot.

As Vincent Canby wrote in the New York Times:

One of the more striking aspects of ''Lola'' is Fassbinder's extraordinary use of color. Scenes are sometimes shot in the subtle ways of chiaroscuro and sometimes with the blatancy of a piece of Pop art, as when, near the end, von Bohm is always seen in an electricblue light and Lola is drenched in pinky-lavender, even when they share the same film frame.

Likewise, outdoor scenes are filled with simplicity in terms of set design and light. Innocence is achieved and we understand briefly that the visual clues in Lola are more indicative of Fassbinder's point than perhaps the actual outcome.

As Canby said above, von Bohn is lit with blues and Lola with pinky-lavenders. The scene where he realizes who she really is (and she thus gains her power - although she won' be aware of it herself until later) demonstrates how light plays a role. The realization features both characters in a light blue, lavendar-esque light and then proceeds to feature Lola's strip tease in harsh reds:

The violent nature of her dance in spirit and in aestheic signifies a major change for her - her chance (and von Bohm's for that matter) for an honest life, one of virtue and love, is over. The seedy underworld, a world of harsh red light, has won over. It is up to Lola to rise to the occasion and enter that world fully - otherwise she risks becoming an object totally and completely.

I think a good way to close this up may be to end with two quotes from Fassbinder himself:

It isn't easy to accept that suffering can also be beautiful... it's difficult. It's something you can only understand if you dig deeply into yourself.
Rainer W. Fassbinder

The more real things get, the more like myths they become.
Rainer W. Fassbinder

5/12/08 : LOLA @ DCTV

2008-05-09T14:48:00.001-04:00

Cinema Today, Godard Then

2008-05-03T11:08:00.009-04:00

******

(we are, i am defined) "by regret, nostalgia for the cinema which no longer exists. At the moment we can do cinema, we can no longer do the cinema that gave us the desire to do it"

*******

5/508 : The Thin Blue Line @ DCTV

2008-05-03T10:41:00.003-04:00

http://projectfilmschool.org for more information

Fringe Benefits : Lars von Trier, A Dane in American Clothing

2008-04-14T00:13:00.029-04:00

The following post is a part of the "American Cinema" Anniversary Blog-a-Thon being coordinated by Adam at Film at 11.

Taking an American filmmaker post 1968 and discussing him/her and their work as an auteur in the spirit of Andrew Sarris' "The American Cinema" is no small task. In fact as I sat down to decide what to write about I got a bit overwhelmed and a bit sad in the realization that most of the cinema I love post 1968 isn't unnecessarily from this country. And the cinema that is, that of Jim Jarmusch, John Cassavettes, Martin Scorsese, etc.., is not cinema I am comfortable (outside of my own viewing of it) writing about.

Luckily, I decided to read Cinema Scope's interview with Lance Hammer (director of Ballast) in which he mentions Lars von Trier's Breaking the Waves and Dogme in general as an influence on his fine first feature. I've always been a fan of Von Trier, and even though "Lars von Trier" is not a name one might think of immediately when asked to consider the directors of American cinema but in a sense I can't think of a more appropriate context for Von Trier than American cinema. As he said in an interview at Cannes Film Festival 2005:

America is sitting on our world. I am making films that have to do with America [because] 60% of my life is America. So I am in fact an American, but I can't go there to vote, I can't change anything. I am an American, so that is why I make films about America.

And after all, the von in his name is supposedly influenced from Erich von Stroheim.

The following is much less formal and comprehensive than I would have liked but should serve as a jumping off point(and hopefully for me to put together a better piece) for a discussion of von Trier and the "fringe benefits" he has bestowed upon American Cinema. I've included his filmography at the bottom, beginning with Breaking the Waves, as his “Golden Heart Trilogy”is a good starting place for considering Von Trier in this context, as it marks his stylistic shift towards Dogme and inklings of a fascination with America.

Breaking the Waves : A much needed contrast to Hollywood love stories. The beginning of Dogma aesthetics. A disarming critique of intolerance. A pumped up take on the American melodrama, von Trier does more than work for you tears, he commands that you cry.

Idioterne : His Dogme film - Dogme itself being a response to the overproduced, stale films of America's Hollywood System. Therefore the goal of Dogme is to purify cinema through the purging of special effects, post production changes, altering light and sound while shooting and other things that are gimmicky and distract from story.

Dancer in the Dark : Like Breaking the Waves, this film is a "sadomasochistic celebration of female suffering." Brings into light the ability of digital video (supposedly shot with over 100 cameras). Also a tale of American greed and perhaps a statement on our judicial system and immigration. Looks to American musicals and their influence as well.

Dogville : Here von Trier is back again as a provocateur. He takes us this time to a stage with actors that represents a Rocky Mountain Community. Through the two faced nature of the towns people and the persecution and martyrdom of an innocent young woman we learn the true nature of American human community. A Brechtian deconstruction of "Our Town, the film worked for many and for others was simply a hateful prank.

Manderlay : Picks up where the anti-American Dogville left off (just with different actors). The main lady and her gangster father drive the Depression-era U.S and end up on an Alabama plantation where blacks are still held as slaves. She works to free the slaves and becomes a "Great White Mother" delivering democracy. Von Trier's critique of America might not hold up as well as with Dogville, but on first viewing is pretty powerful.

Often it is hard to tell whether Lars von Trier's critiques (especially his portrayal and treatment of women) offer true criticism or are just an act of exploitation (both make him relevant in the world of cinema here in the US - I think)

Jonathan Rosenbaum has always been critical of von Trier (and his Dogme pals) and thinks his intentions clearly lean one way, as he writes in his review of Thomas Vinterberg's Dear Wendy:

I'm amused that von Trier managed to snooker the American press with his Dogma 95 manifesto, whose professed aim was to get back to the basics of realism. I'm equally amused that so many of my colleagues routinely overlook his company's production of porn through its Puzzy Power branch. My interest is less moralistic than aesthetic: his supposedly more serious work has the same aesthetic limitations as porn. The protracted shoot-out at the end of Dear Wendy is even more pornographic than the moment when a female member of the Dandies exposes her breasts. The audience is clearly expected to enjoy the bloodbath even while it disapproves.

And in his brief review of von Trier's Dogville:

This experimental drama about the cruelty of a Rocky Mountain community toward a woman (Nicole Kidman) in flight from gangsters, shot with an all-star cast on a mainly bare soundstage, bored me for most of its 178 minutes and then infuriated me with its cheap cynicism once it belatedly became interesting--which may be a tribute to writer-director Lars von Trier's gifts as a provocateur. The fact that he spends most of his time in Denmark as a porn producer seems relevant to his exploitation instincts, yet those who have called this blend of Brecht and Our Town anti-American may be overrating its ideological coherence. As in Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark, the heroine suffers greatly, but whether she suffers at the hands of humanity or von Trier himself isn't entirely clear.

In my mind, intention while worth mentioning, doesn't prove more important to me than what he's actually done. Whether his cinema is seen as exploitative or informative, it brings with it a much needed discussion on issues of greed, misogyny, suffering, faith and violence. Also, whether Dogme was a true attempt to tell genuine stories or more of a joke makes no difference in the sense that it encouraged (and still encourages as we see with Ballast) cinema that goes beyond the cookie cutter films of Hollywood. It encourages people to tell stories with actors and ideas instead of special effects.

And in the words of Lars von Trier himself : "It's always been a lie that it's difficult to make films."

Wasington (2009) (announced
Antichrist (2008) (announced)
Chacun son cinéma ou Ce petit coup au coeur quand la lumière s'éteint et que le film commence (2007)
Direktøren for det hele (2006)
... aka The Boss of It All (International: English title)
Manderlay (2005)
Dogville: The Pilot (2003) (V)
Fem benspænd, De (2003) (segment "The Perfect Human: Avedøre, Denmark")
... aka The Five Obstructions (International: English title)
Dogville (2003)
D-dag - Den færdige film (2001) (TV)
... aka D-dag - Editors Cut
Dancer in the Dark (2000) (as Lars Von Trier)
D-dag - Lise (2000) (TV)
D-dag (2000) (TV)
Idioterne (1998) (uncredited)
... aka Dogma 95 - Idioterne
... aka Dogme # 2 - Idioterne (Denmark: series title)
"Riget II" (1997) (mini) TV mini-series
... aka The Kingdom II (France: theatrical title) (USA)
... aka Geister II (Germany)
... aka Hôpital et ses fantômes, L' (France)
... aka Hospital der Geister - Teil 2 (Germany: video title)
... aka Lars von Triers Riget II (Denmark: DVD box title)
... aka Riket 2 (Norway)
Breaking the Waves (1996) (as Lars Von Trier)

The Binary Images & Haunting Sounds of “Eat, for This is My Body”

2008-04-07T01:35:00.004-04:00

Eat, for This Is My Body, Michelange Quay's binary heavy film acts more like a poem than a movie. There is no plot to speak of and we instead follow images and sounds that lead us on a journey of post-colonialism of the Haitian variety. The scenes aren't all disparate though, we see the same characters throughout the piece, and together they help to build a tension that is both erotic and filled with disgust. Those characters include an old woman or matriarch of an old estate (amazingly played by Catherine Samie), a young male servant, a younger woman called Madame and the troop of young black boys she instructs.

The feature film is a first for Quay, who was born in Queens and is a first generation Haitian. The film is filled with a cinematic language that strays from convention and instead offers up it's own rules of comprehension. The mishmash of images and auditory emphasis on sounds that are wet and bring the focus to the human aspect of things, seem fitting considering how the "story" came to be (according to Quay):

“Wow. Hard to say. In all honesty, the film kind of wrote itself. One day, the main incantatory monologue of the Old White Woman that starts, 'Eat, For This Is My Body', came to me, and from then on, images, and ideas sort of attracted themselves around this core, magnetically, without design, by 'feeling.' " [Michelange Quay in M&G]

The issues of the film are aided by the lack of convention though, as the history of Haiti itself isn't straightforward and traditional. Quay successfully puts a complicated history of hatred and sadness into context with his film:

“Tragedy is a strong word. Haiti is paying for having emerged the first decolonized nation and after the United States and France, the third successful revolutionary republic in history...achieved by black slaves. In that history there is triumph, pride...and isolation that have followed Haiti up until today, into its relationships with its neighbors, particularly the United States. Tragic, magnificent, painful national karma.” [M&G]

It because of this history and the unique language, that Eat, for This Is My Body should be seen by many and also won't be seen by many:

The unhappy question is whether there’s an audience for this kind of cinema: boldly non-narrative, preoccupied with dialectics (racial, historical, sexual), palpably angry, yet utterly sincere. It’s “difficult” filmmaking in the sense that it demands engagement and provides few answers (easy or otherwise), but is articulate enough that advocacy need not bleed over into special pleading. Simply put, Quay’s film is too vivid—too lucidly oblique—to be classified as one of those cinematic Rorschach tests that say more about the looker than anything else. There’s definitely something to see here. [Cinema Scope]

And there is something to see, something I quite enjoyed. Like all first first films it isn't perfect and could stand to lose 20 or minutes, but regardless it's more daring than anything in theaters today and deals with a subject matter that we could all stand to learn more about. The scene of the old woman lying in bed, slowly reciting a monologue that progresses from a quiet murmur to a full on poem of hatred isn't something I will forget soon. Likewise, watching the scene where the group of boys sit around a table that has a big cake on it and slowly start to taste the cake, enjoying it in moderation before they all start madly grabbing at the confection shows true talent on Quay's part - his metaphor of the "cake of humanitarianism" is one of the strongest images I've on screen in sometime.

The trailer : http://youtube.com/watch?v=flREy0YyFBA

originally posted @ takepart.com

Taking Out the Extra Trashy with the Appropriately Titled "Strip Nude for Your Killer"

2008-03-31T23:21:00.016-04:00

This little review is a part of Lucid Screening's White Elephant Blogathon!
Be sure to check out the other reviews.

"Killing is like loving.
It is an art. The most ancient art.
The subtlest and most perverse art..
And it gives pleasure."

-Marquis De Sade
(featured in the trailer for Strip Nude for Your Killer)

If the title wasn't enough, the basic premise of Andrea Bianchi's 1975 giallo pic Strip Nude for Your Killer revolves around a fashion model dying from an abortion, her doctor covering up the death before his own death and everyone associated with the model and her agency dying at the hands of a biker helmet wearing serial killer.

It's giallo, so you've got your sex, horror, violence and a jazzy score to accompany those lovely dubbed actors and actresses. The "story" of the serial killer (that does meet his victims in the nude) revolves around Carlo, a photographer who likes using his camera to get into girls pants. It's actually how we meet him - she proclaims that his camera isn't clicking - after she's already taken off her clothes for the camera. He quickly takes of his swim trunks and proceeds to the next phase of the interview. For most of the film he appears to be the strongest link to the murders.

One of my favorite moments had to be when a young woman who has slept with both men and women to advance in the fashion industry says (after having sex of course) "I want to be a fashion model, not a kept woman or a slave."

Uh huh.... She then walks around nude for awhile before being brutally killed.

In a way that scene is the entire movie. Part of me wants to have fun with the film, that's no doubt the point. It's trashy and doesn't hide it. But a larger part of me can't help but feel disgusted for spending 1 1/2 hours watching women portrayed as no more than slabs of meat. It's 70 machismo at it's best and for better or worse, there doesn't seem to be anything deeper in a plot that isn't especially intriguing. All you get for your 90 minutes are women taking off their clothes, people getting killed and a few interrogations in between.

One especially degrading scene features an overweight man tricking a lady into going back to his apartment, where he forces her to have sex with him only to fail in "getting it up." Which I suppose would feel better if she didn't console him after.

I'm often torn between movies I love and the way they objectify and demean women. On one hand I'm a cinephile and like films for filmsake and on the other, I'm a women and hate having stereotypes reinforced in a male dominated industry. Luckily, there was no such qualm here, the movie was just bad and unfortunately not in a good way.

In looking back at the Marquis De Sade quote, I can't help but wonder why a film that worked so hard to be nothing but an excuse for fake blood and tits is trying to align itself with art or pleasure at all. It seems to me, when all is said and done, the most pleasurable thing about Strip Nude for Your Killer is definitely the title.

*I somehow wonder if my White Elephant submission of the classic Sesame Street pic Follow That Bird somehow karmically doomed me to get receive the trashiest submission :)

* It should also be noted that I decided to write this piece after seeing Chantal Akerman's Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. It seems relevant somehow...

*Also - for those that are curious, the trailer is below:

March Screening Schedule for Project Film School

2008-02-26T16:50:00.004-05:00

Visit http://projectfilmschool.org for more information

Fassbinder, My Valentine of Choice

2008-02-14T20:25:00.006-05:00

It's Valentines Day.. And while I don't really buy into America's celebration of everyone spending money to prove that we love each other - I suppose that it isn't such a bad idea to reflect on the people we care about. So I'm going to do just that and reflect a little on German filmmaker Rainer Werner Fassbinder. He may not have been known as the most likable fellow, but his films make up for any nasty personality traits that he might have had. In a 13 year period (he died at age 37) he directed over 40 productions, mostly feature films, but also some TV specials and a 14 part miniseries called Berlin Alexanderplatz.

The reason I love Fassbinder, is that his films, especially his later works, were often amazing combinations of quality storytelling with social critique. He would create films about people, making the stories strong enough to stand on their own, but going a step further and adding a layer of subversion, often discussing his homeland and what frustrated and disappointed him about his government and his people. He did so in an effortless sort of way, weaving political and social ideas with emotion and character to create one cohesive vision.

His work is known to be depressing and while it may not inspire folks in a typical feel good sort of way, any film or piece of art that attempts to ignite discussion or criticize the status quo, is indirectly a call to action and is personally for me, the most exciting thing I can think of. One of his films in particular seems appropriate to discuss today, Ali : Fear Eats the Soul, Fassbinder's tribute to the filmmaker he loved, Douglas Sirk. His story of an older German woman who falls in love with a much younger Moroccan man is perhaps the closet he got to a love story that wasn't all together tragic.

In the story, Emmi (Brigitte Mira) is a widowed cleaning lady with 3 grown-up children. When she randomly goes into a bar to escape the rain, she meets Ali (El Hedi ben Salem), a Moroccan garage mechanic. Ali's friends dare him to talk to the old woman, who is out of place in the bar not only because of her age, but because the bar is a meeting place for immigrants. He asks Emmi to dance and after some conversation and a walk home, they both realize how lonely they have been and see being together as a solution for this loneliness. They quickly marry, much to the chagrin of Emmi's family and friends, who all disown her in a sense when they find out.

More than a love story, Ali is a honest portrayal of racism in Germany following the 1972 Olympics that were held in Muinch, where Palestinians killed a group of Israeli athletes. The town's feelings toward Ali mirror the feelings of the nation.

So please, in honor of reflecting on those we love, watch the clip below from Ali : Feat Eats the Soul - one of my favorite scenes from any movie and check out one of the prolific director's many films.

Art as Politics, Bach through Portabella

2008-02-12T13:04:00.000-05:00

Pere Portabella's The Silence Before Bach is why I live in New York City. Whenever I feel a little lost in the big city and dream of living somewhere greener with cheaper rent, I remind myself that I live in a city where I can go to the local movie theater and see something as wonderful as Portabella's Bach.

A lyrical look at the life and music of German composer Johann Sebastian Bach, the film explores the relationship between image and sound. Portabella gives us Bach's music on many instruments, some classical, some modern. The images that accompany the sound appear at first to only be connected through the simple relation of the image to the sound, but as the picture progresses the narrative fragments slowly start to connect, revealing a hidden portrait of the composer and of how music plays a role in life today.

For a film filled with sound, it's actually very quiet, it's simple and never shouts the answer to the audience. The opening images are of a barren loft with a self-propelled player piano that gives us Bach's “Goldberg” Variations. From there on we are treated to scenes of a man assuming the role of the actual Bach, a subway filled with string instruments, a horse dancing and present day truck drivers, one expressing his love for Bach on his harmonica.

What really stood out for me, was the film's ability to capture the pure beauty of music, specifically how Bach created something that changed humanity forever. In doing so, Bach has taken on the role of a political person, of someone who is working to overcome the negative in the world. Albert Camus wrote about this idea, that an artist who creates something beautiful, who gives something to the world, is as political as someone at a protest. He contends that authentic political existence can be about defying the things that are working to destroy humanity by connecting us with something that embraces it.

Bach and the many artists that fill the pages of history, have given us this gift and Pere Portabella has continued that vision, that action, by creating a document that puts Bach's music in a contemporary context for today's audiences. The film plays in New York for only 2 more days, so if you live here check it out asap.

If you don't, I highly recommended that you take the time to watch the clip below, sitting with it will give you a taste of how inspirational the film is. They may even encourage you to contact his production company, Films 59, to request the film in your area.

The chances of the film coming to DVD soon is not very likely. Portabella has had strong thoughts on home viewings and how they change the context of a work - although rumors of talks with Chicago distribution company Facets have given me some hope.

Still Life : China in Transition, Images in Motion

2008-02-05T12:48:00.000-05:00

Jia Zhang-Ke's Still Life made me proud to be cinephile. I see a lot of movies and often times folks ask me for recommendations. This always makes me nervous, as movies are expensive and most folks don't see a lot of movies, so when they do, they want it to be good. Thankfully, good is somewhat of an understatement when describing Still Life, as a pal put it, the film is "98% a masterpiece."

The film came about when Chinese director Jia, came into contact with the town of Fengjie and the Three Gorges hydro project. The project has caused that part of China to undergo serious change and the visual landscape of the land is one of a slow destruction and a slow climb to modernization.

An almost invisible mix of documentary and fiction, Still Life focuses on two main characters, Sanming and Shen Hong, as they return to Fengjie to find their missing spouses and upon arrival find a town in transition. Sanming spends his time waiting for the boat his wife work's on to arrive by getting a job in demolition. Shen Hong searches for her husband with one of his friends and visits various establishments.

What makes the picture amazing are the small moments, the moments in which you need no words or explanation to understand that the country is changing, that Communism is giving way to Capitalism and that the environment is at risk. Images tell the story here - it's men in white suits and gas masks spraying the crumbling buildings that the poorest in the community are tearing down with no masks to protect them, it's two workers sharing dinner and their individual cell phone rings, it's bottled water, it's handing out cigarettes, toffee and noodles and mostly it's the ever changing landscape.

As Jia himself puts it

"Still Life represents a reality that has been overlooked by us. Although time has left deep marks on it, it still remains silent and holds the secrets of life. I entered this condemned city with my camera and I witnessed demolitions and explosions. In the roaring noise and fluttering dust, I gradually felt that life could really blossom in a brilliant colors even in a place with such desperation."

What's unfortunate about the film, is that despite the fact that it was seen across the globe in 2006, it's just getting a US release now, in 2008. And upon going to the distributor's website, http://www.newyorkerfilms.com, I was unable to find out if it will be playing anywhere else besides New York City in the future. You can however save it in your Netflix queue.

Considering that the film won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival in 2006, I find this very disheartening. I constantly worry that in the future there will be little to no foreign films in theaters.

What can you do? All I can think is to e-mail info@newyorkerfilms.com and call your local independent movie theater and request that the film be played in your area.

______

Witnessing Drama, Witnessing Disease

2008-02-04T10:28:00.000-05:00

This past Friday night I wandered on over to the IFC Center in Manhattan to see Andre Techine's The Witnesses. The French Techine, director of Wild Reeds, Strayed and many other fine films, here tells the story of 4 people and their experience with onset of AIDS in the western world:

This beautifully acted ensemble film, which uses recurrent images of water and aviation, unfolds in three chapters. The first remembers the heady pre-AIDS era. The second observes the foursome’s reactions to the crisis, which for each is a test of character and of the strength of bonds they have taken for granted. In the third, those who remain pick up the pieces and go on.

“The Witnesses” sidesteps most of its opportunities for high drama, political sermonizing and the jerking of tears. Mr. Téchiné, working from a screenplay he wrote with Laurent Guyot and Viviane Zingg, refuses to pigeonhole his characters in comfortable niches or ethical positions. The film skips ahead with the pace of a light romantic comedy, rarely lingering long enough on a scene to conjure melodrama. [The New York Times]

What I enjoyed most about the movie is what Stephen Holden's Times review touches on, that while AIDS is obviously a political subject, the grace with which Techine weaves the politics of the onset of AIDS with the stories of his characters, allows for a more poignant look at the effect the disease had at the time. Had he been more overt with his point or used the disease to create more drama in the lives of his characters, he would have risked losing one side of the equation (politics or personal stories). His approach allows for a tender portrait of humanity and also a pointed lesson in the way the western world handles crisis.

I also enjoyed seeing a well crafted, socially conscious film. Don't get me wrong, I love DIY films and documentaries, but I can't help appreciating a movie that takes the art of cinema into account, while still having a point and forcing it's audience to think about the issues at hand. The use of warm colors for the clothing of the main characters, the music, the juxtaposition of a young woman wanting to be an opera singer and her gay younger brother, and the fluid camera movement all come together and add vital pieces to the puzzle that Techine is building.

If you live in New York, head over to the IFC Center to check the film out, if not, watch the trailer below and go here to find out when it might be coming to a city near you.

On the Edge of Identity and Hollywood

2008-01-10T10:43:00.003-05:00

With the ever changing face of immigration and the increasing trend of Westernization, cultural identity is anything but clear for most people these days. In 2005, my favorite film of the year was Faith Akin's Head On, an in your face love story that takes place in between Germany and Turkey and just as the main characters have trouble sorting out their emotions, they also are caught in between two countries and two identities.

Akin, Turkish born and German raised, has a new movie coming out, The Edge of Heaven (Cannes winner for best screenplay), it opens in New York on May 21 at Film Forum.

“The Edge of Heaven” has its similarities in theme and some settings to “Head-On,” but it also reflects a more mature approach. The focus on parents and children may stem from Mr. Akin’s experience of becoming a father in 2005, when he and his wife had a son.

Still, “The Edge of Heaven” takes up the subject of cultural conflict for Turkish migrants that played to such powerful effect in “Head-On.” Those conflicts are universal, Mr. Akin insisted, rather than specific to the two countries. Mr. Akin, whose wife is of Mexican heritage, said that he feels great kinship with the Mexican filmmakers Guillermo Arriaga and Alfonso Cuarón.

“What I’m always trying to say is, this Turkish-German gap, you know, or this connecting element of the two nations, or systems, or worlds — you can change that and put other things instead,” Mr. Akin said. “Mexico and the U.S., same thing.” [The New York Times]

Next Akin is headed to New York to make a short film and while he is headed to the US, he isn't going to plop himself into the Hollywood machine. Beyond his honest portrayals of people trying to connect with each other and their heritage, Akin also stands out for his refusal to buy into the Hollywood system, ignoring offers to direct big budget films. European directors are often tempted by big paychecks to abandon their more personal stories only to make films like The Invasion and Flightplan.

For more on Akin, read the complete article in the New York Times and watch the videos below (one is a trailer for Head On - with French subtitles, and one is a scene from The Edge of Heaven)

A Pro-Choice Top 10

2008-01-02T09:41:00.001-05:00

Why do people make top 10 lists at the end of year? When it comes to cinema, I think there are two reasons : 1) the people that spend all year watching films enjoy a moment at the end when they can dialogue with other knowledgeable, passionate folks about what they liked and why 2) as Jonathan Rosenbaum puts it "the industry's desire to resell goods that have already been sold to us again and again."

The reason I'm doing it? A little of the first reason and a little of the second I suppose. In regards to the second, it frustrates me that most movies on my list were never released in the majority of the country, my parents in Ohio for example, didn't have the chance to see 4-6 of the movies that I loved the most this year (if they were released they probably played once without any publicity). We live in a society that pre-packages our entertainment and has ultimately decided that as a country we can only handle the easiest, the most cliched of movies. In that same way, they pre-package most foreign countries only providing people with fear - when people think of Iran, they think of the words that the Bush administration has fed us, but nobody knows who Kiarostami is (do you?).

And people for the most part seem OK with this, OK with choices that suggest they aren't smart enough to work a little bit while they are entertained. With this, I give you a list of films that I think are worth seeing, that for the most part weren't at suburban multiplexes and while there a lot of US films on the list, half are from across the globe. The amazing thing about today, is that despite a lack of control on what gets shown in the theater, with Netflix and online retailing, anyone, anywhere has access to tons of DVDs.

So take this for what you will - and maybe try something you've never heard of. I've included a trailer for each and a link to what I think is a representative review. Enjoy!

1. There Will Be Blood (directed by Paul Thomas Anderson) USA

David Denby's review in The New Yorker

2. Killer of Sheep (directed by Charles Burnett) USA

Jonathan Rosenbaum's review in the Chicago Reader

3. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (directed by Andrew Dominik) USA

Andrew Sarris' review in the New York Observer

4. Private Fears in Public Places (directed by Alain Resnais) France

Jonathan Rosenbaum's review in the Chicago Reader

5. After the Wedding (directed by Suzanne Bier) Denmark

Kenneth Turan's review in the Los Angeles Times

6. Syndromes and a Century (directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul) Thailand

A.O. Scott's review in The New York Times

7. I'm Not There (directed by Todd Haynes) USA

J. Hoberman's review in the Village Voice

8. Regular Lovers (directed by Philippe Garrel) France

Manohla Dargis' review in The New York Times

9. Bamako (directed by Abderrahmane Sissako) Mali

Nathan Lee's review in the Village Voice

10. Sweeney Todd (directed by Tim Burton) USA

A.O. Scott's review in The New York Times

It's in the Eyes and the Angles

2007-12-27T20:25:00.001-05:00

Ingmar Bergman's Autumn Sonata opens with a man talking about his wife. That man, Viktor, tells of how he and Eva became married and of some of her flaws and problems when it comes to dealing with emotions. He speaks directly to the camera before becoming part of the scene and ignoring the camera until the very end of the film.

At first, his breaking of the 4th wall may seem an odd way to open the movie, especially being that the movie is so heavy on emotion and dialogue between characters and Viktor's interaction with the audience seems to distance you from the film you are about to see. But what the absent 4th wall actually does, just for those few seconds, is give you an extremely effective false sense of control. Bergman let's you think you have the upper hand in what will become a heart wrenching battle between Liv Ullman and Ingmar's namesake, and Ullman's on screen mother, Ingrid Bergman.

The battle is also one in which both women come into thinking they also have the upper hand. Liv Ullman's Eva comes thinking she has outgrown her past. She is a quiet woman, but from the moment she speaks of her mother, it's clear she is seeking approval from her. Ingrid Bergman's Charlotte, a woman who sacrificed her family to pursue her career as a pianist, comes thinking she will be able to give Eva what she needs, but from the second we meet her, it becomes clear she doesn't know how to provide her daughter with anything she needs, despite good intentions and a desire to be a better mother.

The films follows intimate moments with the women, on their own and together as they somewhat unknowingly move towards a venting session like only Bergman could create. Eva's personal battle to forgive and Charlotte's personal battle to balance her ambition with her family have long been pent up inside each of the women, and when all is said and done, neither is any more to blame than the other. Bergman and Ullman give us honest women, who in keeping true to themselves have failed each other.

It's been said that Autumn Sonata is more like a piece of theater than a film, but that would mean ignoring two of the things that make Autumn Sonata what it is, the colors and camera. Like the title would suggest, everything is bathed in red, orange and yellow lights and hues. It gives a false sense of warmth to the piece, not unlike the false sense of warmth both women have crafted in regards to their reunion. What makes this a movie though, is the camera. Bergman holds on his actors, holds on their faces, lets their expression tell the story. He centers in on them in a way a piece of theater never could. The perfect example of this is below, there are no subtitles, but you don't need them:

Cheap Shots

2007-12-14T11:14:00.000-05:00

It's an exciting time for documentaries these days. Better, cheaper cameras, like the DVX100, and sound equipment allows documentarians to film to their hearts content and with most major news sources failing to tell it like it is, documentaries are becoming more and more vital to society. With this, I was very excited to head to the IFC Center to check out Jennifer Vendetti's film Billy the Kid, a verite documentary about a teenager in Maine, who she met when she there for work. What really interested me about the film, is that based on the plot, it's a film anyone could make - no special access needed, no money, not even a large tome commitment (I believe she shot the movie in a week or so).

A few minutes into the movie, I knew what I would be seeing was not a remarkable piece of humanity but just another cheap attempt at cashing in on America's seeming fascination with the all American "nerd."

The scenes are formulaic and even worse feel set-up. There is nothing more mind-numbing than having to sit through what is suppossed to be a touching discussion between a son and his mother that feels like it's happening because of the video camera. Also, a progression of moments that are suppossed to deal with young love at a pizza parlor reek of a fascination with being on camera, instead of the fascination of young love.

And what's worse, the camera is not only distracting to those on it, but for those watching the movie, the camera distracts in the worst way possible - it never stays still and appears to be run by someone that has never picked one up before. Often in documentary, the importance of a subject or the level of interest it brings with it, can prove to overcome sloppy camera work - but here, the subject is fairly average and the scenes don't even seem genuine.

Of course there are a lot of films like this, the flip side to technology's accessibility I suppose. What makes this case so disheartening is that not only has the film gotten a lot of praise (Best Documentary at SXSW) it's also being shown in a fairly big art house theater in New York City, The IFC Center. By no means do films have to be perfect and precise, but they should be something created with care, something that the director thinks about - and with that they should also assume their audience to be smart, to be people that won't be won over by false sentiment and need and want a movie that shows them something new through form or content.

But alas, SXSW, home of the mumblecore movement, gains prestige everyday - and with Billy the Kid, I'm sure that young filmmakers everywhere are rushing to film the quirky person in their town so they can be as sloppy as they like.

______

Watching the Unwatchable

2007-11-27T15:18:00.000-05:00

a trip to the theater : Margot at the Wedding
(directed by Noah Baumbach)

One of the reasons we go to the movies is to experience things we wouldn't normally get to experience : a lifestyle, an event or a place etc. Part of the process of experiencing these things through watching a film is having a protagonist that you can align yourself with, that you can relate to in some way, so as to go through what they go through in the film. So when a film is stock full of folks that are so despicable that you can't relate to them, it's sometimes a lonely day at the theater.

Noah Baumbach's Margot at the Wedding is one of those films that requires you to take the journey all by yourself. The main characters are all East Coasters whose background has afforded them the ability to spend their time thinking of only themselves. Their self absorption and associated neurosis makes the entire Margot crew seem inherently unlikable, and with the exception of Margot's husband (played by John Turturro) and her son (played by Zane Pais) all involved are in need of a reality check or at least a lesson in keeping quiet ( although I suppose all the fun would be lost is they kept quiet, for here we don't get to travel with the characters, but instead we get to laugh and cringe at their dysfunctionality).

Films like these always leave me feeling a tad mixed up inside, much more so than films that have more disturbing content. I've seen Fatih Akin's Head On at least 10 times, adore all of Fassbinder and even enjoy revisiting Lars von Trier's Breaking the Waves now and then, so I'm not turned off by discomfort.

But while films like Head On and Breaking the Waves may deal with rougher issues than something like Margot at the Wedding, the main characters, no matter how messed up, are still better people deep down than I suspect Nicole Kidman's Margot is and ultimately I care about them despite the mistakes they make during our time together. This being said, I may not care for Margot, but the more I think on it, the more I enjoy Margot at the Wedding, I may have made the journey on my own, but it was a rewarding one nonetheless.

Processing Our Past on the Screen

2007-11-09T13:00:00.000-05:00

On Monday I went to MOMA to finally see some of the Spain UnCensored series before it ended. Lucky for me, Victor Erice's The Spirit of the Beehive was screening one more time. I've seen the film before (and I own it) but never on the big screen and being that it is one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen on the small screen I knew I was in for a treat!

Of course, I was right, the film looked amazing, but what struck me more than the aesthetics this time were the political undertones, which I knew were there but had never left such an impression on me. It got me to thinking about how politics work in the framework of American cinema today. Current politics of course are present in our theaters - ranging from In the Valley of Elah to Lions for Lambs, but these films highlight their politics in plot, often wearing their opinions on their sleeves. I'm hard pressed to think of a current release that is a subtle as The Spirit of the Beehive, let alone as creative and heartbreaking.

Ana Torrent's eyes speak volumes about the state of Spain during Franco's regime - comparisons between the community of the bee and human communities, ideas of drones and dictators and visuals of Frankenstein and a soldier on the lam all come together to paint a portrait of childhood fantasy as well as a chilling comment on fascism. Perhaps it's just me, but I find films that don't hit you over the head with their message much more effective in relaying a feeling or having an audience understand an idea about a political point. You may not directly understand it, or be able to put your thoughts directly into words, but in the end a more intuitive comprehension is likely more swaying than an intellectual one (we are great rationalizers.. I mean who doesn't think Starbuck's coffee tastes great?.)

Of course, what really bugs me more than the content we are creating, is the content many Americans, especially young progressive folks, are watching. While in years past, young people flocked to films with subtitles, today they are less inclined to do so. The attendance rate of people under 30 at this year's NYFF would seem ample proof of that. I find it interesting that young people who work so hard to try and get Americans to stop selfish capitalistic ways and embrace the rest of the world, don't watch many foreign films. Iran, a country we have a very tricky relationship with, is responsible for some of the best cinema in recent years, but of my friends who spend their time trying to change the world, very few know who Kirostami is. It isn't just a matter of entertainment, it's about supporting an industry and content that only furthers American domination ("cinema" is without a doubt one of our biggest exports and more than that places a cultural stronghold on the rest of the world).

The stories we choose to tell and share, express who we are and how we are processing what happens to us as a society and while films like the current releases I mentioned above, as well as the current surge in documentaries, are important as more direct dialogues on our situation, I can't help but long for an American Cria Cuervos (Carlos Saura) Father (Istvan Szavbo), The Marriage of Maria Braun ( R.W. Fassbinder ) or The Spirit of the Beehive. I guess I want stories that teach us something about humanity as well as recount political presents and pasts, I want movies that entertain as well as evaluate without having to tell me they are doing so, I want to feel it. Is that asking for too much...?

Rosenbaum and "Reservation Road"

2007-11-05T18:36:00.000-05:00

I should start this by saying something I have probably said more than a few times on this blog - I'm a big fan of Jonathan Rosenbaum (head film critic at the Chicago Reader). So when he made Terry George's Reservation Road (a film I wanted to see when I first heard about it) his critic's choice of the week, despite the fact that the film had pretty much been universally panned, my interest was peaked.

Before the almost unanimous bad reviews, it seemed like Reservation Road was a film made for me. It starred two of my favorite american actors, Mark Ruffalo and Joaquin Phoenix, and was billed as a melodrama, my favorite film genre (although the definition of melodrama as it relates to a concise genre is somewhat complicated). Not only that, it was a melodrama where the protagonists were men, not something we see much of - although Susanne Bier did a great job with After the Wedding.

But with Jonathan's conditional recommendation i was excited to give it a shot. The opening sequence was great, it is rare that I almost cry at the beginning of a film, especially when you know ahead of time what the tear-inducing event is and that it comes at the beginning. but in the opening moments of Reservation Road I caught myself tearing up, and with this, Iwas ready to delve further into the story of two families and the differing effects that a tragic hit and run have on them. However, as the film went on I found myself further and further outside of any real connection with the story and the characters. Dramatic character changes started happening off screen and I was left to rely on dialogue to understand that Phoenix's character had started to abandon his family and that in turn Ruffalo's character had started to embrace his.

Not that dialogue is bad, but when it comes to people and changes in relationship, it is almost always better to show than to tell. That being said, I still found myself somewhat emotionally tied to the actions of the characters, but seemingly in a cheap way - in a way that wasn't earned through storytelling but was gained through manipulation (which when done well, like lars von trier for example, can be an accomplishment in and of itself - that was not the case here).

Overall, I can understand where Rosenbaum is coming from and his assessment isn't off by any means - what actually becomes apparent is that in his recommendation he takes the brave stance to claim his enjoyment was conditional to his view of the characters. I don't think I fully realized this until after I had seen Reservation Road, and with it I just respect Rosenbaum even more.

Today too many reviews claim, without any room for personal taste, to be absolutely correct - and in many ways, all films are dependent on when we see them, who we see them with and how we are feeling on that day in question. However, I have always championed that when it comes to film, it is possible to look beyond any personal fog and critique a work and hopefully in the case of most critics, this is what happens.

I have to say though, it's just a nice change of pace for someone to admit that their opinion of a film didn't necessarily have to do with a given rubric and that experience is predicated on experience - I think if we all thought about that a bit more, people would make smarter choices when going to the cinema. and maybe we would have better standard fare at the multiplex.

15 hours of Fassbinder

2007-10-27T20:24:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater (museum) : Berlin Alexanderplatz (episode 1)

(directed by Rainer Werner Fassbinder)

Fassbinder fans who live in New York City have a lot to be excited about these days. MOMA's PS1 has an amazing exibit devoted to Fassbinder's 13 episode + epilogue Berlin Alexanderplatz. The exhibit consists of one theater space that plays 6 continuous hours of the series everyday, 14 mini-rooms that loop each individual episode and one large room where each episode plays simultaneously without subtitles next to each other. Not to mention the large amount of stills, storyboards and notes that drape the walls surrounding the viewing areas.

On my first visit to the exhibit, I wandered around in awe for quite awhile before episode 1 restarted in it's room. Thus far Berlin Alexanderplatz seems to be classic Fassbinder in many ways - the stylization, the music and the political mixed with the melodramatic. There does however, appear to be something different happening with the story of Franz Biberkof. I felt a supernatural or dreamlike element in what appears to be a very realistic story. This may be because of the strange lighting that defines the story: (click on the photo to read an explanation)

Overall episode 1 did a good job of giving back story without flashbacks or narration and also of setting up the different elements of character and place. It was fun to see "Fassbinder regulars" popping up all over place and i was especialluy pleased to see Brigitte Mira (Mother Kusters and Ali: Fear Eats the Soul) and Hanna Schygulla (The Marriage of Maria Braun, Effi Briest and Lili Marleen) enter the story. The main character, Franz Biberkof, is a man seeking redemption but also a man who can't control his impulses. Thus far things are looking up for our "hero" but of course this is Fassbinder and episode 1 is appropriately titled "The Punishment Begins" - I for one can't wait for his world to start twisting.

Most of all though, I am excited that the exhibit allows repeat viewings - when you pay 1 admission you get a pass that lets you in as many times as you like. I'm hoping to figure out the timing on the theater space so i can watch episode 2 in all its glory.

2007-10-22T11:41:00.000-04:00

a trip to the nyff : Leave Her to Heaven

(directed by John Stahl)

When I first got the schedule for the 45th annual New York Film Festival, I skimmed through the selections and the first film that got me extremely excited was John Stahl's Leave Her to Heaven. First, because it is an amazing film, second because Martin Scorsese would be introducing it and third (also mainly) it was going to be presented in restored Technicolor!

The film itself is a wonderful melodramatic noir about obsession starring Gene Tierney and the best color pallet of any film I have ever seen. I feel pretty confident about my opinions on this one - it isn't often you have video proof of Martin Scorsese reconfirming your beliefs about a film : enjoy!

Click To Play

2007-10-18T12:12:00.000-04:00

a trip to the nyff : I'm Not There
(directed by Todd Haynes)

This was without a doubt my most anticipated film of this year's festival. Todd Haynes is one of my favorite directors - but beyond that, the idea of a film about Bob Dylan, with Dylan's music and six different people playing various interpretations of Dylan is pretty remarkable sounding.

I don't know how much my anticipatory excitement blurred my opinion, but I have to say, the film was one of the best I have seen in quite some time. Truly an experimental piece, I'm Not There takes a pop culture icon, big name actors and a Hollywood studio and twists it into something that defies the convention of almost everything behind the film (with the exception of the director).

From the moment he entered the the cinematic scene, Haynes has played with the conventionality of subject and of genre - and with I'm Not There he is finally able to really play with the convention of narrative. He takes the idea of looking at a man's life and tosses it in the air, weaving together various pieces and parts into a film that acts as an experience of a life, instead of a point a to point b narrative.

All six of the actors that contribute to the idea of who Bob Dylan is/was/will be - escape into their roles, with special mention for Cate Blanchett (the buzz is well deserved) and Ben Whishaw, perhaps the least flashy of the Dylan's (Dylan the poet as Arthur Rimbaud). You never really question that they are all the same person, despite the fact that none of the "Dylans" are actually named "Dylan" and within seconds you could be presented with 3 different actors all playing "the main character."

Hearing Dylan's music, sometimes sung by Dylan, sometimes sung by various musicians, also drives home the experience. With I'm Not There, Haynes has managed to not just tell the story of a famous individual, but to give you the impression, the sensation of almost embodying Dylan - to go beyond storytelling. Not only do you learn about a life - you feel it, and it's quite amazing, all 136 minutes.

2007-10-03T10:57:00.000-04:00

a trip to the nyff : Silent Light

(directed by Carlos Reygadas)

It is hard to know where to start with Silent Light, a quiet film that transports you to a very different world through striking visuals and a simple story. Here that story is a classic love triangle set in a not so classic mennonite village in the small Mexican town of Chihuahua.

Our main character, husband and father Johan, is in love with a woman that isn't his wife. the film takes us through subtle moments that tell the story of johan, his wife Ester and his mistress Marianne, along with the larger less plot driven story of their faith and of the community in general. Supposedly the film is a tribue of sorts to Dreyer's Ordet (which I haven't seen) but even with this, I have a hard time with the supposedly spiritual aspects of the film - outside of the personal connection I made to the natural surroundings where the film was set (Reygadas' opening shot is of a sky full of stars, and living in Brooklyn, that is a site I rarely get to appreciate.)

The journey of the characters, the plight Johan faces between desire and faith never quite grabbed me, as even with a somewhat scandalous subject matter (adultery in a small religious village), the film relies on the faces of the characters and not on any revelations in plot (save the last scene). And while I loved looking into the eyes of these people it seemed to me to be more like looking at a long set of paintings and not like watching a story (which isn't necessarily bad, but something to take note of.) I know many folks who love this unconventional method of storytelling and cherish the idea of dumping the typical 3-act structure most films give us - and instead opt for longer takes and ellipses, letting the audience fill in the blanks. And while films of this sort are usually visually stunning and are memorizing to watch, I do wonder about how much they take the audience into account. 2 hours and 7 minutes (the running time of silent light) is a lot for most people to take, even for folks who like slow films and have the patience to appreciate them. Also, practically speaking, the 3 act structure of cinema hasn't really been around that long when you compare it to storytelling forms in literature or theatre (both of which have been around for quite some time). Has it really been explored all that it can be?

That being said, the cookie cutter way in which most 3-act films, especially American work, are made isn't fair to audiences either and in the end I would rather sit through 1,000 Silent Lights before subjecting myself to most of the fare at the mainstream box office.

2007-10-02T12:09:00.000-04:00

a trip to the nyff 2007 : Secret Sunshine

(directed by Lee Chang-Dong)

Going into Lee Chang-Dong's Cannes winner Secret Sunshine, I didn't know much about what I was about to see. All I knew was that it was a film of shifting emotion and that Jeon Do-Yeon was supposed to give an amazing performance.

After all was said and done, I was glad to have known so little, as Secret Sunshine is a film about transition and how events change us and allow us to accept that change and a huge part of enjoying that process is not knowing what will happen next.

I don't want to give anything away so I'll go without a plot summary, suffice to say Jeon Do-Yeon's accolades are well deserved for her portrayal of a woman that has a lot handed to her throughout the film's 2 hours and 22 minutes. Lee Chang-Dong takes a character and displays how people shed layers of superficiality when confronted with tragedy and uncertainty.
He also provides a balance that allows the viewer to not get lost in the despair through the character of Kim, played by Kang-Ho Song, who is best known for more macho roles (ie his work in The Host). In Secret Sunshine he plays with something different and gives us a character that is quite understated and docile in nature, a man that at 39 isn't married, still hangs out with the guys from work and develops an innocent crush on Jeon Do-Yeon's Shin-ae.

The one thing that makes me sad about the film, is that as of now, Secret Sunshine has no American distribution. This is a real shame, as the film deals with emotions in a way most Americans, let alone American films, never do. However, it is nice to remember the power that The New York Film Festival has to bring us works that we wouldn't have access to outside of the festival. Although in today's troubled film climate, for every Secret Sunshine the fest has, we have to contend with a The Darjeeling Limited, a film I can make no judgments on (I haven't seen it) except to note that it premiered at the NYFF on Friday and promptly opened in New York theaters the next day.

Locked in Laughter and Tears

2007-10-01T15:09:00.000-04:00

a trip to the nyff 2007 : The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
(directed by Julian Schnabel)

The New York Film Festival has begun! With one weekend out of the way I have seen 3 films and been to one director's dialogue. the highlight of the weekend was without a doubt Julian Schnabel's The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.

The film, an experiment in form and point of view tells the story of Jean-Dominque Bauby, the editor of French Elle who had a paralyzing stroke at the age of 47, resulting in "locked in syndrome." Bauby was only able to communicate by blinking his eye but managed to write a book about his life and experience as a prisoner of his own body.

Schnabel used a swivel and tilt lens to tell much of the story through our main character's perspective. In this way people stare right into the camera and we experience what is happening just as Jean-Do did, with people out of our line of sight more often than not. About halfway through, we also begin to see things from an objective POV, just as Jean-Do begins to find his own way to live.

The film is an exhilarating roller coaster, running the emotional gamut with some scenes sparking both tears and laughter. Schnabel, a painter who occasionally makes films, creates a beautiful portrait of life out of a tale of mortality and death, somehow connecting the two opposing forces in a way that illustrates what it means to be human.

Mathieu Amalric, continues to be amazing, here in a roll that is largely dependent on his voice, eyes and ability to stay still. The women that inhabit Bauby's life are just as good, each one complimenting, along with defining him in a different way.

What makes the film amazing and an experience not to be missed is Schnabel's uncompromising approach to filmmaking. As someone who doesn't rely on filmmaking as a profession, he has a freedom and reckless spirit that allows for experimentation and for non-traditional moments. He can create based purely on artistic merit, he doesn't need to worry about whether or not he'll be able to make his next picture,. In a world of compromised visions, this is a rare thing and more than that, seems the most appropriate way for the story of Jean-Do to be told.

The film will be released stateside in December - for now check out the French trailer:

2007-09-23T10:49:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater : eastern promises

(directed by david cronenberg)

i found my love of david cronenberg in college, when i was assigned to interview him for the film section of our school paper. in preparation for the interview i watched almost all of his films in a weeks time.

perhaps it was my intense immersion into his world or maybe it was just an instinctive connection, but something in his films clicked with me. on the surface this may seem slightly disturbing (as his films are usually quite disturbed in content and visuals) but really i think it's something more natural. cronenberg's films almost always deal with the body and focus on physical connectivity with machines, other people or fantasy. and when it comes down to it, the one thing that connects all people is the body.

his latest film, eastern promises is no different. on the surface, a classic mafia story, the film slowly reveals itself to be a meditation on the intimate nature of violence and how our bodies not only interact with this violence but how the physical marks we carry tell our stories. full of homoerotic imagery, body art and visceral scenes of bodily destruction, cronenberg weaves his characters and their journey with blood and ink to create a great, but understated piece of cinema.

he uses the cliche of genre in a such a controlled way and beautiful way that his film even begins to question "the surface" of what most folks think cinema or a movie is (or what it can be). i never thought i would see cronenberg with such a classic hollywood film, but it works, as he is critiquing what we see and what things appear to be - and who better to present that message to than the masses. it reminds of douglas sirk and how at first all thought his 50's melodramas were nothing but typical and 20 years later everyone realized they were nowhere near typical and that he had managed to get some pretty subversive material into the mainstream. it also doesn't hurt that eastern promises is an amazing well told story with strong performances and an engaging camera.

give a listen and look as the master himself talks about collaboration and working with actors:

Click To Play

2007-09-06T12:45:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 9/5/07 : querelle

(directed by rainer werner fassbinder)

where to start with querelle? i suppose with its history - the film is about jean genet's novel by the same name (according to fassbinder and instead of being an adaptation or a film based on the book)

also, it was fassbinder's last film - he shot it but died before it was done being edited. for me this seems to actually connect a lot with the picture. it seems to me (and to many pfs'ers) that querelle is mainly a film of excess and extremes. looking beyond the overload of plot, is a set that is candy coated with phallic imagery and decorated by glistening young sailors. visually it isn't possible to make a film more homosexual.

coincidentally at this time, fassbinder himself was full of excess, it would lead to his death by drug overdose and defined his career as during his all too brief time as a director(less than 20 years) he created 44 projects - moving at a somewhat unbelievable pace.

he seems to take all of that and throw it into querelle. an ambitious project, as genet does not seem to be something would easily work on screen, many folks, even fassbinder die-hards, hate the film - vincent canby did in his 1982 review of the film, as he says:

For something that might be called a Fassbinder-Genet jointventure, ''Querelle'' is exceedingly discreet, resolutely unshocking and unprovocative. If it spoke with a single voice - it was apparently shot in English but is being released here with a German sound track - that voice would be a steady drone.

Except for some things that Miss Moreau does, ''Querelle'' is not only humorless but also uncharacteristically witless. The actors aren't called upon to act but to keep a straight face, which may sometimes be difficult for the audience. Mr. Davis, Mr. Nero and Miss Moreau do what they can, but they behave like people abandoned in a foreign country without money or passports.

i wonder though if fassbinder didn't intend this? one thing he always did was to make his intentions known and rather obvious - through performance or visuals fassbinder gave you the clues to figure out what he was getting at. for a film with so much excess to not be provocative or shocking doesn't appear to me to be a failure, but perhaps a choice. i rather doubt that fassbinder would fail at being provocative if that was what he desired.

for me the film works because of the fact that you are seeing and hearing things that don't typically exist in the context of a candy colored world of cinema (normally seen in the 50's) but despite the content you aren't surpised or shocked...instead you actually consider how ideas of sex, homosexuality, love, murder and brotherhood are present in the world today and in your own life - in a film of doubles, it's hard to not try and consider how you exist in fassbinder's world of sailors, even one filled with penis shaped ships and choreographed fight scenes.

on a last note - the film was dedicated to the actor that played "ali" in ali: fear eats the soul -(El Hedi ben Salem M'Barek Mohammed Mustapha) - he was fassbinder's lover and coincidentally committed suicide while in prison in 1982... i am unsure of how this plays into querelle - but it's fassbinder, so i'm sure it does.

2007-08-29T12:41:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 8/28/07 : l'eclisse

(directed by michelangleo antonioni)

a late starting, small, but good pfs was had last night.

we got together and watched michelangelo antonioni's l'eclisse

the ending stirred discussion amongst the group, some loving it, some finding it a strange choice. for me, it brought about a sense of the everyday and also of general unease, especially when for a brief moment, a blond woman enters the screen, making us wonder where our protagonists have gone.

jonathan rosenbaum's essay that we wrote for the criterion release of the film highlights the beauty and importance of the ending:

"It’s almost as if Antonioni has extracted the essence of everyday street life that serves as a background throughout the picture, and once we’re presented with this essence in its undiluted form, it suddenly threatens and oppresses us. The implication is that behind every story there’s a place and an absence, a mystery and a profound uncertainty, waiting like a vampire at every moment to emerge and take over, to stop the story dead in its tracks. And if we combine this place and absence, this mystery and uncertainty into a single, irreducible entity, what we have is the modern world itself—the place where all of us live, and which most stories are designed to protect us from."

comparisons between our introduction to monica vitti's vittoria and alain delon's piero were also brought up : vittoria being introduced to us in a quiet scene between soon to be ex-lovers that seems to be missing an intensity, while piero in contrast comes to us in a stock exchange of sorts a - place devoid of real human connection but filled with intensity. likewise the two characters reactions to the death of a drunk who stole piero's car seems to highlight two differing senses of isolation and interaction with the world.

the visual construction of the film is breathtaking - the way in which characters are framed and how surroundings effect where the camera is and who and what we see, tends to define the film over any plot that exists concerning two lovers coming together.

as jonathan rosenbaum also said:

"Only a large screen can do full justice to the virtuosity of Antonioni’s mise en scène; a sense of monumentality is basic to his conception throughout, whether the focal point happens to be a rotating electric fan at dawn, a car with a corpse being hauled from a river, an illuminated streetlamp at dusk, a couple necking on a sofa, or a crowd of screaming speculators. And, again as in (Tati's)Playtime, even our misrecognition can play a role in overall dynamics: characters with fleeting resemblances to Piero and Vittoria pass through the intersection where their meeting fails to take place, teasing us with possibilities. What Roland Barthes has called Antonioni’s vigilance of desire has become our own, though it remains unsatisfied."

2007-08-21T10:32:00.000-04:00

pfs opinion
morning sickness without pregnancy

if there is anyone out there that reads this blog regularly and also pays attention to the poster, you know of my disgust, hell lets call it hatred for harvey weinstein. throughout his time with miramax, weinstein managed to destroy any real chance for independent cinema to actually be independent, instead making it just another way for those in the movie industry to make money and with the thanks of the media, hypocritically feel like they were actually making “good” films.

so when i woke up this morning and took a look at the movie section of the nytimes and saw an article about the man himself and his great plan for releasing todd haynes latest film i’m not there (if you do read this blog, you probably know i love haynes) i was curious and hoping not to lose my breakfast.

weinstein’s plan is to open the film in november at nyc’s art house fav film forum, and while i love film forum, it is undoubtedly one of new york’s smallest theaters. this strikes me as strange, as not only does haynes have a cult following, he is also an academy award nominated filmmaker. more than that, the film stars christian bale, heath ledger, richard gere, julianne moore and cate blanchett - all actors that can carry their own film. so why such a small release?

according to weinstein : “With a movie like this you have to build it. I don’t think you can go out on 500 screens. The reason for Film Forum is you go where the best word of mouth is on the movie. I like the movie; I think it’s adventurous. The audience is going to have to work — work in a good way.” the times also went on to cite that: “Mr. Weinstein said the decision to pick up “I’m Not There” was not purely about making money but about an obligation to have important movies distributed.”

this from the man that made sure jim jarmusch’s masterpiece dead man failed in every way possible when it came to distribution. jarmusch refused to cut the film (and rightly so), and weinstein refused to actually try to get people into the theaters. it didn’t matter that dead man was an amazing film by one of the most important directors of the time - what mattered was that he didn’t think it would get any money.

to be fair i should add that it turns out the film will also open at lincoln plaza, another nyc art house theater… and although this makes me feel better, i am worried about where the film will go from there. it is also curious to me that todd haynes had no comment for the article - he was “unavailable”. call me crazy, but this doesn’t make me feel good about this supposedly harmonious relationship.

there is some potentially good news though, harvey did go on to mention that in regards to cate blanchett getting an oscar nomination that ““ if Cate Blanchett doesn’t get nominated, I’ll shoot myself.” - here’s hoping.

check out the entire article here

2007-08-16T10:30:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 8/15/07 : cria cuervos

(directed by carlos saura)

ahhh, i am happy - last night we got together to watch cria cuervos and i fell in love with the film all over again (it was my fourth time seeing it)

overall i think everyone was blown away by ana torrent and how the film was not only a striking portrait of childhood but also managed to show you the world from a child's point of view. saura's use of repeated imagery and movement captured the limited memory of a child and made the symbolism of specific things in the film not distracting and quite manageable.

vincent canby put it best in his 1977 new york times review of the film :
"Childhood can be a most terrifying time. One must constantly observe the proscriptions of a primitive system of cause and effect that can be questioned only by the reckless or the ignorant. Squash a spider and it will rain. Step on a crack, break your mother's back. Sleep in the light of a new moon and you may never wake up. There is power in the knowledge of these things, as well as awful responsibility. One must be vigilant. One has to be alert for signs."

in a film ripe with metaphor, allegory and chicken feet - i am always amazed at how the simple moments are enough for me. for the most part i have never had the desire to really delve into the politics of the film and am still quite happy to just experience it

something else i love about the film was the use of photographs to relay information about the past and to actually represent the past. usually when photographs are used in movies it seems contrived and a little cheesy - but here the images we see add another layer to a tale that revolves around memory and visually help to define the family outside the eyes of our 9 year old protagonist.

interestingly enough there was no commentary with this criterion - but on the supplements dvd, there is a documentary about carlos saura and it begins with saura and a roomful of damaged cameras that he had "rescued", cleaned and rebuilt. watching him with all of the different cameras he had preserved was almost all the commentary on the film i needed....

2007-08-08T16:10:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 8/7/07 : dark days

(directed by marc singer)

last night's project film school went very well. thanks to jay and his doc loving ways, we decided to watch dark days, a film about homeless people living under new york city's penn station. for everyone but daria and i, it was the first time experiencing the film.

the film itself is amazingly verite, with little to no exposition or explanation from the filmmakers, except to provide us with the names of the characters and a major plot point halfway through that dealt directly with an inability to film.

what really struck me about the film the first time i saw it and even more so this go around, was how it is in many ways a survival film, like most period pieces depicting life on the american frontier. it challenged conventional notions of what we as people can stand and what we do to survive when we need to.

technically there was much to marvel at as well. it's hard to believe that dark days was shot on film, in a place with no light and horrific sound - for a film with all of these barriers, it looks and sounds terrific.

everyone seemed in agreement that this was something everyone should see - with all pfs'ers thinking of who they were going to recommend it to.

i'll leave this pfs entry with jonathan rosenbaum's brief review from the chicago reader, which i think sums the film up pretty nicely and also provides some good background info:

With no prior training in film, 21-year-old Londoner Marc Singer set out to make this 16-millimeter black-and-white documentary (2000) about the homeless people living in the tunnels under New York's Penn Station. Singer's six-year quest--including a brief stint of being homeless himself--deserves notice, and in a way I'm disappointed that the film doesn't go into greater detail about it. But what's most remarkable and fascinating here are the squatters, who do a pretty good job of explaining themselves without any outside narrator (and who, in countless ways, assisted Singer in shooting the film). The lives of these people inside their shacks are full of surprises (one keeps several dogs as pets, another shaves with an electric razor and a broken mirror) as well as grim confirmations (the self-loathing misery of a crackhead who lost her children in a fire), but the things we don't know about them also significantly shape our experience of the film. 84 min.

2007-08-05T14:56:00.000-04:00

Trouble in Paradise : Lubitsch, Love and Light
flickr set

Gaston Monescu: I love you. I loved you the minute I saw you. I'm mad about you, my little shoplifter... my sweet little pickpocket... my darling.

Mariette Colet: No, no, Francois, I tell you, no. You see, Francois, marriage is a beautiful mistake which two people make together.

Lily Vautier: Darling, remember, you are Gaston Monescu. You are a crook. I want you as a crook. I love you as a crook. I worship you as a crook. Steal, swindle, rob. Oh, but don't become one of those useless, good-for-nothing gigolos.

Gaston Monescu: It could have been marvelous.
Mariette Colet: Divine.
Gaston Monescu: Wonderful... But tomorrow morning, if you should wake out of your dreams and hear a knock, and the door opens, and there, instead of a maid with a breakfast tray, stands a policeman with a warrant, then you'll be glad you are alone.

Lily Vautier: Don't you remember the day you took that Chinese vase from the Royal Palace? And you made it into a lamp for my night table.
Gaston Monescu: I remember the lamp, I remember the night table... and I remember the night.

2007-08-02T14:13:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 8/1/07 : after the wedding (directed by susanne bier)

douglas sirk once said that melodrama was simply drama with music - and while i suspect there is a bit more to it, he was certainly on to something...

susanne's bier's after the wedding, the film we ended up watching at project film school this week, opens with shots of india and the sounds of sigur ros. after an introduction to our main character a serious, yet somewhat sad, do-gooder, we shift our eyes to denmark and our ears are suddenly filled with the classic "it's raining men" as a less serious, larger and well to do man drives up to his pictoral estate. both men come with character expectations and sterotypes based on their class and where we meet them - but bier does a great job of twisting and turning our emotions around our expectations until we have nothing left to do but cry....it is interesting to note where the two songs we hear in the opining scenes reappear later in the film.

as a whole the pfs crew enjoyed the film - what was interesting was the very strong opinions all had on character's motivations - i don't think i have ever had a film experience where everyone felt so right in their assessment of the actions of the people we had all come to know while watching the same two hour film. bier's frequent close ups and swirling camera, along with her outstanding cast create a intimate space in which the people we are watching become much more "known" to us - she effortlessly blends the immediacy of her past work in the dogme movement with the tightly woven up and down narrative that defines melodrama - making for a rollar coaster ride of realism you can't get off.

i leave this pfs report with a quote from andrew sarris' review of the film that looks to one point we debated over last night regarding choice of locations:

"...suffice it to say that our opinions of the characters undergo subtle changes, particularly when it involves our ingrown prejudices regarding financiers and seeming humanitarians. The performances of Mr. Lassgård, Mr. Mikkelsen, Ms. Knudsen and Ms. Christensen head up a splendid ensemble, both in Copenhagen and Mumbai. One final hint: The heart of the narrative is much more in Denmark than India, which ends up being exploited for its more colorful production values."

2007-07-24T10:37:00.000-04:00

origins : music, memory and responsibility

one thing i am always struggling with is how to control my anger when new movies come out that have taken key material/ideas from movies that i love and that may not be as well known.

the two most recent examples of this are zach braff's proposed remake of susanne bier's experiment with dogme, open hearts and sadly (i just realized this one today) wes anderson's trailer (and i am assuming the film) for the darjeeling limited uses the kink's this time tomorrow, a song that defined phillipe garrel's regular lovers (and was also used in the trailer).

with braff, i think my increasing anger is probably somewhat justified. open hearts was created as a dogme film and the dogme movement was born out a desire to create films that were as anti-hollywood as any film could be and it seems to me that zach braff represents hollywood in a pretty real way.

with anderson however, i am not sure how appropriate my anger actually is. i sat down at my desk this morning and saw that the trailer was out for the darjeeling limited, which excited me, as the film is opening the new york film festival this year. but when the kink’s song started about halfway through the trailer i was immediately enraged. the song to me was regular lovers, it defined the film (and the generation that the film portrayed) in a way, that to me, makes it placement in anderson’s film unacceptable.

as someone who wants to make films though, i know it’s hard to resist the urge to give a shout out to things that have inspired you or moved you in cinema. and perhaps open hearts really moved zach braff and he wants to use his influence to move more people, and likewise perhaps this time tomorrow really is the perfect song for the darjeeling limited….

i have to say though, that i’m doubtful.

music is used so carefully in anderson’s films and is in many ways its own character - so for the key song in the darjeeling limited to be one that was already used in a film and used in such a defining way seems sloppy and irresponsible - especially since regular lovers was released stateside so recently. i feel like anderson should know better, he watches films and i think ignorance was probably not the case here.

although i am sure there are tons of examples of times i have approved of music being recycled and many times i have been unaware of stolen moments in films i love.

what to do then….i don’t know?

i do know that i am much less excited about seeing the darjeeling limited - which is unfortunate, as anderson is a one of the better filmmakers working today.

but you should judge for yourself:

the trailer for the darjeeling limited

2007-07-19T13:48:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 7/17/07 : 3 women (directed by robert altman)

"the narrative is not only present, it is central to the film's impact. not that altman was hoping a conventional story would somehow emerge from the indefinite notions he had when principal photography began. "i'm trying to reach toward a picture that's totally emotional," he once told a journalist, "not narrative or intellectual, where an audience walks out and they can't say anything about it except what they feel." 3 women doesn't quite match that ambition, but no altman movie comes closer." - david sterritt

this nicely sums up how i felt after watching the movie that robert altman claims to have dreamt up while his wife lay ill in the hospital. watching 3 women was simply put "an experience"and not one that is easily summed up in plot summary or direct criticism.

this film marked the first time in quite some time that a group of us got together to hold an official project film school : and it was interesting to hear the differing opinions on altman's dreamy look at personality theft and women in general.

many i think came up on the side of not buying that this was a serious attempt by altman to explore anything - citing a general annoyance with the characters and an idea that altman had created this film simply to make fun of his audience.

dana expressed a different sentiment towards the film:

"i feel like this movie has to be watched many times to even observe every nuance and detail, which is something we discussed post movie last night. i didn't pick up on the dresses getting caught in the car door...and i am sure there are a whole lot of other reoccurring moments and minute details that require several viewings to notice (let alone conclude to their significance). there is certainly a kind of kafka-esque factor to the first half, where details are focused on so acutely, but they are details without explanation of why or a purpose. when thinking about the first half, i realized the film really is cut into two halves--and the first half's sterility juxtaposes to the surrealness of the "dream" (and also pinky's other self) that dominates the second half of the movie."

after the film had ended and the pfs troop had gone home, i sat down to listen to the first half of altman's commentary. beyond claiming that the film was indeed inspired from a dream he had that featured shelley duvall and sissy spacek, he claims that most events in the film (like millie's dress getting caught in the car door) i am always somewhat hesitant to believe the director's that claim everything was improvised and happy accidents. espcecially in a film like this where the women have names that are mirrored (millie, willie) and such visual attention is brought to very specific things time and time again.

but who knows - only he i suppose.

"my ideal film would be a painting with music" - robert altman

2007-07-17T14:26:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater: the charge of the light brigade,1968 (directed by tony richardson)

lincoln center is in the middle of their woodfall film series that is showcasing works from the studio that changed british cinema in the 60's. with the majority of editing complete on "the evolve documentary" - i was finally able to head uptown to partake in the series.

being that the original 1936 film based on the alfred lloyd tennyson poem is my father's favorite movie, i decided that the film for me to see was tony richardson's 1968 version. also of interest was the fact that vanessa redgrave would be introducing the film.

the mix of styles (animation,19th century) and moods (silly, devastating realism) make the film slightly off balance, but luckily it doesn't so much matter. the charge of the light brigade is a film you see and feel to understand the point..and while there may be moments of confusion about the direct path of the story, perhaps that's the point - as war itself is never without an underlying sense of befuddlement.

here is a small clip of vanessa redgrave and her brother corin talking briefly about what made the film revolutionary - unfortunately (or not) i ran out of memory right as corin launched into a very dramatic monologue of sorts that seemed to deal with acting and the importance of the film....

Click To Play

2007-07-15T20:20:00.000-04:00

home movie : brodre (directed by susanne bier)

since i first saw imitation of life, i have been interested in the genre of the melodrama. my love of the genre has only grown since viewing douglas sirk's technicolor gem about two women, their daughters and their differing social conditions. from there i dove into rainer werner fassbinder, finished out douglas sirk and moved towards any films with the word melodrama in their description that dealt primarily with women.

this led me to susanne bier's oscar nominated film after the wedding - a mix of melodrama and the more realistic approach of her dogme films - the film excited me not only because i enjoyed it immensely but also because it was a film, dealing with women's issues in the genre of women's issues actually created by a woman.

i have always been frustrated that my favorite films have been directed by men - specifically films that deal with strong female protagonists. so whenever i find a female director that speaks to me, i cling to her and start to watch all of her films.

i began with her dogme film open hearts recently and last night took a shot at her dogme'esque brothers - the film has a female protagonist, but inherently deals with the relationships between two male siblings. michael and jannik couldn't be more different in practice - michael is a strong family man with a stable job in the army and jannik is a drifter who has just gotten out of prison. despite his love for his older brother, jannik is haunted by his position in michael's shadow; he is never able to overcome the good deeds that define the family man.

this all changes after michael is sent to afghanistan and is wrongly presumed dead - with the weight of his brother gone, jannik begins to find his place in the family and assumes a comfortable sense of self. his contentment is put a risk when michael returns home after being found alive in an enemy prison.

what strikes me most about bier's authorship is her ability to read both men and women - after years of seeing films authored by men that accurately portray women, it's wonderful to see a woman succeed at the reverse. her woven narrative of emotional upheaval based on circumstance never falters, thanks in part to her actors but mainly because of her even-handed storytelling. the tragedy of bier's work never crosses the line, making you all the more uneasy and making her films all the more satisfyingly unsatisfying.

2007-07-13T11:15:00.000-04:00

f is for fall - f is for film

so i have been busy finishing up the yet to titled meerkatmedia documentary about a group of people, young and old creating theater together and learning the importance of storytelling - which means i haven't really been watching any films (although i did get disc 1 of season 3 of deadwood in the mail and started it last night)

luckily, i have to spend 7 hours at the computer everyday at my day job, and this is the time of the year when trailers for all of the exciting fall/early winter releases start to pop up.

in terms of personal anticipation - i am most looking forward to a few films:

1) there will be blood (dir. paul thomas anderson)
a story about family, greed, religion, and oil, centered around a turn-of-the-century texas prospector (daniel day-lewis) in the early days of the business.

the combination of PTA with DDL is what initially made me excited about this film, seeing their work is an all too rare occurrence these days. the trailer and plot however, cemented this as the film i will take a sick day to go see. i am thinking that it will be a robert altman/terrence malickesque written on the wind with an amazing performance from day-leiws. will that combination work? i hope so.

2) i'm not there (dir. todd haynes)
ruminations on the life of bob dylan, where seven characters embody a different aspect of the musician's life and work

todd haynes is probably my favorite working director today. he is the sirk and fassbinder of my movie-going generartion and thus far has done no wrong. the cast is outstanding to boot. i'll be there.

3) the edge of heaven/auf der anderen seite (dir. fatih akin)
a turkish man travels to istanbul to find the daughter of his father's former girlfriend.

keeping with my love of fassbinder, fatih akin's latest features a performance from hannah schygulla - which given my love of maria braun, is enough to get me to the theater. what makes this film a must see for me, is akin himself. his last film, head on, was the best film of 2005 in my opinion and quickly became one of my all time favorites. hot off a successful trip to cannes, this film promises to be good.

4) things we lost in the fire (dir. susanne bier)
a recent widow invites her husband's troubled best friend to live with her and her two children

i have been slightly obsessed with danish cinema of late and bier is without a doubt one of the reasons why. from her edgy dogme film open hearts (which zach braff is remaking to my disgust) to her oscar nominated after the wedding, bier creates solid dramas that weave the gritty reality of the dogme movement and the mise-en-scene of more stylized melodramas. this is her first go at an american picture, so we shall see i suppose. although the film does feature the recently absent benicio del toro - automatic bonus points!

also excited about

5) no country for old men (joel and ethan coen) - after not being able to force myself to watch the ladykillers i welcome a movie that feels like the coen's of my past

6) the flight of the red balloon (dir. hou hsiao hsien) - great director...one of those guys where you just go and see the movie - no matter what.

7) the golden age (dir. shekar kapur) - a great cast, including cate blanchett, clive owen, geoffrey rush and especially samantha morton sell me on this period piece sequel.

8) reservation road (dir. terry george) - the cast sells me again - joaquin phoenix and mark ruffalo mainly...

9) sweeney todd (dir. tim burton) - i've always has a soft spot for burton and it's about time we saw him do something darker.

10) 3:10 to yuma (dir. james mangold) - i've been into westerns lately. this one may be a remake, but i inherently trust christian bale. and am excited by the prospect of a resurgence of the genre (re: how amazing the proposition was).

check out some trailers and clips:

2007-07-07T22:00:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater : in between days (directed by so yong kim)

as i sit down to write about this film, it's fitting that right next to me fellow members of my media collective and i are editing a scene for our upcoming documentary with the working title of evolve - it is fitting because the scene we are working on is about a young teenage immigrant and his adolescent experience.

since it played at sundance this past year, many have compared the film to other tales of awkward girls coping with and working through life as an adolescent. and deservingly so, they highlight the strikingly honest performance of jiseon kim in portraying the teenage protagonist. but to simply call so yong kim's film about a young korean girl sorting through teenagerdom a portrait of youthful angst, ignores what really helps to tie the film together, the location of her journey, toronto.

from the opening shot, where the young lady of our story, aimie, tells her absent father about the coldness of toronto, it is clear that where she is, is as relevant as who she is in the story. the brisk moments of voiceover to relay the letters she sends to her father, create the foundation for the plot of aimie's crush on her best friend tran.

it is location that sets her apart as on outsider in terms of language, defines her as a young woman without a father figure and also as having a mother focused only on her educational success and not on her emotional state. these elements make every glance that kim's aimie gives and every move she makes, take on a irreplaceable silent meaning.

the immigrant perspective allows the film to forgo traditional plot points and instead become an observational journey that feels instead of tells. it abandons the overused and too often seen and in turn aimie's story transcends her longing for tran to tell her he likes her and enters into a territory everyone, young and old, can relate to - an unfortunate rarity in films today.

2007-06-27T09:52:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater! : rescue dawn (directed by werner herzog)

last night eric and i went to see a special screening of werner herzog's new film rescue dawn hosted by variety and the museum of the moving image. i went into the film knowing very little except that it dealt with the vietnam war era, is the narrative version of a documentary (little dieter needs to fly, also by herzog) and that it was supposed to be intense.

i have never seen little dieter needs to fly - a decision i made when i learned that herzog was embarking on a narrative version of the story. to me, seeing a narrative is almost always better with the least amount of knowledge of the story as is possible, trailers and reading ahead can often give away ending clues or provide the audience member with predisposition that ruins the magic of watching something as "blindly" as possible. and while my viewing of the documentary will no doubt be without the same tension - i think i will still be able to benefit from and enjoy seeing the non-fiction version of dieter's journey, albeit in a different way.

i enjoyed the film immensely. the performances and look of rescue dawn help to break the barrier between reality and fiction. herzog actually takes you places, instead of digitizing them for you and watching christian bale has proven to me once again that he is one of, if not the best actor working today. what struck me most about the film was that despite the time and location that we find ourselves in, rescue dawn is less a look at times of war or patriotism, but instead encapsulates the human spirit and the power we all possess when it comes down to the wire. it's a story of survival and of our ultimate desire to live.

here is a little video clip of steve zahn talking about supposed tensions on the set and working with werner

Click To Play

2007-06-22T09:39:00.000-04:00

a trip to the theater! : strange culture (directed by lynn hersman-leeson)

in an effort to change things up : VIDEO!

this was taken at the human rights watch film festival at the june 18 screening of strange culture: the film highlights the recent events of artist steve kurtz. kurtz was preparing for an exhibition which would allow participants to test food for the presence of GMOs, scheduled to appear at the MMOCA in 2004, his wife tragically died from heart failure. distraught he called 911, but when the medics arrived and saw the scientific materials for the exhibition—all legally purchased—they called the FBI. dozens of agents in haz-mat suits searched his home, impounded his computers, books, cat, and even his wife's body, and held kurtz as a suspected bio-terrorist. three years later, kurtz has been released, but he still faces up to 20 years in prison on mail and wire fraud charges relating to his acquisition of materials for the art exhibit.

Click To Play

2007-06-20T14:46:00.000-04:00

home movie : fucking amal (directed by lucas moodysson)

upon reccomendation i watched lukas moodysson's fucking amal (known here as show me love). the film is an angtsy teenage romp about two young girls finding love and figuring out sexual orientation. form is fairly typical to teen movie standards - but what sets this swedish tale of adolescence apart from more standard fare are the amazing performances from moodyssoon's appropriately aged cast and his glossless portrayel of teenage life.

both rebecca liljeberg) (agnes) and alexandra dahlstrom (elin) were within one year of their character's ages while shooting. regardless of you make someone up, that awkward stage where ones face is shedding childhood and starting to come into adulthood can't be faked and the film (and audience) benefit from the girls natural ability to display the inbetween phase they are caught in. this, along with moodysson's explorative camera allow the film to escape the cliches of american teen dramas and instead embrace an honesty about two girls searching for acceptance, love and self in a tangle of sexual orientation and small town woes.

fucking amal rivaled titanic at the box office in sweden - which isnt so much a statement about how good either of the films are but is just another example of how americans are unable to deal with challenging material and be entertained at the same time. it's hard for me to imagine a day (even with the success of brokeback mountain) where a film about two teenage lesbians finding themselves and each other could break any type of box office barrier. hell, we can't even give them equal rights, why would we ever give them equal screen time?

in america the dollar rules the day and until people are presented with more challenging material they'll accept what they are given.... for now it seems young girls with have to make do with lindsay lohan unless they have hip enough parents to add films like fucking amal to their netflix cue - in which case i hope they pass it on.

2007-06-08T11:36:00.000-04:00

pfs meeting 6/5/07 : thx 1138 (directed by george lucas)

dystopian future!

generally speaking i try to avoid george lucas and his partner in crime steven spielberg...their films tend to make me angry and for the most part their engagement within the hollywood system always manages to push my buttons. but nonetheless for our last projectfilmschool we sat down to watch the first feature of mr. star wars himself george lucas.

i was suprised to learn during the opening credits of thx 1138 that walter murch not only edited the film, but also co-wrote it. i generally like walter murch and his views on editing. he has a good handle on how we read films emotively - and his presence made me feel better about spending so much times in the hands of george. but i digress..back to thx

throughout the film and its exploration of a futuristic world where everyone is bald and no one has sex, i kept thinking about how films of "dystopian future" have changed as of late. thx 1138 portrays the future as one of high tech cars, constant big brother presence and a clean and controlled aesthetic. dystopia is portrayed through restrictive visuals and possible technologies taking the place of emotion. while films like this tend to create genuine discussion of possible totalitarian tomorrows, they also tend to distance the audience emotionally.

recent films such as children of men (cuaron) and code 46 (winterbottom) display grim futures but with a sense of reality. gone are the gadgety cars and white walls. instead we have soldiers and much tighter immigration laws. the fear and reasons for the heightened sense of security come from reproduction woes (no children for cuaron's, no procreation for genetic doubles in winterbottom's) - something that has been a topic of debate since roe v wade.

this isn't to say i necessarily prefer children of men to thx 1138 - just that it hits different emotional markers. seeing people that dress like us being locked up and killed and seeing people in military uniforms doing the locking and the killing makes dystopian scenarios seem much more likely. connections to current political situations seem impossible to miss.

the visuals and sound of thx 1138 may provide a disconnect, but they also help to create a true cinematic experience. personal sentiment aside, i will admit that nobody creates a world quite like george lucas - his ability to transform space is something that not many people can touch.

beyond penning the project and cutting it together, murch played a major role in the sound of the picture - and his unique soundtrack helps to make thx a film that resonates. the film may have a touch too much student art film in its blood - but brushes of antonioni and the presence of robert duvall help overshadow the cliches. it's hard not to believe robert duvall when he's on the screen. here he commands your attention and makes a world of white walls, pills and silver faced cops work.

i should add here that i once had the pleasure of interviewing robert duvall and upon parting he shook my hand and wished me good luck - never before was i so positive that good luck was actually headed my way.

2007-06-01T15:31:00.000-04:00

pfs roots and jonathan rosenbaum

a big part of the reason that i wanted to try and start something like project film school was because of a lack of real voice when it comes to cinema. there are of course lots of film "critics" out there, filling newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets - but folks who speak about cinema outside the mainstream (this includes sundancey films and high profile foreign films) and look to what we actually have access to are extremely rare.

the one critic that i always follow - and that does work outside of the capitalist critic mold is the chicago reader's head critic jonathan rosenbaum. i finally ordered his book Movie Wars: How Hollywood and the Media Limit What Films We Can See today- which i have been meaning to read forever. (you can read more by clicking on the above link)

i thought on that note i would post an excerpt from that book that deals with the above:

"One of my oldest and dearest friends, Meredith Brody, is a cinephile who lives in Hollywood and frequently writes about movies. She's as addicted to movie lists as I am and keeps a scrapbook devoted to all the films that open locally, pasting in newspaper ads of them.

While I was visiting her in December 1998 she started to read aloud some of the Hollywood titles in her scrapbook, all pasted in over the previous six months. Most if not all of these movies had played in Chicago, which meant that even if I hadn't seen them, I'd read promotional material about them and written a descriptive capsule or assigned them to the second-string reviewer at the Reader and read her review. The disturbing thing about Meredith's list was that a good 80 percent of the titles had no resonance for me, even after she read me the ad copy.

Could it be that I'm going senile in my mid-50s? I doubt it, because if I heard a list of random commercial titles from the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, or 80s I wouldn't draw the same blank. Some might argue that it's easy to forget how many wretched movies were made during those decades, when the task of regularly furnishing theaters with product made the likelihood of indifferent and unmemorable work high, but I'm sure I remember more of the lesser movies of 1956 than of 1998. The reality is that movies can get away with being terrible these days without causing any crisis in the film industry because no matter how much the capacity to make movies that matter has been impaired, the capacity to advertise, market, and disseminate them has only improved.

If most Hollywood movies today have become as terrible as I'm implying, wouldn't people stop seeing them? Maybe. But I don't think the will of the people is as decisive an influence as we like to believe it is. Much as the enforced "consensus" of the Stalinist state made it impossible to figure out what Soviet citizens really wanted until that state was overturned, the interests of corporate executives make it hard to find out what the American public really thinks about movies. And we can't turn to journalists for a definitive answer, because most of them are devoted to doing variations on the corporate stories.

Consider what might happen if Roger Ebert couldn't find a single movie to recommend on one of his weekly shows, which has undoubtedly happened. How much freedom would he have to give a thumbs-down to everything, especially if he did it three or four weeks in a row? For all the unusual freedom I enjoy at the Reader, how long could I keep my job if I had nothing to recommend week after week? For just as communist film critics were "free" to write whatever they wanted as long as they supported the communist state, most capitalist film critics today are "free" to write anything they want as long as it promotes the products of multicorporations. The minute they decide to step beyond this agreed-upon agenda they're likely to get into trouble with their editors and publishers. This isn't to say that critics aren't free to express their dislike for expensive studio productions, but most of them aren't free to ignore these releases entirely or to focus too much of their attention on films whose advertising budgets make them marginal as far as the mainstream media are concerned. That I have considerably more freedom to focus on what I want than most of my colleagues is merely the exception that proves the rule, and it's true only of my writing for the Reader. As I've noted recently in these pages, the only two times I've appeared on Chicago Tonight I've been forced to speak almost exclusively about studio releases. The first time, in 1994, was around Oscar night; the second time was the day after Christmas two years later, and, weary of being obliged to promote only movies that were "important" because of the studio muscle behind them, I agreed to appear only if I'd be allowed to speak about a couple of foreign and independent pictures. This privilege was eventually granted to me -- after a show devoted exclusively to promoting garbage such as Evita -- over the brief closing credits, and it's why I'm unlikely ever to agree to appear on the show again. (I had a much happier experience appearing on Roger Ebert's TV show in July 1999 -- along with fellow reviewers Dann Gire, Ray Pride, and Michael Wilmington -- on a special show devoted to Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut, a film all of us liked, in contrast to most of our New York colleagues. This experience confirmed my suspicion that network television is paradoxically more open to alternative points of view than PBS. The constraints of the show's format clearly limited what we could say, but I think the final editing of Ebert's show fairly and accurately represented what we said during the lengthy taping.)"

2007-04-03T13:45:00.000-04:00

1) at pfs we have been a bit scattered as of late: but of course we have been finding random spur of the moment times to see movies, here are a few some of us have seen
a) the wind that shakes the barley
b) antoine and collete
c) the blue kite

2) eric posted an interesting comment about "army of shadows" and "the wind that shakes the barley" in reference to the fact that "army of shadows" will out on criterion soon, check it out:

there is a murder scene in Army of Shadows where a normal man (a doctor i believe) is called upon to execute another man, by strangling him. he wraps a knotted towel around a stick, loops it over the man’s head, and twists until the tightness of his weapon forces the tightness of the victim’s body to wilt, and he ceases to resist.

the thing that strikes me about it is afterwards - the look he gives he compatriots - before he begins running and running. it’s a lot like certain scenes in the new Ken Loach movie “The Wind That Shakes the Barley.” it’s very personal, and very close. there is no fooling oneself in these murders: a life is being extinguished.

being forced to kill someone is one element of revolution that takes normal revolutionary-oriented folks like us and forces us to wonder, how far would you go for your cause? would you kill someone? would you stop killing them halfway through if it got too tough to do? would you think about them dying as you did it? how about after?

the blatant humanity of killing someone in close quarters makes it a very different thing - forces you to confront the value of your high ideals with the immediate value of a human life. nothing like that craziness over there right now of shoot and shoot and don’t check the dust afterwards. would you kill someone if it meant the end of capitalism? how many people would you kill if it *meant the end of capitalism?* hmm?

2007-03-07T15:35:00.000-05:00

Ratcatcher 3/6/07
dir. Lynne Ramsay

goodbye, snowball....

2007-03-07T15:31:00.000-05:00

Ali: Fear Eats the Soul 2/27/07
dir. Rainer Werner Fassbinder

"Emmi Kurowski: We'll be rich, Ali... and we'll buy ourselves a little piece of heaven.
Ali: Why heaven?
Emmi Kurowski: Oh, just a fancy of mine. "

2007-02-21T11:21:00.000-05:00

Videodrome 2/20/07

dir. David Cronenberg

after everyone left projectfilmschool, i decided to listen to the commentary for videodrome by david cronenberg. this turned into a slow progression of me getting more and more excited and remembering how much i love david cronenberg and his films. so much so, that i have no idea where to start in this little recap of the film and the ideas it discusses.

what i am going to do is throw out some very general quotes about the film, cronenberg himself and issues of technology and the body. even if you didn't see the film last night, please feel free to comment or discuss, esp if you have seen other cronenberg films (and of course videodrome)

*( 1-4 come from carrie rickey's essay entitled ,5-7 are quotes i hurriedly tried to write down from cronenberg's commentary)

1) "The bizarre and troubling mutations of body and machine manifest in Cronenberg movies graphically illustrate how he intentionally exteriorizes the body's functions of processing information, absorbing medication, and operating technology. Far from advocating repression, Cronenberg movies argue that the revolution begins at home—right in our central nervous systems and psyches."

2) "In Videodrome, Cronenberg riskily goes one step beyond in identifying power structures that are, essentially, invisible. While exalting the awesome dynamics of the body—its sexual energy, its capacity for the extrasensory, its suggestibility—Cronenberg implies that the body is a transient state between individual existence and the creation of a "new flesh" in which the television screen is, literally, the retina of the mind's eye. In the trancelike, if confounding, universe of Videodrome, the only way to resist eradication is to transform oneself into pure electronic energy. Understand that Videodrome was released sixteen years prior to the matrix

3) "Centrally, Videodrome is about those who would control access to all broadcasting, who can unscramble all the scrambling devices, who can wash all the satellite dishes and incrementally transform all TV dropouts to tune in. Led by a benign-looking despot named Barry Convex, these cable totalitarians revel in the fact that they can search for and destroy their natural adversaries because thrill-seeking counterculturalists are easy marks for hidden signals beamed during the more radical television entertainments. Videodrome is the Orwellian 1984 blueprint contextualized."

4) "Riddled with such paradoxes, Cronenberg movies are unforgettable manifestos of how attempts at corporate control inevitably result in corporate anarchy—and vice versa. You could get a brain cramp from trying to tease out whether a Cronenberg scenario privileges repression nor expression.

5)"i like reinventing the human body"

6) "technology isnt really effective, it can't really expose its real meaning until it has been incorporated into the human body" (ie hearing aids, pace makers, glasses)

7) "technology has really taken control of evolution - our minds create change in the human body"

2007-02-14T16:35:00.000-05:00

Father: 2/13/07
dir. Istvan Szabo

this was my introduction to eastern-european cinema that dealt with the after-effects of WWII. father, specifically dealt with hungary, the war and the following revolution in 1956.

what struck me about the film was how it functioned and succeeded as a film purely about shedding one's childhood, in this case through an acceptance of family (the main character finally coming to terms with who his father really was). beyond that though, the film has a strong political message about identity and how we view the past.

the innocence of tako and his entertaining recreations of his father create a world that can overlook the politics of yesterday (WWII) and also tell a story that functions outside of the political realm.

the switch to tako as a young adult, brings with it the lose of said innocence and a direct confrontation with the politics of the day, which in one scene is seen through a recreation of events related to WWII.

this film, like many european films that use political metaphor, the story of a person that represents a larger historical idea, makes me think even more about the lack of such storytelling in this country : we seem set on either films that are overtly political (ie fahrenheit 911) or only story (pretty much every narrative in the mainstream).

it seems we are not processing our past and relating it to the future...i hope one day we will wise up and use cinema as a way to both entertain and evaluate our actions.

2007-02-14T16:34:00.000-05:00

Shooting People 2/6/07
dir. meerkatmedia and friends

jay is part of an awesome media collective that screened a short at this event: this is jay's recollection of the evening:

We (meerkatmedia) were invited to show Wee Dark Hours at a screening hosted by Shooting People last week at the pioneer theater. When we got there we were greeted with an incredible meerkat puppet (as seen in the photos) that Jesse and Ingrid picked up whilst at Sundance the previous week. I also got to see some other filmmaker friends like Keir and Landon and meet Agnes Varnum, a woman with a fantastic blog about the independent documentary scene in New York.

Just moments after arrival, the projectionist working that night came out and told us that our mini DV master tape unspooled in their deck and since it was their only mini DV deck and they didn’t want to take any chances, they were unwilling to try our tape again. So they said they COULD NOT show the film! This all happened as everyone was filtering into the packed theater. A bunch of us kats and friends were there so this was a touch disappointing. Just when hope seemed to be lost for the meerkats, the internet future came to the rescue. Since we put high quality copies of everything on our website we were able to borrow someones laptop, track down a blank DVD, download a fresh copy of the movie from our site and burn a DVD with time still watch most of the other short films. They ended up screening ours last so Lex’s lullaby (the soundtrack to the piece) was stuck in everyones heads for the rest of the beer and pizza that followed.

Our love affair with Shooting People continues to this day–they just highlighted “Wee Dark Hours” as the featured short film on the front of their myspace page!

2007-02-14T16:33:00.000-05:00

Regular Lovers: 2/1/07
dir. Phillipe Garrel

after three hours of french indulgence, eric,keith and i talked about the film and tossed around quite a few observations, any of which would make a good starting off point for discussion but i guess what really struck me about the film was its ability to suck you in despite aesthetics and time period specifics. the look of the film was pure paris 68' - you felt it from the opening shot and garrel never let you slip away for a moment. he bluntly tells you where you are and you have no choice but to give in and get on board (it's best to just give in). even with the very defined era and a look that in a sense should distance you from the film, i couldn't help but feel connected to all that was happening, not as an observer, but more as a participant. it's a universal portrait : the image might be a slice of history, but it's painted with characters that offer up their reality and in turn you offer up yours. i'm interested to know if i am alone on this one??

also: it looks like (according to imdb) most of the actors were actually "non-actors" with this film being their only major work...thoughts?

2007-02-14T16:27:00.000-05:00

The Red Shoes 1/30/07
dir. Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger

its the story of a woman being forced to choose between two loves : that of a man and that of dance.

this is a movie that has and most likely will continue to influence everything i create as a filmmaker : from the luminating, overpowering color (something quite new for 1948) to the unique colloboration between the storytelling methods of film and dance, the red shoes stands out not only for its story but for its presentation.

i have always been drawn to melodramatic film and the red shoes is a great example of one. the use of image and music to express what the characters feel is beautifully done, even thorughout the long dance sequences, we need no dialogue, only the expressions of vicky's face.

what stands out though, is the timelessness of vicky's problem. it is clear the red shoes was ahead of its time. as a woman today i still relate to her struggle.

2007-02-14T16:20:00.000-05:00

The Spirit of the Beehive 1/25/07
dir. Victor Erice

more of a moving portrait then a plot-driven film, spirit of the beehive embodies spain and the trauma of the francoist regime and the civil war through image, sound and expression. ana torrent's eyes, the empty house and the isolation of place all define the time, the politics and the heart of the film.

in relation to this very visual storytelling, i leave you with a passage from paul julian smith's article entitled spanish lessons:

"Erice conveys all this with great economy and reticence. The script is laconic (many of the best sequences are entirely silent), and the shooting style says it all. Each member of the family is introduced separately, in a different location: the spartan cinema, the teeming beehive, the hushed room, reminiscent of Vermeer, where Teresa writes her letter to an unknown man. Not once in the film’s ninety-nine minutes do they share the same frame. Typically, in the one sequence when all four are together, a family breakfast, Erice films each of them on their own. Because Erice rarely gives us an establishing shot to set up the action in such scenes, we feel as lost and disoriented as his child protagonist. Framing, too, is used to suggest existential isolation. In one moving sequence, when Fernando joins his wife in bed, she feigns sleep. Erice trains his camera on her watchful, fearful face, while her husband is reduced to indistinct offscreen noise and murky shadows cast on the bedroom wall.

The house itself, an authentic location, is perhaps the most important character in the film. The weathered stone facade, its large entrance crowned by a timeworn coat of arms, suggests an ancestral residence gone to seed (there are even battlements on the roof where Ana’s mother calls out to her lost daughter). Dark furniture is matched by gloomy oil paintings, carefully chosen for their themes: in the girls’ bedroom, an angel leads a child by the hand (Ana will become obsessed with death); in Fernando’s study, where he reads and types, Saint Jerome is depicted as a writer, with a skull placed prominently on his desk. Even the honey-colored light that streams through the windows, glazed with hexagonal panes, is more ominous than it first seems. It evokes the beehive of the title, which Fernando tells us is a society of feverish, senseless activity, one that has no tolerance for disease or death. Cuadrado’s cinematography thus cites a tradition of Spanish old masters that sees intimations of mortality not just in shadows but also in the vanity of everyday life. Ambitiously aiming his first feature at the heart of Spanish cultural tradition, Erice even has his opening title (“A village on the Castilian plain”) echo the first words of Spain’s national novel, Don Quixote (“In a place in La Mancha”). "

2007-01-22T14:49:00.000-05:00

in lieu of an organized pfs this thursday, eric and i ventured out to see the last king of

scotland

. having seen the trailer in theaters, i knew going in that the main character, scotsman dr.nicholas garrigan, was headed towards a point of no return. his naivety in traveling to

uganda

and with idi amin, the new president circa 1970, isn't hidden in the least. the film throws foreboding music at you, signaling every wrong choice our protagonist makes. from accepting a job as amin’s personal physician (later his advisor) to starting as affair with one of his wives, garrigan allows the audience to knowingly shake their heads as he seals his fate.

the story centers on garrigan’s relationship with amin. coming to power after the overthrow of left-leaning obote, amin promised a new uganda, while only delivering death. the tragic journey of his people is hidden and rarely focused on during the film. we instead experience this traumatic time just as garrigan himself did, witnessing occasional hints of trouble that are all too easily washed away with amin’s charms and gifts.

the film of course faces the same problems any film about africa made by westerner’s faces. looking beyond troubling colonialist attitudes and the filmmakers focus on the white man and neglect of the ugandan people, the film does successfully bind the actions of garrigan with the journey of the audience. we, like garrigan constantly think we are one step ahead, him with amin and us with the film, only to be gravely disillusioned towards the end.

the specific scene that thrusts us into a very violent and sudden disillusionment, is one of the most visceral i have ever seen in my many years of movie watching, with many in the audience trying to fly from their seats into a safer, less confronting space.

it’s a lesson in cathartic art-making and in many ways forces the audience to deal with the ramifications of naïve white men's explorations of africa.

2007-01-14T17:30:00.000-05:00

The Marriage of Maria Braun 1/11/07
dir. Rainer Werner Fassbinder

" the best thing I can think of would be to create a union between something as beautiful and powerful and wonderful as hollywood films and a criticism of the status quo. that's my dream, to make such a german film." - rainer wener fassbinder

this thursday we joined together to watch a film that functions on many levels! at its heart the marriage of maria braun is the journey of a woman, picking herself up from the rubble of both a war and a poorly-timed marriage. maria also functions as a metaphor for post-war germany, specifically, the country's progression and the german economic miracle. she also stands for the rise of the independent woman and the rise (or strength) of capitalism.

this is a movie i have seen many times and even with repeat viewings, i am always overwhelmed by all that fassbinder brings to the table. this post could easily focus only on the movement of the camera, the color palate of the film, the brechtian performances, the outlandish music or political metaphors, with each providing a different view or interpretation of the film and what is accomplishes.

as a woman, i am always drawn to the strength of maria and her ability to use her sexuality to retain her independence emotionally and financially. she does not let society or circumstance determine her place. in the beginning of the film she is radiant, beaming with life, however her appearance is somewhat dull and dowdy. this seems to coincide with her progression, as she climbs the social ladder, her appearance assumes on the bright exterior, with more make-up and clothes that stand out. meanwhile her personality loses its luster. whether this is a deliberate choice by fassbinder is unclear and if it was, whether it is a statement on women's autonomy or the political journey of germany is also debatable.

what amazes me and encourages me as a filmmaker is that both are possible - that politics and entertaining storytelling can co-exist so effortlessly.

on that note i leave you all with this quote:

"fassbinder by his own admission was not interested in historical films, but in films about history from the perspective of the present: 'we make a particular film, about a particular time but from our point of view.' this meant that in his films, the past is seen across the traces which it has left in the present, fixed in the representations of the past, across the styles, the getsures, the images that evoke this past in and for the present."
-Thomas Elsaesser
"Fassbinder's Germany : History, Identity Subject"

2007-01-10T11:55:00.000-05:00

i finally got around to checking out jean-pierre melville's army of shadows at film forum last night..

the immense praise surrounding the film is deserved and it would be well worth your while to quickly head to the theater and catch the film before it exits on thursday the 11th.

"army of shadows, a film that melville, a resistant himself, waited twenty-five years to make—a film acknowledged in the u.s. only now, thirty-seven years after its release—is even more relevant today, not only for its reappraisal of the french resistance in a more enlightened context but for the pressing political, moral, and ethical questions that it raises as we confront our own social contradictions."

that statement from cineaste's review of the film, puts into context why army of shadows is creating such buzz. melville was a linguistic genius when it came to the language of cinema, so of course a "new" film from meville would be exciting in and of itself. i am sure many cinephiles sit around and dream of the films that never were from their favorite directors of the past (for me truffaut and fassbinder, each experiencing an early and sudden death). so unseen or previously unavailable melville, he died of a heart attack at 55, is a treat for any cinema lover.

what makes army of shadows so exciting though, is its portrayal of the resistance:

"lino ventura plays philippe gerbier, a resistance fighter who has willingly surrendered his entire being to the cause. (much as melville surrendered to cinema.) the film opens with gerbier's imprisonment in a concentration camp and, shortly thereafter, his escape from his captors. exciting if implausible, the escape seems almost an afterthought to the scene immediately after in which gerbier hides in a barbershop. sitting in a chair with a face full of lather, his throat to a strange blade, the escapee seems cruelly vulnerable anew, the tension abating only after the barber puts down his razor and shows his true colors." (Manhola Dargis, NYT )

melville paints a restrained and dedicated picture of the gaulist movement during WWII. today resisters of political authority are often given violent and flaky personas : in army of shadows, we see a much different picture. supplied with unspoken alliances, a seemingly invisible presence and a resolve that can't be broken, we follow the men (and one amazing women) as they convene in corners, back-alleys and forgotten pastures, working with the knowledge that their death is imminent but their work vital. the tension builds ever so slowly, until we are completely caught in melville's web, with nowhere to go but the end of the line with our cinematic counterparts.

2007-01-04T10:13:00.000-05:00

Pan's Labyrinth 1/1/07
dir. Guillermo del Toro

on monday, jay, zara, daria and I started the new year off with a trip to see "pan's labyrinth". the film was an amazing mix of political allegory and fantasy, splashed with the violent reality of a nation destroyed by civil war. the film follows a young heroin, ofelia as she and her pregnant mother move to the country to live with ofelia's new step-father captain vidal. vidal is a loyal franco devotee and is in the country to eradicate a group of anti-fascist resisters. upon arrival, ofelia meets faun, who informs her that she is the long lost princess moanna - he gives her 3 tasks to complete in order to reclaim her throne. ofelia splits her time protecting her mother and attempting to determine her own destiny, while struggling to overcome the gruesome violence that seems to define both worlds.

even with a few days to let the film swish around in my head, i don't know if i can discuss it clearly. so instead, i am going to cite two passages in "girl interuppted" by mark kermode from the december issue of bfi's sight and sound:

"Like its predecessor, Pan's Labyrinth balances political tensions with a feud between fantasy and reality, between the way the world seems and the way it is. "The Devil's Backbone was set in a time that belongs only to Spain - because six months after Franco won, Hitler invaded Poland," del Toro explains. "But in Pan's Labyrinth we're dealing with the end of the Second World War, a moment when the Spanish resistance fully believed, for very good reason, that the Allies would turn around and help them take care of Franco - which, of course, they proved not to do. In conjunction with this historical reality, I was trying to uncover a common thread between the 'real world' and the 'imaginary world', which I found in one of the seminal bloodlines within fairytales: the bloodline of choice. It's something that has intrigued me since Cronos, through Hellboy, and now to Pan's Labyrinth: the way your choices define you. And I thought it would be great to counterpoint an institutional lack of choice, which is fascism, with the chance to choose which the girl takes in this movie."

Crucially, this quest involves a journey through a labyrinth, a word which has become synonymous with the Civil War (think of key historical accounts such as Gerald Brenan's The Spanish Labyrinth), and which served as the "perfect metaphor" for del Toro's endeavours. "A maze is a place where you get lost," he explains, "but a labyrinth is essentially a place of transit: an ethical, moral transit to one inevitable centre. You think of the transit of Spanish society from the 1940s to the incredible explosion of the post-Franco period. The 1980s in Spain were like the 1960s in the rest of the world! In the movie, Ofelia is a 'princess who forgot who she was and where she came from', who progresses through the labyrinth to emerge as a promise that gives children the chance never to know the name of their father - the fascist. It's a parable - just as The Devil's Backbone was a parable - of the Spanish Civil War. Putting aside the implications of the English-language title, which simply sounded better than 'The Faun's Labyrinth', I really needed this creature to be ambiguous. It's important that Ofelia chooses to enter this new world, despite the fact that her guide is unreliable and unattractive. So we made the faun a creaky, ancient creature who becomes more physically beautiful as he becomes more perverse. It's subliminal almost, but essentially the girl distrusts him the most the better he looks."

here is a link to the entire article

2006-12-22T10:24:00.000-05:00

Waking the Dead 12/21/06
dir. Keith Gordon

being that is was the thursday before that holiday some folks celebrate in december - most pfs'ers were out of town...but zara and i represented and got together for a film.

we decided to watch keith gordon's waking the dead : a time-shifting romance that creates and works within a dialogue about the best way to initiate social and political change, by working within the system or by tearing it down.

i think the movie functions successfully on both levels. at first the quick and suppossedly passionate relationship of fielding pierce (billy crudup) and sarah williams (jennifer connelly) is somewhat hard to swallow, as a viewer you question whether you will buy the romance and in turn the film itself, as it hinges on an emotional connection with the characters.

somehow though, the brief visits into fielding's and sarah's life together manage to fairly effortlessly pull us in. scenes of lovemaking are especially effective in establishing the unspoken connection between the two.

politically, fielding and sarah act as foils of each other - while they both dream of changing the world, those dreams take place in very different worlds . sarah, an activist, works with the sanctuary movement, (which also gives us a glimpse to a time when the catholic church represented a commtiment to revolution and helping those in need, as opposed to today's apparent mission of "tradition" and bible devotion) fielding on the other hand, is in law school and wants to be a senator. the film seems to side with sarah and her efforts to break down the system she finds disgusting, but fielding has his fair share of moments that give serious inquiry to the importance of "good people" trying to exert change from within.

crudup and connelly both bring their characters to life effectively : connelly lighting up the screen with each brief visit. crudup, as the central character, remains constant throughout, and shines towards the end when for a mere second he lets his guard down, revealing his sadness, confusion and dissatisfaction with where his life has ended up. watching fielding finally release his demons only to suck them back in moments later is heartbreaking.

in a cinematic world of either/or it is exciting to see a film that allows us the selfishness of spending two hours indulging in a romance but also challenges us at the same time to confront social systems and the ways in which we control our destiny (on both societal and personal levels).

2006-12-15T14:22:00.000-05:00

Touch of Evil 12/14/06
dir. Orson Welles

a great pfs wrap up for the american independent: past,present and future!!

amazingly enough everyone (hold 1) were experiencing touch of evil for the first time. it is always fun to watch the film with fresh minds and take note of the varied reactions to shot angles, camera movement, dialogue and plot.

all agreed that the film was one that could be viewed many a time, each new viewing bringing added insight and new observances. also, welles's use of cliches in terms of gender and race, were so blatant that you couldn't help but smile..

overall, a great cinematic experience : one that is all the more amazing knowing the trouble welles went through in the creation of the film, including the lengths he went to try and preserve the integrity of it. seeing touch of evil as welles intended is not only immensely satisfying as a viewer, but is empowering as a creator of media.

orson welles, what is there to say except, "he was some kind of a man"

2006-12-05T15:27:00.000-05:00

She's Gotta Have It 12/7/06
dir. Spike Lee

last night we had a small PFS - but one of the better ones! eric, zara and i all watched she's gotta have it

here are our thoughts (eric and zara please feel free to correct me if i am misinterpreting you!!!)

: if you have seen the movie or if you haven't please join the discussion!

1) we all liked it - and were somewhat amazed at all spike lee was able to accomplish back in 1986 - he took what he had and made the most of it, from using his dad's jazz band, to creating a story that would work despite (or with) rough acting and limited resources

2) it is exciting and telling of lee that the film still holds true and manages to still reflect society today with issues it was dealing with almost 20 years ago...whether this is because society hasn't changed much or because of lee's ability as a storyteller becomes almost irrelevant.

3) the ending (nola's monologue at the end) seems abrupt in light of the intense scene and change in nola's character regarding her decision to go back to jamie - zara thought it was not enough to make her forget nola's throwing away her autonomy (by giving "ownership" of her pussy to jamie) - and wondered why lee chose to wrap his film up that way.

4) to me the ending works as a reflection of how people work in relationships, concerning love, sex, gender, expectations and the intermingling of it all - its confusing and often unsatisfying! even the most confident people sometimes doubts themselves...

especially in this case, where nola's openness about her hedonism, seemingly gives society the right to call her a freak...she is strong, but like many people, she falls prey to the conventions that society reinforces - the rape scene is intense and as a woman it's heartbreaking - but i think her monologue at the end - and the dissatisfaction is gives the viewer - allows us to exist in the confusion and the contradictions that currently did and do define women and sexuality today

5) eric looked more at the film as a series of choices - observing lee's camera and his construction to put the film together....i think for this reason the ending worked for him...he thought the length of time spent with “strong” nola was enough to buy her monologue at the end - and more then that, didn't know how what lee's alternative was necessarily

6) we all heart mars blackmon

2006-12-05T15:21:00.000-05:00

The Journals of Knud Rasmussen 11/30/06
dir. Norman Cohn & Zacharias Kunuk

2006-12-05T15:15:00.000-05:00

Dead Man 11/16/06
dir. Jim Jarmusch

2006-11-03T02:08:00.000-05:00

This image is all I can think about right now. Perhaps somehow I can write out the horror that consumes me.

Ok! So. Safe.

The Voice called it "the best film of the decade." The more I think about it, perhaps the more I can understand that perspective.

In describing it to a friend, I called it not so much a movie, but really more of a two-hour long modern painting or photograph, something that exists solely for its purpose as a vehicle to simulataneously communicate and critique a specific world. His use of hyper-accurate details demonstrate that the content of his subject proves to be the best weapon with which to attack it.

In this case, the subject is wealthy suburban SoCal, and we open with a full 45 minutes of shots that remain relentlessly distanced from the characters. Sound operates on a minimum of three layers at all times, washing the world into a blur of input, giving the audience a plethora of cues from the society we are immersed in, but forcing us to cling to these details, as we are provided with zero plot, and scant facetime with our protagonists.

The result is a viewing experience that is disconnected and yet requires one's full attention; often I found myself drifting from the tiny-sized "action" of a shot to examine the shapes and lines of the room (Moore talks on the phone, dwarfed by her mansion; her family digresses from discussion at the dinner table, but is framed in just one of three distinctly lit rooms in an immense darkness; she and her husband sit in bed, the room twice as large thanks to a wall of mirrors).

This void of plotline, and the searching that results from one's lack of emotional engagement, perfectly mirrors Moore's experience in the film: she is lost, confused, hyper-aware, emotionless. She is living in a world full of details, and it is obviously and painfully empty. That emptiness retains an inevitability, an inescapable quality, as if it were a prediction of the future, impossible to avoid. For me, the force of Haynes' world stems from this inevitability. Whether one examines the lives of his characters, or the way he shoots their world, everything screams emptiness, void, and loss. Throw in the fact that this is the past, and has already happened, and the crushing inescapability is reinforced once again. Indeed, the metaphor of shortness of breath is an accurate physicalization of Haynes' view on suburbia. It is the illusion of freedom, and never do we see this freedom in any context other than viciously restrained and boxed-in, its characters framed within the windows, cars and angular houses they have chosen to live in.

After the movie ended, I found myself wanting (although dreading) to watch it again, in order to re-experience the process of Moore's character becoming weak and succeptable to "chemical sensitivity." The aesthetic choices of this film are so precise and so heavy-handed that one is forced to examine them in great detail at the beginning. He adds elements of camera movement slowly, like a 20 minute trance song building bit by bit, and then just as we become accustomed to them, begins to use them in unpredictable ways. He calls attention to them explicitly, starting a shot solidly, then pulling out halfway through. He goes meta, as he films a zoom-in on a television as he pulls away from it, and then very soon after goes ahead and uses that Vertigo trick in real life, as the room begins to bend and sway when Moore comes home in a particularly dissociated mindstate. One finds oneself examining the borders of the shot, just to see if it's moving or not. Zooms and dollys are interwoven with inconsistency, and angular lines are used to the extent of optical illusion, as in one scene outside at the compound, when I began to hallucinate camera movement in a decidedly static shot.

It made me think much more about the choices one makes as a cinematographer, in terms of placement within a film of certain aesethetic elements. Say, of a well-composed and extremely studied wide shot. Putting it in the beginning of a film says something very different than delaying its first appearance until a key plot point develops. After having recently seen Little Children, I cannot help but examine my own aesthetic leanings (cinematographicly) from a new perspective--one that connotes much more responsibility with each choice. It is as if I have suddenly realized that I cannot merely "have fun" with my kids, but must also think about what games we play and what that teaches my child about the world. Time to be a responsible parent. Time to take my skills a little more seriously. Most importantly, time to shoot!

-eric p-h

p. freakin' s.

there is a *ridiculously* Web 1.0 site for this movie, clearly made in 1995 actually. Check it out in depth. It will not disappoint. Reminds you of a different era.

2006-10-26T12:09:00.000-04:00

janus films @ the walter reade theater
pfs members saw the following films

2006-09-29T11:15:00.000-04:00

Tarnation 9/28/06
dir. Jonathan Caouette

2006-09-25T14:26:00.000-04:00

Written on the Wind 9/21/06
dir. Douglas Sirk

2006-09-15T12:48:00.000-04:00

A Woman Under the Influence 9/14/06
dir. John Cassavetes

2006-09-15T12:42:00.000-04:00

Encounter Point 9/11/06
dir. Ronit Avni,Julia Bacha

http://www.encounterpoint.com/

2006-09-08T11:43:00.000-04:00

Four Eyed Monsters 9/7/06
dir. Arin Crumley and Susan Buice

2006-08-31T10:16:00.000-04:00

Head On 8/31/06
dir. Fatih Akin

2006-08-24T11:10:00.001-04:00

The War Tapes 8/23/06
dir: Deborah Scranton

2006-08-22T12:22:00.000-04:00

The Battle of Algiers 8/17/06
dir. Gillo Pontecorvo

2006-08-22T12:18:00.000-04:00

Half Nelson 8/9/06
dir. Ryan Fleck

2006-08-22T12:14:00.000-04:00

Heat 7/30/06
dir. Michael Mann

2006-08-22T12:13:00.000-04:00

Murderball 7/27/06
dir. Henry Alex Rubin Dana Adam Shapiro

2006-08-22T12:03:00.000-04:00

Alphaville 7/24/06
dir. Jean-Luc Godard

2006-08-22T12:01:00.000-04:00

The Wicker Man 7/17/06
dir. Robin Hardy

2006-08-21T12:25:00.000-04:00

Psycho 7/15/06
dir. Alfred Hitchcock

2006-08-21T12:18:00.000-04:00

films we have seen (see individual posts if you would like to comment/discuss)

8/17/06 - The Battle of Algiers
8/9/06 - Half Nelson
7/30/06 - Heat
7/27/06 - Murderball
7/24/06 - Alphaville
7/17/06 - The Wicker Man
7/15/06 - Psycho

2006-07-28T12:11:00.000-04:00

Having thouroughly enjoyed watching the film Murderball, I wondered why I never got around to seeing it before. This is the type of documentary that is right up my alley. I got my answer when I revisted the trailer for the film (see above). It is marketed as sports movie - more than that a RUGBY movie.

Murderball is a film about courage, and using all you have to live your life - it is about family and acceptance - these issues are all packaged and woven together with the thread of wheelchair rugby - it is the thing that brings the film together - but not what the film is about.

This happens all too often in present day cinema - take Signs for example (I may hate M. Night Shyamalan, but his films often fall into this catergory).

Signs was marketed as a movie about an Alien Invasion - and while that was a part of the film, Signs is a movie about spirituality and faith - those expecting aliens were most likely disappointed (although i argue that you should simply expect BAD when hanging with M Night in order not to be dissapointed)

Unfortunatley while missleading marketing most likely helped M Night and M Gibson - it most likely hurt M. Zupan and J. Soares - I can think of many people that would love Murderball but like me never really considered it - based on a poorly run advertising campaign.

I wish Hollywood realized that it isnt always about gltiz, glam and rough and tough: sometimes the human spirit is inspiration enough to spend 2 hours of your day involved in a story.

2006-06-29T13:59:00.000-04:00

coming soon