Film & Discussion

Imagine my Claude Rains Voice...

2010-01-12T15:41:00.000-08:00

[Oops - meant to put this at my place - I'll leave it here, no harm done...]

Mark McGwire admits to using steroids. This is shocking news, huh? I have never been a Mark McGwire fan - nothing to do with steroids, really, it's just that - without steroids, he would have been a one dimensional slugger, a new Dave Kingman - with them, he set records and was mistaken for one of the all time greats. A problem in part because it overshadowed people who probably were among the all time greats - and I remain fairly convinced, drove those players to the same expedients that made McGwire seem like more than he really was. And so people act as though Clemens and Bonds, to name names, were just chemical byproducts, instead of two of the best who ever played. And McGwire's part in this goes deep - we shouldn't forget that he and Canseco (and probably a few others, but mostly the bash brothers) were instrumental in moving steroids from a dirty little secret of the game to front and center, the engine of the game in the late 90s and early 00s. I didn't like that style - I like pitching and defense and line drives and walks - I may only be able to play slow pitch softball, but I don't want to watch it.... But that is how the game was built, and it was very popular, and restored the game to new heights after the labor problems that almost ruined it.

But all that aside - this confession would be enough to get me to vote for McGwire to the hall of fame. I don't care if it's cynical and fake-sentimental and years too late for something - the fact is, he's the first major star of the era to state the obvious without being forced to. (Unless you count Canseco, though his was even more cynical and self-serving; and a bit pathetic.) McGwire is catching hell for it - sanctimonious shits like Brian Williams pontificate away, mewling about the "magical stuff" of the summer of 1998 (not magic - science!) - ugh.... Look - it was possible to look at Bonds, know what kind of player he had been all his career, and sort of imagine that maybe, if he gave up trying to run and just bulked up, he could hit those home runs - wishful thinking maybe, but still... But not McGwire, and not Sosa - they were steroids players, playing a steroids game - with the tacit (at least) approval (even encouragement) of the owners and league officials - not to mention the people who played the business up on TV. The only other explanation for all those homers that ever had any validity was that the sport was juicing the balls - it was the baseballs or the players or both, but something was getting juiced...

And people enjoyed it. Why not? they enjoyed it then, and are enjoying it now, cause they get to play the victim - oh, we were fooled! - and huff and puff and bask in their own righteousness and the convenient amnesia about what kind of dope the old timers were using. And McGwire - going first - will get the worst of it. Just like A Rod got it worse than Manny and Manny got it worse than David Ortiz last summer.... every player who admits this will get just a little less crap about it, and by the time Bonds or Clemens gets around to it, they'll be able to brag about it. And - I'd wager - by summer, McGwire will be getting more cheers than boos - and maybe - who knows, in time this will look like what it is - a misguided era in baseball history, creating some odd offensive stats that require some on the fly translation to understand (at least until everyone 'fesses up and the statisticians can start trying to parse out what, exactly, steroids changed) - it will be something like the dead ball era that you just have to count around. No one will ever win 42 games again; probably no one will hit 73 home runs; both are products of how the game was played at the time....

2010-01-10T09:52:00.000-08:00

Star Sightings

2009-08-29T11:57:00.000-07:00

I was off of school for a couple of weeks and needed to get out of the city. I drove up to Bolinas, a northern California town that is difficult to get to, all windey roads on cliffs overlooking the Pacific. Gorgeous, but stomachache producing. And that's the only way to get there.

The beauty of the town and beach is matched by the pride of the people who live there and have prevented it from becoming a tourist attraction. The downtown has about 6 buildings: restaurant, bar, grocery, surf shop, gift shop, art gallery. When signs are put up on the highway indicating where the city is, residents take it down, so the state has stopped putting them up.

Oona and I were there on a glorious afternoon. It's a large, long beach, and there were about 15 people on it. It was sunny and somewhat warm, but the wind was whipping off the ocean. Oona and I were throwing rocks into the water and listening to the resonance of their kerplunks. As I was standing behind her, watching her throw, I glanced to my right and saw Francis McDormand and John Turturro walking toward me, looking very relaxed and simply chatting. Francis looked at me, gave me a very warm smile, and said, "hi." John did not look. I like Francis, but I really love John's acting. Behind them were Joel Coen and a very pretty woman who I now know is Turturro's wife. Their children were tagging along behind. As an aside, I looked on IMDB and Francis has nothing listed in production. She did two things in 2008 and that is it. Now, how much of a shame is that?

It is the perfect place for people like them. People barely noticed them, I saw no one stop them. They were allowed to be people walking on the beach. I was happy for them.

Here's the beach:

Grey Gardens

2009-08-29T11:45:00.000-07:00

Rented the film first and then watched the documentary.

Wow. Fascinating on so many levels.

First, the documentary. The real women are, of course, more engrossing. I could not take my eyes off of Little Edie. There is no question that the woman possessed charisma in spades, even without hair and with haphazard clothing. There is a genuine sweetness to her that makes you adore her. All of the unfair things that happened to her in her life, and she has very little bitterness and only shows anger (appropriate anger, by the way) once in the film. Her clothing, though odd, shows great creativity and has a certain panache to it. Her speaking style is mesmerizing with a slow cadence, a wonderfully creative vocabulary, and an unusual accent. It is my belief that she cannot fully distinguish between the past and the present, maybe because the present is so awful, she can only live as things were the same. At one point in the film, she talks about how the washing bins used to be in the servants quarters, then repeats, "The washing bins are in the servants quarters." She pauses and then says, "It's very difficult to keep the line between the past and the present. You know what I mean? It's awfully difficult."

The elder Edie had no charm for me. She came off as dangerously selfish and self-absorbed, and her disgustingly dirty bed almost made me wretch.

Second, the film. What performances by Drew Barrymore and Jessica Lange. Truly amazing. I mean, it is a lot easier when you have so much footage to copy, but still, they were amazing. I wish there were more roles for Jessica Lange, she always was one of my favorites.

Ted Kennedy

2009-08-29T11:34:00.000-07:00

We put to rest one of the most important politicians of our generation. He never served as president, but afterall, a president only serves 4 years, and Ted served 47--he got way more done as a senator than I think he ever would have as president.

A flawed human being for sure, and MaryJo Kopeckne will never be forgotten. I do think that he was drunk that night, and that informed his decision making. Is that an excuse? No. But, I do think it allows us to see him in another way besides a monster who simply let her die. How many of us have been drunk like that and not really in control of ourselves?

But as a senator, I think we will never see the likes of him again. He was from a generation that is now gone. A generation where if you were given riches, you had a duty to help others. People simply don't think that way today. If you are rich, you flaunt it and there is never enough. They simply want to amass more. Ted Kennedy wealth was one of the reasons he could be trusted as a senator. He couldn't be bought by a lobbyist--he had enough of his own.

In looking at photos from the funeral, I was struck the the photograph below. A man, sitting alone and obviously early out of respect and reverence--waiting.

Bea Arthur

2009-04-25T15:08:00.001-07:00

I know we've got some fans hanging around - a sad day - Bea Arthur has died. One of the coolest figures to ever grace a TV set, let's not kid ourselves...

Dresses at the Oscars

2009-02-23T08:22:00.000-08:00

Hi Guys: I hope you're all doing well. I'm so busy with school and Oona that I don't get here much, but when I do, you guys have always posted quality things that I enjoy reading. You guys really ARE the best discussion buddies. So insightful. . . .

Anyway, you wanted my take on the Oscar dresses, right? You knew I'd come through.

First of all, wasn't the show GOOD?? I loved Hugh Jackman (is there anything that man can't do? Talk about a triple threat.), and I also really loved the way they gave out the lead and supporting roles, with an actor for each nominee talking about them. What I really wonder though, is if it was their own words. Most were so heartfelt. One that was really wooden and empty was Halle Berry--does she feel for others? I thought it was an excellent show, and I really enjoyed it. Loved the musical numbers, except Beyonce. She's not that talented, and she's freekin' everywhere. Can't someone else sing?

So, about the dresses. My pick? Peneolope Cruz, no one even close. She looked like a dream come true in vintage Balmain. A Spanish queen. She was simply lovely, lovely. So elegant. I have always found her to be stunningly beautiful and vastly talented. I am very happy for her win. Second place was Marisa Tomei in her origami Versace. That is a work of art walking, and she wore it well. Honestly, everyone else paled in comparision to these two. The few awful ones were Beyonce (she has to stop wearing her mother's clothes, even if this wasn't one of her mother's clothes) and Sophia Loren. Sophia Loren just made you cringe, it was so sad to see her looking so bad. Her stylist should be fired immediately. Everything was wrong. Everything.

For the men, honestly, I feel sorry for them having to wear the same damned thing like a bunch of penguins. I wish they'd get a little risky and put a little color or something into their tuxes. Oh, well.

This show was so good, I can't wait for next year.

Karyn

Who Can Explain This?

2009-02-20T17:29:00.000-08:00

I should probably leave this alone - EW's 25 Greatest Active Film Directors. (The Obenson Report, for instance, provides a handy list version; Anne Thompson annotates, for some reason.)

I can't exactly say I'm offended by their choices. It's different. It's like - they are using words I recognize ("greatest" - "film" - "directors"), but they are using them in ways that are completely alien to me. It's not even just that they're just talking about Hollywood, or American, or whatever it is - because they have Almodovar on the list (and Del Toro, and Ang Lee, who split time...) So foreign languages are allowed... so - what? I can't imagine any definition of greatest, film, or director that involves Zach Snyder in any capacity. Judd Apatow? he's a director? Even "active" is a bit dubious when you look for James Cameron's last film... All of them ahead of Clint Eastwood! who at least made the list, which gives him the ups on David Lynch or Woody Allen or Spike Lee. I'm not going to pretend they're supposed to care about Godard or Wong Kar-wei or Manoel de Oliveira, aged 100 and going strong, or even Werner Herzog, who has became a fairly mainstream documentary director these days...

So I don't know. I can't do anything with it but marvel. I'd have to add that I don't think I could muster a very good version of the list for myself - because it's harder than it looks to find ways to combine "greatest" and "active" in a meaningful way - how do you balance lifetime achievement, recent achievement, etc? Not to mention, how do you balance influence, maybe success, with the quality of the films (over the career or now.) All very difficult, unless you pile on the qualifiers....

The list, in case anyone wonders:

1. Steven Spielberg
2. Peter Jackson
3. Martin Scorsese
4. Christopher Nolan
5. Steven Soderbergh
6. Ridley Scott
7. Quentin Tarantino
8. Michael Mann
9. James Cameron
10. Joel and Ethan Coen
11. Guillermo del Toro
12. David Fincher
13. Tim Burton
14. Judd Apatow
15. Sam Raimi
16. Zack Snyder
17. Darren Aronofsky
18. Danny Boyle
19. Clint Eastwood
20. Ron Howard
21. Ang Lee
22. Paul Thomas Anderson
23. Paul Greengrass
24. Pedro Almodóvar
25. Jon Favreau

Random Movie Report: The Call of Cthulhu

2009-02-14T13:15:00.000-08:00

The movies have not been kind to H.P. Lovecraft; though he’s considered one of the most important horror writers of the last century (at least in English), there has yet to be a significant film adaptation of his work. The closest we’ve gotten so far is the psychedelic 60s version of THE DUNWICH HORROR and Stuart Gordon’s RE-ANIMATOR. The rest is direct to video trash, mostly, taking advantage of the dubious copyright status of Lovecraft’s work and paying little attention to what he was actually writing about. THE CALL OF CTHULHU is an interesting attempt to do right by the author, and a neat conceptual experiment overall; it’s a silent film, shot in the style of something from the late twenties, when the short story of the same name was published. Running at a mere 47 minutes, this not-quite-a-feature is surprisingly effective and atmospheric, though the retro filter does soften some of the impact.

Matt Foyer is the protagonist, a nameless man telling a nameless listener (John Bolen) about the discoveries he pieced together based on papers left by his deceased uncle (Ralph Lucas.) His story is divided into three acts. First we see his uncle’s contact with an artist suffering feverish dreams of an ancient city inhabited by an indescribably horrific being. These dreams, which inspire mad carvings, take place over the month of March 1925, when by coincidence a great earthquake is detected at sea. The second piece of the puzzle revolves around the uncle’s chance meeting with a police inspector who, decades ago, disrupted a mad human sacrifice ritual in the Louisiana bayou, perpetrated by cultists of the Great Old Ones, deities from the stars, and in particular the octopus-headed Cthulhu, who is said to wait slumbering in the lost city of R’lyeh. When the stars are right, he will rise, and humanity will be doomed. The third act tells of a ship lost at sea after a storm, and its crew attacked by cultists and stumbling upon a mysterious and uncharted island.

My major concern going into this movie was that the silent movie approach was a pretty big gimmick, and it seemed like it had a chance of overwhelming the proceedings and not doing justice to the material as a result. Usually, horror works because it makes us believe in the horrible things it’s showing us, but the silent film inherently has an air of the unreal and artificial (for those of us who can hear, anyway.) Of course, silent films don’t get made much anymore and it’s hard to revive a lost art. On top of it all, this is a fan project, made by the H. P. Lovecraft Historical Society, so there’s a high risk of kitsch and in-jokiness (there are a couple in the unskippable copyright warnings, but I'll let that slide.)

Fortunately, the filmmakers insist on playing it straight and trying to make the film as good as it can be, given a low budget. It helps that they’re going for an Expressionist look similar to what was popular at the time; the sets are obviously sets and just a little plywoody, but it doesn’t matter because what they stand for is so clear. The only places where this approach falls down are in some overly stiff and pantomimed action sequences, and what we see of Cthulhu himself; the film takes care not to give us clear prolonged shots of the beast, which is a good approach seeing how much effort Lovecraft went to in describing the indescribable, but the stop-motion model we do see is a little spindly and roughly textured, not quite conveying the bulk or power of the beast.

This is a pretty faithful adaptation, and the short length means they don’t feel compelled to pad out the story. There’s a good amount of dialogue and narrative text, but somehow the captions don’t feel like an intrusion as they often did in over-written silent films. The performers do a good job of emulating the heightened emotional style of silent acting without going over the top. All in all it’s a very well-balanced picture, and so succeeds at what must have been its primary goal of being really goddamn creepy. Perhaps a truly great Lovecraft adaptation is still yet to come, but this is defiinitely a film worth seeing.

Based on the short story by H. P. Lovecraft
Screenplay by Sean Branney
Directed by Andrew Leman

Grade: A-

Top 10 of 2008 and Assorted Miscellany

2009-02-09T12:49:00.001-08:00

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it's the top 10 list that you may have been interested in a month ago. I like to take my time, but I've either seen or waited too long to see all the films I wanted to last year, so let's do this thing.

As film years go, 2008 was, well, decent. Not bad, by any stretch, and with some interesting highs, just with some dry patches. It was, for whatever reason, a year when the blockbusters aimed for artistic glory and occasionally achieved it, but the holiday season was kind of anticlimactic and short on cheer. This was also a year in which we got two well-made dark comedies, which may tragically be a record. So here's how things shook out for me in the year of change, crisis, and I’ll try to think of something else starting with “C”:

1. WALL-E. Let’s stack this all up, shall we? Brilliant evocation of character through minimal dialogue and faces with limited expression, expert animation loaded with detail, a decidedly chipper take on dystopian sci-fi, an environmental message that isn’t the least bit judgemental or scolding, an affirmation of willingness to change, all topped with ultracute robots. Also, Fred Willard. We have a winner.

2. THE DARK KNIGHT. A well-oiled engine of a crime thriller with the framing of the superhero genre and the spectacle of an action movie, managing to be a great example of all three. Heath Ledger reinterprets the Joker as a ragged genius who won’t be happy until everyone is as savage and destructive as he is, creating one of the most weirdly compelling villains seen in a long while. The story moves in unpredictable ways and defies obvious structures, the characters are never sure of themselves, the visuals are pristine, and the action isn’t nearly as confusing as it’s been made out to be. A triumph.

3. SPEED RACER. Okay, show of hands, who anticipated this being half as good as it was? The Wachowskis take on a vintage Japanese cartoon known mostly for inspiring parodies on every animated show known to man, and create a visually dazzling and surprisingly heartfelt story of a family fighting the system. This is one of those fantasy films that wraps you in an inviting and tantalizing world which promises more awesome things than you can pick up at once, eschewing any kind of restraint in favor of ninja fighting and random appearances by Shaft. On top of that, it’s a nice reminder to modern filmmakers that it’s okay to have multiple colors on screen at one time.

4. MILK. The energy, the dedication, and the urgency of the Seventies pro-gay movement all course through this film, placing the viewer at the center of a civil rights struggle that’s rarely given its proper place in history. Sean Penn captures Harvey Milk’s charisma and political acumen, while a splendid supporting cast help bring his world to life. Not quite up to THE TIMES OF HARVEY MILK, but another take on the material is welcome.

5. THE WRESTLER. This one has grown in my estimation since I first saw it, a sign of just how subtly effective the movie is. Mickey Rourke is a powerhouse, Marisa Tomei is beautifully conflicted, and the world of small ticket pro wrestling is rendered with brutal honesty and admiration. The more conventional parts of the story are made believable by Darren Aronofsky’s deliberate eschewing of obvious movie trickery and slow development of emotional intensity.

6. IN BRUGES. Part black comedy, part morality play, part throwback to Hieronymous Bosch; this unique crime picture defies categorization but never ceases to entertain. It’s got a story that’s better constructed than it looks, actors who are putting in more effort than they seem to, and characters who may or may not be as damned as they think they are. Moving and hilarious in equal parts.

7. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE. The grimiest and most stylish of heartwarming indie crowd-pleasers; part of me wanted to declare the whole thing overrated and overhyped, but it’s simply too well-made to dismiss. The story may be simplistic, its portrayal of India inaccurate, and some of its elements underdeveloped, but it is the story being told and the filmmakers do a damn fine job telling it. And I really hope more films start doing closing dance numbers.

8. BURN AFTER READING. The Coens follow up Oscar-winning respectable bleakness with an almost deliberately offputting farce that’s just as nihilistic, but has the courtesy to have a sense of humor about it. Like FARGO it focuses on people’s ability to let short term compulsions and a lack of critical thinking foil their ambition and make things very messy very quickly. As comedy it’s an unusual taste, but I couldn’t but laugh.

9. PINEAPPLE EXPRESS. As overexploited as the “dumb white guys face the long-delayed onset of maturity” subgenre of comedy is becoming, I can’t help but appreciate the blending of this material with nostalgic callbacks to stoner comedies and 80s buddy pictures, complete with excessive gunplay and a theme song by Huey Lewis. The revelation that James Franco is a great comic performer helps catapult this onto higher ground, no pun intended.

10. TROPIC THUNDER. Feels weird to put these two movies right next to each other, but there you go. A fun satire of the Hollywood movie machine and the actors caught in its gears, not pointing in any one direction but still funny and possessed of a manic energy. Inspired and strangely uplifting.

Films I missed: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Waltz With Bashir, Doubt, Let The Right One In

Most Underrated Film of the Year: SPEED RACER. There’s really no contest here; the Wachowskis labored to bring us a bouquet of sheer Technicolor joy, and it was tossed to the ground because... I don’t know. The dialogue scenes are kind of longish. The editing style takes some getting used to. Um, it’s based on an old cartoon. In the end it amounts to looking at Michaelangelo’s David and bitching about imperfections in the marble. You’d expect either the critics or the public to miss the point but both at once requires some spectacular bad fortune.

Slight runner up though this one actually made some money and wasn’t slated that badly at first but Internet flaming reached really annoying proportions: INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL. I realize that suspension of disbelief has its limits but if your major point of contention with this film is that silly and implausible things happen in it, I wonder what genre you thought this picture was. (Also: CGI is not your enemy.)

Saul Bass Honorary Award for Best Opening Credits Sequence: QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Thank God for the Bond series, otherwise I may not have bothered to give this out. (THE WRESTLER had a nice one too, though.)

Worst Title of the Year: NICK AND NORAH’S INFINITE PLAYLIST. I know that was what the book was called, but seriously guys.

Performances that impressed me (a forever incomplete list):

Elissa Knight, WALL-E
Macintalk, WALL-E
Heath Ledger, THE DARK KNIGHT
Aaron Eckhart, THE DARK KNIGHT
Michael Caine, THE DARK KNIGHT
John Goodman, SPEED RACER
Dev Patel, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
Anil Kapoor, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
Sean Penn, MILK
Emile Hirsch, MILK
James Franco, MILK
James Franco, PINEAPPLE EXPRESS
Mickey Rourke, THE WRESTLER
Marissa Tomei, THE WRESTLER
Colin Farrell, IN BRUGES
Brendan Gleeson, IN BRUGES
Ralph Fiennes, IN BRUGES
Robert Downey, Jr., IRON MAN
Gwyneth Paltrow, IRON MAN
Jeff Bridges, IRON MAN (in a cave with a box of scraps)
Frances McDormand, BURN AFTER READING
John Malkovich, BURN AFTER READING
George Clooney, BURN AFTER READING
J. K. Simmons, BURN AFTER READING
Frank Langella, FROST/NIXON
Michael Sheen, FROST/NIXON
Tina Fey, BABY MAMA
Amy Poehler, BABY MAMA
Robert Downey, Jr., TROPIC THUNDER
Daniel Craig, QUANTUM OF SOLACE
Gemma Arterton, QUANTUM OF SOLACE

... “crashes!” That’s it!

What was I trying to do that for again?

Oscar Nom Nom Noms

2009-01-22T22:39:00.001-08:00

The Oscar Nominations are in, and as usual, they’re kind of disappointing. The Academy has long taken the position that it’s better to mildly disappoint everyone instead of really outraging anyone, and while genre fans will most likely be rightfully pissed at THE DARK KNIGHT not getting a nod for Best Picture or Director, that’s actually not the biggest sin. Now, I haven’t seen some of these movies just yet and I have yet to post my finished review of dark horse/favorite SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE (short version: It’s really good), but I feel qualified to rant on some of these.

As mentioned above, THE DARK KNIGHT did not get a Best Picture nomination. It was a bit of an outside shot, but definitely worthy, so it’s disappointing but not outrageous. However, the big prize also passed over WALL-E, one of the very best films from the consistently awesome Pixar and so, by definition, better than anything you could possibly have seen last year.

Both snubs have their reasons. THE DARK KNIGHT is a superhero movie, and it made lots of money so it technically doesn’t need Oscar validation. WALL-E also was reasonably popular, but more importantly, it has a nomination and almost certain win in the Best Animated Picture category. I kind of approved of that category back when it meant that SPIRITED AWAY got an Oscar, but now it’s clear that it’s just an excuse for the Academy to avoid the seeming indignity of giving Best Picture to a cartoon. It’s the first step towards a Grammy-style segregation of genres, and further dilutes the chance of animated features actually getting the full recognition they deserve. Imagine if there had been a “Best Comedy Feature” category when ANNIE HALL was up for nominations.

There’s also THE WRESTLER, which I need to see, but given how positive the reviews have been I’m starting to wonder just who Darren Aronofsky has pissed off in the business.

In the outside track, we instead have THE READER, which may well be a fine picture, but with a Metacritic score of 58 (RottenTomatoes lists no score due to some technical error on their part) it’s hardly a critical darling. And, you always hate to bring this up, but it is a Holocaust movie and you wonder if it wasn’t chosen simply because the subject matter was worthy. I’m also not really sure why THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON is such a favorite, seeing as its reception has generally been warm rather than superheated.

Also, can I just say how incredibly unbelievably bored I am by the nominations for Best Art Direction? This is a category that’s been a problem for a while, because the people who nominate films for it consistently show a bias towards meticulously researched costume dramas over any other kind of movie. Some of the films that have NOT won Best Art Direction include BLADE RUNNER, THE WIZARD OF OZ, BRAZIL, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, THE FIFTH ELEMENT, FORBIDDEN PLANET, ACROSS THE UNIVERSE, any of the Universal horror films, anything by David Lynch, anything by Terry Gilliam, an entire host of imaginative creative work passed over in favor of recreation. Don’t get me wrong, the challenge of expressing creativity and arranging images within the bounds and conventions of an established period is significant, but surely setting those bounds and conventions yourself is also challenging. WALL-E was a triumph of design and composition, and the same can be said of SPEED RACER, HELLBOY II, and arguably SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE despite the high levels of location work involved.

Finally, though this is another film I have to get around to seeing, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN was not nominated for Best Foreign Film despite a swarm of good reviews. The reason, yet again, is that its country of origin, Sweden, didn’t submit it on time, and apparently it didn’t even play theaters there in time to make the cutoff. Between this and the CITY OF GOD fiasco, I think it’s clear that we shouldn’t let the countries decide for us what movies we should look at, and just pick the best from the entire world market.

There were some pleasant surprises- Robert Downey Jr. won a Best Supporting Actor nomination for a great comic performance in TROPIC THUNDER, though the late Heath Ledger is almost certain to win. (It’s always a shame when an acting award is a foregone conclusion, though it’s tragically inevitable here.) Amy Adams also gets another nod, and though I haven’t seen DOUBT I’m sure she deserves it because she is cool. IN BRUGES gets a screenplay nod, and though it deserves more it’s a miracle the Academy even remembers it was released last year. Still, I have a feeling that Hugh Jackman will have to work hard to liven up these proceedings.

But then, it wouldn’t be the Oscars if they didn’t frequently get things horribly wrong, now, would it?

I'm Helping

2009-01-19T11:44:00.001-08:00

New Neko Case material is always a reason to celebrate. Her latest single, 'People Got a Lotta Nerve', has been released on the interwebs. It's a quick, infectious ditty that I think is either about men who demonize strong women, or about how Steve Irwin had it coming.

Evidence to support Theory B: for every blog that posts the song, Neko's record label donates 5 bucks to the Best Friend Animal Society. So here it is:

People Got A Lotta Nerve - Neko Case

This is from her album 'Middle Cyclone', out on March 3. I can't wait. Digging around on YouTube, one can find some poor-quality iPhone camera footage of Neko performing new material, such as this:

Sounds good to me! I'm biased; Neko's been my favorite singer since I purchased half of her albums the day after a friend played the song 'Deep Red Bells' for me. I can't talk about music with much authority -- I don't have the vocabulary for it -- but Neko's the rare singer for me whose lyrics, melodies and arrangements are equally powerful in their own right. I listen to the same song multiple times to focus on each element separately. Also doesn't hurt that she has a preternaturally beautiful singing voice. She packs more meaning into a two minute song than most artists have in their entire output. I'm gushing.

Here she is performing my favorite song, 'Knock Loud':

And for those who wish for the polished studio sound, here's 'Deep Red Bells' played over someone's personal camcorder footage (ignore that part):

New Year's Resolutions, Only Two Weeks in

2009-01-13T18:12:00.000-08:00

Back at the beginning of the year, Adam Ross at DVD Panache made up a meme - nine movie related resolutions for 2009. Ah yes. Our very own Moviezzz got tagged, and actually did it - which is certainly more than I can say about the last couple times I've been tagged for things. Meanwhile, Evan did his own resolution post - last week now... we're two weeks into the freaking year... I have stopped writing 2008 EVERY time I write the year...

Anyway: I am a resolution maker, of sorts - though most years it amounts to, spend less money, eat more greens, see more movies and post more often... no exceptions this year I guess. But - in the spirit of film, discussion, Making a Clean Start to the Year, and the End of the Decade (ooh! lists!), I shall now undertake this very meme for your reading and perhaps discussing pleasure!

Nine film (and blogging) resolutions:

1. As every year - aim to watch at least 250 movies. That's a good number.
2. Turn over a Netflix film every week. MOre if possible. This is a bad habit - letting them sit there for a month at a time... this would not be so bad except for the next resolution -
3. Watch the DVDs I buy. Just found a used copy of Centre Stage! Maggie Cheung! at her youthful finest! Will I ever watch it? will I at least attach a screen cap to this post?
4. Take a film class - I miss writing about films where there's something at stake - I need the discipline now and then. With luck, the discipline translates to more general writing - and more posting - with luck...
5. Speaking of which - post 3 times a week - make at least one of them substantive. This should be such an easy target - yet I go ages without posting anything worth the trouble. Alas! The brain is a muscle - if you do not use it, it becomes flabby and weak! etc.
6. Comment 3 times a week - or something like that. Enter conversations! post, comment, whatnot, here! and elsewhere! [I have not, contrary to appearances, resolved to use more exclamation points. There may be spiritual influences at work, however.]
7. Make things - films or videos maybe - whether this means vlogs or animations or home videos or swedes, make them, post them. Before the the Lawyers arrive en masse especially if there's sweding involved.
8. do Piper's dinner with X meme he tagged me with sometime back in the 90s, I think it was. In an ideal world, this would combine with #7. More likely, this will be part of my 46 resolutions for 2046 post....
9. Rather than another blogging resolution (which might get me to 46, before I'm done) - try this: go to an out of town film festival. NY - Toronto - something. Takes some planning, and some money, but - something like that. This or leave the country. For a while anyway. On principal.

I guess that's it. If anyone want to feel tagged - go for it! For Maggie's sake...

Hi & "Best Taglines EVER"

2009-01-08T08:36:00.000-08:00

Hi Everyone! On winter break, so I can actually read and post a little bit here. I hope everyone is well. (I do miss the social aspect of our old posting sites. . . .) I thought you'd enjoy this article as much as I did. Original found at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/07/DD7B153UOO.DTL&type=movies.

Peter Hartlaub Pop Culture

Drink from me and live forever - the art of the movie tagline

Peter Hartlaub

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

When he pours, he reigns.

I remember the first time I noticed a tagline for a Tom Cruise film, on an advertisement for his 1988 bottle-flipping bartender romance "Cocktail." From that moment on, I became a lifelong fan - not of Cruise's acting but of the snippets of text that appear on his movie posters.

There was Cruise like Thunder for "Days of Thunder," Drink from me and live forever promoting "Interview With a Vampire" and Expect the impossible ... again for "Mission Impossible II." And even as the actor's career continues into the 21st century, he can still bring it. Many saw evil ... they dared to stop it on the poster of the current release "Valkyrie" isn't as overwrought or self-referential as Cruise's best work. But it's still the product of a man who, after more than a quarter century in the business, is near the top of his game.

Taglines are the promotional lines for a film, usually anywhere from a few words to three sentences in length, that appear on movie posters and other advertising. They're often more entertaining than the film itself. I haven't paid to see a Steven Seagal film in a theater since 1995, but I eagerly await each of his taglines, which remain among the best in the business.

Taglines are also proof that in the minds of Hollywood marketing executives, the IQ of the average moviegoer is about 63. Either that or the IQ of the average tagline writer is 63. How else to explain this sentence on the poster of the 1977 movie "Suspiria": The only thing more terrifying than the last 12 minutes of this film are the first 92. Or this gem, from the 1982 action film "Silent Rage": Science created him. Now Chuck Norris must destroy him. Other taglines seem painfully obvious (See "The Matrix Revolutions") or intentionally cryptic. I'm still trying to figure out what this tagline means, from the 1998 film "Urban Legends": It happened to someone who knows someone you know ... you're next.

Not all taglines are campy or laughable or just plain bad. Lines such as Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water and They're back remain part of the lexicon decades after everyone has forgotten the bad sequels that spurred them. (New journalism rule: Every time a lazy columnist, blogger or editor in the American media uses a variation of "They're ba-aaack," he or she gets a week's suspension without pay.)

But all too often, it would be better to say nothing at all. Sequels in particular seem to get the most negligent tagline treatment. Search on IMDb.com and you can find more than two dozen sequels where the tagline writer did nothing more than add "... again!" to a line from the original film. A sampling:

"Hellbound: Hellraiser II": It will tear your soul apart ... again!

"Home Alone 3": It's bad news for bad guys .... again.

"Alien 3": Start running .... again.

"Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh": Dare you say his name 5 times ... again!

"Poltergeist III": They're back ... again.

Academy Award-caliber movies tend to play it safe with their marketing. Still, there's little relation between the quality of a movie and its corresponding tagline. There was absolutely nothing good about the 1986 Sylvester Stallone movie "Cobra" except the tagline, Crime is a disease. He's the cure. If you look at the 11 films on my all-time-best tagline list accompanying this article, six were panned by critics.

But there are definitely good years and good eras for taglines. Despite a few memorable entries ("The Happening": We've sensed it. We've seen the signs. Now ... it's happening), the year 2008 doesn't match up with anything in the late 1980s, when Arnold Schwarzenegger, Patrick Swayze, Stallone and Cruise were each good for at least one memorable tagline per year.

And there are good and bad tagline actors. Tom Hanks may have more Oscars, but his taglines will never be as awesome as Swayze's.

The dancing's over. Now it gets dirty.

Now, if that doesn't make you rush home and put "Road House" in your DVD player, nothing will.

The best taglines

Here are my choices for the all-time-best taglines, judged for their ability to sell the movie, not for campiness or so-bad-it's-good qualities. I was born in the 1970s and watch a lot of bad science fiction and horror films, so your picks might differ. Add your favorites to the online version of this story at SFGate.com.

"Texas Chain Saw Massacre" (1974): Who will survive and what will be left of them?

"Rocky" (1976): His whole life was a million-to-one shot

"Jaws 2" (1978): Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water ...

"Alien" (1979): In space, no one can hear you scream

"This Is Spinal Tap" (1984): "Does for rock and roll what "The Sound of Music" did for hills

"Poltergeist II: The Other Side" (1986): They're back

"Jaws: The Revenge" (1987): This time, it's personal

"Predator 2" (1990): He's in town with a few days to kill

"Army of Darkness" (1992): Trapped in time. Surrounded by evil. Low on gas.

"Volcano" (1997): The coast is toast

"Monster's Inc." (2001): You won't believe your eye

- Peter Hartlaub

E-mail Peter Hartlaub at phartlaub@sfchronicle.com.

2008 Lists

2009-01-04T18:30:00.000-08:00

FILM

It's a confusing year for top ten lists. Two of my favorites of the decade, Flight of the Red Balloon and Silent Light, were on my 2007 list, but keep appearing on '08 lists. The paltry distribution most foreign films received outside of film festivals are leaving critics confused as to whether some of their favorites qualify as '08 releases. I've decided not to be shackled by silly rules. No one's gonna whip me for including a film on my list that I saw at a film festival, are they? The following ten films were seen by me, one way or another, in a movie theater during 2008:

10. Gran Torino (dir. Clint Eastwood)

9. La France (dir. Serge Bozon)

Set during World War I and inspired by the early war films of Samuel Fuller, Bozon follows a troop of French soldiers through the countryside, joined by a woman in drag (the incomparable Sylvie Testud) searching for her husband. They walk, they fight, and the men occasionally burst into songs sung from a female perspective. When motives are revealed and a distinct aimlessness to the journey becomes apparent, the film begins to feel like a vision of purgatory. Weird and fascinating in the best possible ways.

8. My Blueberry Nights (dir. Wong Kar Wai)

7. Transsiberian (dir. Brad Anderson)

6. Encounters at the End of the World (dir. Werner Herzog)

5. Tulpan (dir. Sergei Dvortsevoy)

Life on a steppe in Kazakhstan may not sound like an exciting subject for a film, but in my mind, there was no moment more thrilling in 2008 cinema than watching a mother camel wailing in despair as she chased after a jeep that drove off with her injured child. A close second would be seeing a baby sheep born in one long take. Then there are the awesome lightning storms, miniature tornadoes, and the little girl who sings at the top of her lungs to defy her father. Dvortsevoy's film focuses on sensitive sailor Asa's attempts to woo the titular bachelorette, one of a handful of women available to marry on the steppe. A broader scope and a deeply felt outlook on life develop thanks to the documentary style and constant, welcome peeks into the day-to-day goings on in the life of a Kazakh sheepherder. Not to be missed.

4. Shotgun Stories (dir. Jeff Nichols)

3. WALL-E (dir. Andrew Stanton)

2. Happy-Go-Lucky (dir. Mike Leigh)

1. Synecdoche, New York (dir. Charlie Kaufman)

My Fantasy Acting Award Nominations:

Actor

Clint Eastwood, Gran Torino
Michael Shannon, Shotgun Stories
Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler
Sean Penn, Milk
Chiwetel Ejiofor, Redbelt

Actress

Sally Hawkins, Happy-Go-Lucky
Emily Mortimer, Transsiberian
Rebecca Hall, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Meryl Streep, Doubt
Michelle Williams, Wendy and Lucy

Supporting Actor

Michael Shannon, Revolutionary Road
James Franco, Pineapple Express
Josh Brolin & Emile Hirsch, Milk
Brad Pitt & Richard Jenkins, Burn After Reading
Eddie Marsan, Happy-Go-Lucky

Supporting Actress

Viola Davis, Doubt
Dianne Weist, Synecdoche, New York
Hanna Schygulla, The Edge of Heaven
Vera Farmiga, Quid Pro Quo
Frances McDormand, Burn After Reading

MUSIC

Rather than list my favorite albums of the year, I'm gonna give you a little tracklisting of the songs I had on repeat throughout 2008. I'd appreciate you doing the same, as I'm always looking for new tracks on the mp3. No particular order of preference:

1. "You'll Find a Way", Santogold
2. "Family Tree", TV on the Radio
3. "The Rip", Portishead
4. "Acid Tongue", Jenny Lewis
5. "Up!", M83
6. "Kids", MGMT
7. "Human", The Killers
8. "L.E.S. Artistes", Santogold
9. "Too Late", M83
10. "Things Ain't Like They Used To Be", The Black Keys
11. "Don't Hold Me Close", Spiritualized
12. "Valerie Plame", The Decemberists
13. "Buzzer", Dar Williams
14. "Panama", The Cat Empire
15. "You, Me & the Bourgeoisie", The Submarines

20 Actresses

2008-12-21T15:51:00.000-08:00

In my fine tradition of lagging far behind the blogging pack, I'm just now ready to participate in the '20 Favorite Actresses' meme started at The Film Experience. I love a good excuse to dip into my pool of collected screengrabs (17 of the following 20 images came from my hard drive), and even though I could probably list 20 different names tomorrow, today it's the following ladies that entertain, awe and fascinate me the most, even if some of their filmographies are more impressive than others.

Note: The list of films following each name contain the performances by each actress that give me the most pleasure, and are not necessarily the finest films on that actress' resume. (But just try and argue with me on the merits of The Skeleton Key. I dare you.) The first film listed for each actress is the film pictured. Here we go:

Angela Bassett - Strange Days, What's Love Got to Do With It, Sunshine State

Jennifer Connelly - Dark City, Requiem for a Dream, Dark Water, Career Opportunities

Bette Davis - All About Eve, Jezebel, What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Irene Dunne - Love Affair, The Awful Truth, My Favorite Wife

Audrey Hepburn - Funny Face, Wait Until Dark, My Fair Lady, Charade

Katherine Hepburn - Stage Door, Bringing Up Baby, Adam's Rib, Holiday

Madeline Kahn - Clue, Paper Moon, What's Up, Doc?, Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, High Anxiety, The Cheap Detective

Deborah Kerr - Black Narcissus, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, The Innocents

Jennifer Jason Leigh - eXistenZ, Short Cuts, The Hudsucker Proxy, The Anniversary Party, Margot at the Wedding

Shirley MacLaine - Some Came Running, The Apartment, The Children's Hour, Steel Magnolias, In Her Shoes

Giulietta Masina - Nights of Cabiria, La Strada

Emily Mortimer - Bright Young Things, Lovely and Amazing, Lars and the Real Girl, Transsiberian

Sarah Polley - No Such Thing, The Sweet Hereafter, Go, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Guinevere

Thelma Ritter - Pickup on South Street, Rear Window, All About Eve

Rachel Roberts - This Sporting Life, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, O Lucky Man!, Picnic at Hanging Rock

Gena Rowlands - A Woman Under the Influence, Faces, Minnie & Moskowitz, Love Streams, The Skeleton Key

Rosalind Russell - His Girl Friday, The Women, The Trouble with Angels

Lili Taylor - I Shot Andy Warhol, Say Anything, Girls Town

Sylvie Testud - Fear and Trembling, Murderous Maids, Beyond Silence, The Chateau, La France

Rachel Weisz - My Blueberry Nights, The Shape of Things, The Fountain

Holy Grail List

2008-09-08T18:38:00.001-07:00

There's a meme going round - Joseph has done it, I just managed a post - and - well - tagged YOU! Us, Whatever. Basically, the idea is this: name 12 films you 1) have not seen; 2) are not available through Netflix.

A list of participants, so far, can be found here.

Anyway - my post is rather long and inefficient - here is the condensed version: 12 films.... heavy on the Japanophilia, but that shouldn't surprise anyone...

1. Anything (besides Yi Yi and Mahjong) by Edward Yang - soon to be rectified.

2. Humanity and Paper Balloons, by Sadao Yamanaka.

3. Chikamatsu Monogatari - Mizoguchi.

4. Ishtar - Elaine May. (Yes, it's listed on Netflix; no, it's not "available" on Netflix.)

5. Out One: Noli me Tangere - Rivette - the 13 hour version.

6. La Cicatrice Interieure - Philippe Garrel.

7. Keep cool - Zhang Yimou.

8. Timeless Bottomless Bad Movie - Jang Sun-woo

9. Bigger than Life - Nicholas Ray. (I'm not alone.)

10. Histoires du Cinema - Godard. (This either... but I've been hearing about these films forever. Where are they?)

11. Fantomas - Louis Feuillade. Thanks to David Bordwell.

12. Souls on the Road or the Red Bat - a very early Japanese film, and a well known Chambara.... blame Noel Burch.

And - anyone interested - hop in! create your own post, add to this one, put it in comments, here or at The Listening Ear.

Don LaFontaine, voice of movie trailers, dies

2008-09-02T19:29:00.000-07:00

Don LaFontaine dies.

Hi Everyone:

Been busy with school and summer vacation, but I come here and read your excellent posts.

I thought you'd be interested in the above obituary. I can't tell if he's the guy with the REALLY low raspy voice or not. I youtubed him, and I couldn't tell. I think it's him. The guy I am thinking of totally dominates trailers.

Karyn

Movies About Movies

2008-08-14T17:24:00.000-07:00

This is too good not to post about - Andrew Osborne at Screengrab runs through a five part series on Movies about Movies. Great series.

Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Part Five

And - since I have to contribute something - all of Osborne's top 20 in one place:

American Movie
State and Main
The Stunt Man
The Big Picture
Day For Night
Hearts of Darkness
The Player
Contempt
Sunset Boulevard
Singin' in the Rain
Mulholland Drive
Barton Fink
Living in Oblivion
Davd Holzman's Diary
BAADASSSSS
Demon Lover Diary
Ed Wood
Gods and Monsters
Bombshell
Los Angeles Plays Itself

Not had to come up with more - someone in comments started in with 8 1/2 - oh yeah, that... I'm inclined, quickly, to think of Sherlock Jr. or Never Give a Sucker and Even Break - or any of the host of films made about the early days of cinema, from Forgotten Silver (which definitely has to be pretty close to any best 20 films about films, I'd think), or Of Freaks and Men, or - going really obscure - Tren de Sombras (or Innisfree, for that matter). There are plenty more - what do you guys think?

What's Worth Your Time

2008-07-25T10:46:00.000-07:00

ON DVD:

Perhaps you'll recall the minor rumble in the blogosphere caused by Armond White's assertion that critics were ignoring Jeff Nichols' Shotgun Stories. It was an odd claim -- at the time, you couldn't look at any film review venue without seeing a positive notice for the film -- but all the back-and-forth about who liked it first shouldn't distract from the actual work. It's an excellent debut film, about the feud between half-brothers over their recently deceased father.

Three brothers -- named Son, Boy and Kid -- resent the indifference of the man who left them with an unfeeling mother, found Jesus, and raised four more boys with another woman. They crash his funeral, say some harsh words, and set off a chain of events that slowly escalates into violence. At the film's center is an expertly restrained performance by Michael Shannon as the eldest of the abandoned sons, whose stern face has an uncanny ability to express all the longings, regrets and anger of his character with barely any movement.

Then, for those cinematic adventurers who've been dying to take a crack at Bela Tarr's legendary 7-hour opus, here's your chance: Facets has just released a 4-disc package of Satantango! Read Michael Atkinson's write-up at IFC Films here. Through some bizarre mishap on my Netflix queue, disc 1 is already on its way to me. Maybe I'll pull my head out of my ass and write about it...

Also, I just watched Wong Kar Wai's Happy Together for the first time, and it's so friggin' good I feel the need to recommend it to everyone.

ON TELEVISION:

With the second season of Mad Men approaching, I decided to catch up on what I'd missed with my cable's OnDemand service. Yadda yadda yadda, it's as great as everyone says, but what I most look forward to in every episode is catching a glimpse of Christina Hendricks as Joan Holloway:
It's impossible to take your eyes off her, what with her bright outfits, fiery red hair and wicked grin. Forgive me for being a drooling man here, but WOW!

ON THE INTERWEBS:

After reading this interview with Teri Garr at the Onion AV Club, I felt the need to share it with any and everybody. Following decades in the business and recently surviving an aneurysm that, as Gawker put it, "severed her give-a-shit nerve", she's ready to let loose with a heaping spoonful of candor that you pretty much never see in celebrity interviews.

Forums R Us

2008-07-20T09:10:00.000-07:00

Has anyone here heard of an internet forum called "Silver Screen Oasis"? I tried to wiki it, but no articles showed up for it. It might be fairly new, or just little known. I've found a great site for discussing jazz, allaboutjazz.com, and one for soccer at bigsoccer.com, and had long wished to find a similarly-templated forum with moderators, etc. for art film discussions, but a lot of searching in the past turned up nothing. I thought, do all we want to do is blog?

But now, I may have found a suitable one at silverscreenoasis.com, that advertises itself as the place to discuss "classic" films--I don't know if that means "art films" or particularly B&W Hollywood "classics". But a keyword search on their site turned up names such as Bresson as topics for discussion. So this may be the place for me, if there are enough like-minded fans on there.

This blogspot here is a lot of fun too, and I'll continue to post here from time to time, but I've long wanted a place where a lot of feedback could be expected, and where registered users are on a more egalitarian plane, and if that's what you want also, then perhaps you should check this site out.

I don't know if discussion is allowed for modern would-be classics, though. I understand it probably doesn't want to descend into discussion about all the latest first-run features, which could make the website top-heavy in a way they wish it not be.

In Theaters: Wall-E

2008-07-08T11:59:00.000-07:00

WALL-E is not only possibly the best picture of the year, it’s the best science fiction film in a year and a half at least. It’s getting kind of boring to talk about Pixar delivering yet another great animated epic, but even by their standards they may have created something special here. It’s a film that’s almost as dialogue-thin as 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, that tugs on the heartstrings as much as E.T., and that manages the level of social commentary of just about every science fiction film of the early Seventies, but without the unbearable preachiness. Despite all these comparisons, it’s unique. It’s original, something we don’t see enough of from the major studios, and it even defies some of the conventions that Pixar itself is associated with. Above all, though- look at ‘im! He’s adorable! Aww!

Wall-E (voiced, in a sense, by veteran sound effects creator Ben Burtt) is the last of a group of clean-up robots tasked with squaring away the litter of a terminally polluted Earth. Mankind has long since abandoned the planet, and Wall-E is left alone to crush garbage into cubes and stack it in giant towers. In his isolation he has gone a little eccentric; he preserves objects he finds interesting, makes friends with a cockroach, and listens to showtunes as he works. One day, however, his routine is disrupted by the arrival of an Apple-sleek, vaguely feminine robot named EVE (voiced by Elissa Knight), whose mysterious directive involves zooming around scanning the landscape. A friendship of sorts is kindled, and Wall-E has often longed for someone to hold hands with, but when he shows her a plant he discovered, her directive kicks in. A probe ship takes her and the plant away, Wall-E in tow, heading towards the Axiom, a giant worldship carrying all of humanity. They’ve been waiting for Earth to become habitable again for 700 years- at least that’s the mission statement, but in the meantime the species has become entirely fat and sedentary, whizzing about on floating chairs and cared for by the ship’s computer and countless helper robots who really run the Axiom. Worse, when Eve is brought up to the computer to make her report, the plant has gone missing. Eve and Wall-E get carted off as malfunctioning robots, and an unintended prison break has them chased by robot security guards and still trying to find out the fate of the missing plant.

Critics so far have expressed a preference for the film’s first act, in its wordless simplicity and desolate beauty as Wall-E and EVE form a relationship. To be sure, it works brilliantly in and of itself. But the rest of the film shouldn’t be dismissed as lesser, not by a long shot. The shift of tone when we reach the Axiom is jarring, but we end up in the midst of a sparkly, shiny dystopia dominated by consumerism and inactivity, a surprisingly sharp bit of social criticism for a children’s film. But here’s where it gets interesting; the film is not callous towards humanity, even after it’s trashed its home and locked itself in stasis. During his visit Wall-E manages to knock a few people out of their slumber, and when they wake up and look around, they’re not scared by reality, they embrace it. The people in this film aren’t selfish, and as a matter of fact, I’m not sure any character in the film fits that description. What they are is locked in a pattern, and this holds for the robots as well. It takes a force like Wall-E, a new element, to shake them out of it.

The animation continues to extend Pixar’s high standards, with a number of shots that would work perfectly well for a live action feature. The level of detail is utterly amazing, whether we’re dealing with the junk-encrusted Earth or the sparkling Axiom. Weirdly enough, there’s even some live action in the picture, seen on electronic video screens and billboards.

The film mostly forgoes the familiar tradition of having well-known actors and actresses voice the major parts. Burtt “voices” the main character (and several other robots) through his use of sound effects and voice modulation, and the ship’s autopilot is voiced by Apple’s Macintalk text-to-speech system. Sigourney Weaver, Kathy Najimy, and Pixar vet John Ratzenberger all have parts, but they’re outshone by the nearly wordless protagonists. There’s also the immortal Fred Willard appearing in the live action pieces as the President of the world-dominating Buy-N-Large corporation.

Of course, much of what makes Wall-E work is in the simple appeal of the main character. He’s cute, he’s humble, he’s friendly and curious. He’s attracted to EVE first out of his loneliness, but soon sees the virtue of her “directive” and works to preserve the life of the little plant that holds the key to mankind’s future. I’m not sure he ever fully understands what this is all about, but he knows that it’s EVE’s mission and seems to have a respect for all living things.

WALL-E is an extremely intelligent picture that manages to be very simple and fun at the same time. It’s a film with many layers, but it can be engaged with on the most basic level as the story of a lonely robot in love. It has just the right combination of passion and elegance, sweetness and sophistication. Definitely the picture to beat for overall excellence this year.

Written and Directed by Andrew Stanton

Grade: A

Mad geniuses

2008-06-26T17:21:00.000-07:00

I've picked out 3 films that almost killed their creators, either literally or figuratively so. And the directors who made them had to be quite mad, as they pushed their craft to the very extreme in one way or another.

The first one is Jacques Tati's Play Time. Now this is a movie that is unlike any I have ever seen in my life, and I don't know how much I even like it, but yet I find it fascinating to no end. In it, there is not much dialogue at all, no main characters, and just about every shot is wide-angle. I think Tati detested closeups. His sets were so elaborate and with so many things going on at the same time, you have to watch it several times from different parts of the theater to catch everything. Its very nature was sort of off-putting to many audiences, so maybe that's why I haven't seen very many immitators. It's like seeing the Grand Canyon, if you consider yourself a true cinephile, you must see this film at least once in your life. It's quite a spectacle. I think he even said it was like this film came from another planet. In such a way I think it's quite inspiring by showing us different possibilities with cinema. This film was a real budget-buster, too. Tati created this whole futuristic city for a set, outside of Paris, they called "Tativille", and this project ate up so much money that he even resorted to using cardboard cutouts for extras at times. Incidentally, this movie put Tati into financial ruin.

The second film I've chosen to mention is Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven. He filmed this thing on the southern Alberta plains, and drove everybody up the wall during filming, I've heard. After shooting was over, he had to reshoot some scenes, and spent about two years editing the thing, which included overlaying a lot of the spoken dialogue with Linda Manz's voiceovers, and so forth. Two years of editing! I don't think he made the producers very happy, but the world should have no complaints because all that madness produced what I think is one of the most seamless and beautiful films I've ever seen in my life. I think this film comes as close to perfection as any film ever has. Incidentally, this film must have taken so much out of the director that he didn't make another film for the next 20 years. I guess that's called suffering for the cause. But I'll take one Days of Heaven over 20 Woody Allen films. And I like Woody Allen a lot.

And the final film I'll mention is.....can you guess it.....yeah, Werner Herzog's Fitzcarraldo. Of course. This film was one of the most daring projects any director ever set out to make. I think Klaus Kinski almost murdered Mr. Herzog over it, or maybe I'm exaggerating, but it wouldn't have been a surprise if he did. I don't think any director in history has had more cahones than Herzog. He was quite demanding. There are no "special effects" in this film. They really did pull a ship up a mountain. He just had to do everything authentic, didn't he? There is a companion piece to this film, a documentary on the making-of, directed by Les Blank, that is equally as fascinating to watch, or moreso. Here is a clip I don't remember seeing before, but I'll use it because it really makes the point:

New Classics

2008-06-23T10:33:00.000-07:00

To celebrate their 25th anniversary, Entertainment Weekly has posted several lists of "New Classics" -- that is, the best of everything that's debuted within the last 25 years.

Obviously, the movie list doesn't dare to be different. It's full of titles most people have seen and chatted about, and 94 out of 100 are English language films. Clearly, it's a list of broad popular tastes, and I'm not gonna waste energy criticizing EW for doing exactly what it always does. But I think we can do better.

There are nine contributors to this blog, so let's each list nine of our own New Classics. The only guidelines are: feature-length films released in 1983 and after. No need to create a new post, simply edit this one to add your titles.

As with any list, mine could completely change tomorrow depending on my mood. Here's what I feel the need to add right now:

MIKE DOC'S LIST

After Hours (Martin Scorsese, 1985)
Dancer in the Dark (Lars von Trier, 2000)
The Death of Mr. Lazarescu (Cristi Puiu, 2005)
The Double Life of Veronique (Krzysztof Kieslowski, 1991)
Flight of the Red Balloon (Hou hsiao-hsien, 2007)
Flirting with Disaster (David O. Russell, 1996)
The Sweet Hereafter (Atom Egoyan, 1997)
Syndromes and a Century (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2006)
The Thin Blue Line (Errol Morris, 1988)

EVAN WATERS' LIST

Brazil (Terry Gilliam, 1985)
Videodrome (David Cronenberg, 1983)
Ed Wood (Tim Burton, 1994)
Rushmore (Wes Anderson, 1998)
Requiem For A Dream (Darren Aronofsky, 2000)
Children of Men (Alfonso Cuaron, 2006)
The Lord of the Rings trilogy (Peter Jackson, 2001-2003)
The Aviator (Martin Scorcese, 2004)
Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki, 2002)

Weepingsam's List (promoted from comments)
City of Sadness (Hou Hsiao-hsien, 1989)
Inland Empire (David Lynch, 2006)
Fallen Angels (Wong Kar-wei, 1995)
Yi Yi (Edwards Yang, 2000)
Satantango (Bela Tarr, 1994)
Vanda's Room (Pedro Costa, 2000)
Peking Opera Blues (Tsui Hark, 1986)
Brazil (Terry Gilliam, 1985)
O Brother Where Art Thou? (Les Freres Coens, 2000)

Erik's list
Russian Ark (Alexander Sokurov, 2002)
The Sweet Hereafter (Atom Egoyan, 1997)
Mulholland Drive (David Lynch, 2001)
Magnolia (Paul Thomas Anderson, 1999)
Gosford Park (Robert Altman, 2001)
Adaptation (Spike Jonze, 2002)
GoodFellas (Martin Scorsese, 1990)
Taste of Cherry (Abbas Kiarostami, 1997)
Lost in Translation (Sophia Coppola, 2003)
9/11 (Gedeon & Jules Naudet, James Hanlon, 2002)

Joseph B's List

(if nothing more than personal favorites.. I have such a damn hard time seperating 'favorite' from the abstract idea of 'important')

1. Casino
2. Magnolia
3. Heat
4. Laws of Gravity
5. The Big Lebowski
6. Goodfellas
7. The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford
8. The Double Life of Veronique
9. The Thin Red Line

Sports Post and Poll

2008-06-22T12:00:00.000-07:00

It's been a tough couple weeks for baseball managers - John McLaren in Seattle, John Gibbons in Toronto, Willie Randolph of the Mets were all fired in the last couple weeks - and the trade rumors are starting: whither CC Sabathia? Matt Holliday? Jason Bay? And so Im putting u another poll, for you baseball fans: which of the dreadful underachievers are most likely to turn things around in the second half?

There have been some dreadful underachievers: The Mets, at least compared to their image of themselves; the Tigers and Indians, by pretty much any standard, have been huge disappointments; The Mariners wanted to think they were contenders, and acted like it,trading prospects for Eric Bedard; both the Rockies and Padres have been awful, after being in the playoffs last year... The Blue Jays, Dodgers, etc., all had dreams of contention, which aren't very likely now.

But - if I had posted this a couple weeks ago - I could have included the Yankees: a winning streak later, they're over .500 and only 5 out; The Brewers were mediocre for a long time - now - 6 1/2 out, but moving up on the Cubs; good lord - even the Orioles are over .500! So - who else can turn it around? I'm going to limit the choice to the teams that both have a shot at the post-season - so no Mariners, they won't come back from 18.5 out, and were supposed to be good, and were good last year, but have been lousy this year. Those teams are:

Detroit and Cleveland - both very good last year, supposed to fight for the top of their division, if not the league, this year - both very bad this year. Though lately the Tigers are hot - and both are still within range of contention, and both have bunches of established players who have not been performing - they are prime candidates to make a run.

Rockies and Padres - playoff teams (sort of) last year, awful this year - but close enough to make a run, and - maybe...

Throw the Dodgers in there too, since they fit the bill pretty well.

And finally - the NYMets - they're the ones getting the attention, of these sad underachievers. The joys and perils of being in one f the big media cities. And of spending a ton of money and playing to the tabloids every offseason - which seems to me to be a big part of their problem. They have been making the big splash almost every year of the Minaya era - signing Beltran, Martinez, trading for Santana and so on - all fine and good, except they haven't bothered to put a team around the stars. Take away Wright, Reyes and Beltran, and that is one sorry lineup. It's interesting to compare them to the Phils - what's the difference? comes down to this - the Phils' stars are playing at or above expectations (except for Rollins), while the Mets stars, while doing okay, have not been up to their standards; and the rest of the Phillies lineup is competent major leaguers who stat on the field - Victorino, Werth and Jenkins, Feliz - nothing special, but they give you something. The Mets? not so much...

Anyway: we'll see how this goes... maybe next we can ask about which of the overachievers (Tampa, Florida, the Pale Hose, those over .500 Orioles, etc.) can keep it up.

Four Fathers

2008-06-15T12:07:00.001-07:00

I Was Born, But... (Yasujiro Ozu, 1932)

The Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton, 1955)

A Christmas Story (Bob Clark, 1983)

The Squid and the Whale (Noah Baumbach, 2005)

Shared Items

2008-06-10T16:57:00.000-07:00

This is an experiment. I don't know if anyone else cares about my Google Shared Items page - but I think it might be interesting to have a post with a bunch of these. So - if anyone else wants to link to shared posts - it looks like you just have to add the script here.

Indiana Jones and the Umpteenth Jokey Title

2008-05-27T19:05:00.001-07:00

Spoilers? Probably...

The glowing review that Keith Uhlich posted on Sunday at The House Next Door for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is still generating comments. As I type this, the latest are focused on the scene in which Marion drives herself, Indy, Mutt and Dr. Oxley off a high cliff and onto a sturdy tree branch, which bends far enough to allow the jeep/boat hybrid a safe landing into the river below.

Commenter Chris P, reacting to the assertion that this scene is equivalent to Indy’s leap of faith towards the end of Last Crusade, says:

“Before his leap of faith, Indy's scared. He's nervous and not sure it'll work. And when it does, he's even more amazed than the audience. He feels for us. We feel more a part of the adventure because of his emotional reaction to it.

By contrast, Marion has it all planned out, it works exactly as she expected -- nothing goes wrong, there's not even a moment where she thinks "uh oh, maybe this was a bad idea" -- and we don't get a woop of unmitigated joy, or even a sense that maybe her feigned bravura was just that, when something so amazing does work.

Simply: that short scene sums up everything that was wrong with the movie.”

Uhlich later responded:

“To which I say that we do get that sense of unmitigated joy in Karen Allen's smile after the stunt works, a visual cue that rhymes with her beatific reaction to Indy's "none of them [the other women in my life] were you" and with her mad "are we still alive?" laughter after they go over the three waterfalls.”

What this exchange boils down to is a round of “No it’s not!”/”Yes it is!”, and I suppose we can simplistically say that either the film worked for you or it didn’t. Though Uhlich is a good enough writer to make me wonder if I might be wrong, I do side with the camp that’s emphatically anti-Crystal Skull. And I think Chris P is on to something.

That particular scene makes use of the dreaded three letters: CGI. Though Karen Allen’s smile is winning, it’s not precisely enough to convince me of the adrenaline rush likely to accompany such a daredevil stunt. I wonder if Allen was ever shown the equivalent of the cliff in question, or the waterfalls she survived. Some highly-skilled digital artists created a nice-looking picture of a large tree whipping itself against the cliff, knocking several Russian digi-soldiers to their deaths. But Spielberg never provides a shot to convince, nor do the flesh-and-blood actors react in a way that suggests such a spectacle really happened. Mayhaps this wouldn’t be so jarring a letdown if Spielberg hadn’t already pulled off a virtuoso cliffside sequence in Temple of Doom, where none of the problems I mentioned exist. Because there was no CGI. That was a real, flimsy bridge over a really frigging high drop.

I get the supporters’ argument that it’s unfair to judge the movie based on what you expected, rather than what was presented -- though plenty that’s presented is worthy of derision, but this post isn’t about reaction shots of gophers and Shia LaBeouf’s injured testicles, so I’ll move on. Isn’t it fair for longtime fans who’ve invested in a franchise that employed innovative camerawork, on-site special effects and stuntmen (plus, as one commenter at HND put it, “a crisper, more ‘analog’ look”) in three previous installments to expect the same of the fourth? Rather than cartoonish, unconvincing CGI to cover up for most every daring feat? The excitement of the narrow escape doesn’t exist in this movie. The characters simply disappear behind the computer graphics, then appear again, safe and sound.

I appreciate Uhlich’s analysis of Spielberg’s imagery and the thematic content, but he expounds on it far more elegantly than the film ever does. After the movie, I told my friends, “I want to weep, it was so bad.” I grew up watching the Indy movies with my father, wondering at the movie magic on display. What do kids today have to wonder about? It’s all computers. I take my entertainment seriously, and Crystal Skull felt mostly like a bunch of clowning around.

Cannes Results

2008-05-26T06:25:00.000-07:00

This year's Cannes film festival is done: winners are up - Greencine has them all, competition and otherwise Un Certain Regard ; Critics Week; FIPRESCHI.

And now we wait for distribution. I've put up a poll - which of the award winners are you looking forward to seeing most? Or are you looking forward to films that didn't win awards - A Christmas Tale (Desplechins)? The Headless Woman (Lucretia Martel)? 24 Cty (Jia Jiang-ke)? Tokyo! (Michel Gondry, Leos Carax & Bong Joon-ho)? Kung Fu Panda?

Let me update with a link to Glenn Kenny's roundup of award winners.

Sport

2008-05-19T18:44:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking of putting up a baseball post lately - seeing Joseph's Rangers within a game of .500, that sort of thing. I have more concrete inspiration now - I come home from seeing J'Entends Plus la Guitare (a rare and precious Philippe Garrel screening at Harvard) - in time to watch Jon Lester finish off a no-hitter. The sentimental among us should be pleased. The cynics among us should become a bit sentimental. The Red Sox fans among us can think we have 2 starters with a combined 48 starts and 2 no-hitters.

Academy of the Underrated: Godzilla (1998): The short version

2008-05-18T13:36:00.000-07:00

Okay, I've gone and written up my defense of the much-disliked American GODZILLA movie, and posted it over on Club Parnassus. I was going to post it here, but it may be even larger than the SPEED RACER post and I don't want to monopolize the blog. (Note: This might be a good time to implement a script that'll let you put long material behind a cut.)

So, if you're interested in reading it, the review is here. You can comment on that post or this one, or just ignore it. I figured I should post it today because it's the ten-year anniversary or nearabouts.

Crazy Cannes News

2008-05-15T10:48:00.001-07:00

Get a load of this action.

In Theaters: Speed Racer

2008-05-11T09:56:00.001-07:00

Ignore the cynical critics, who seem to object to SPEED RACER more on a conceptual level than on anything to do with the film that’s been made. Ignore the fact that this is yet another movie based on a vintage TV show. Ignore the poor box office reports. SPEED RACER is, and I never expected to say this, a truly great film. It does what it sets out to do almost perfectly- you may object to what it sets out to do, especially if you have epilepsy, but there is not only skill in this film’s execution, but genuine heart.

I went into SPEED RACER hoping to enjoy it, but seeing it mostly out of principle. Said principle was that movies are not colorful enough these days, and that anything which embraces the idea of having more than one shade onscreen at a time deserves support. I knew the reviews were not great, and at any moment I expected the film’s massive flaws to reveal themselves, and the divide in opinion (because I’ve heard enthusiastic responses to the film on various fora) would be explained, and I would decide what side I fell on. I actually kinda wish I’d seen what the problem was. Instead, I gotta say, this is a superb spectacle that delivers everything it promises, and the naysayers- I don’t get what their deal is.

If you’ve seen the show (I actually haven’t), you know the story. Speed Racer (Emile Hirsch) is the middle child of the Racer family, who as you might expect are big in the car racing game. Pops Racer (John effing Goodman) builds cars, and big brother Rex Racer (Scott Porter) drives them. But at some point Rex seems to go bad, aggressively pushing off other drivers and seemingly being killed in the middle of a massive cross country race. Years later, though, the Racer tradition lives on, as Speed continues his brother’s legacy in the Mach 5 (in an ingenious touch, the first race sequence slides between Rex and Speed running the same track, eventually racing against each other for the all time record.) After a big win, Speed is approached by Royalton (Roger Allam), head of Royalton Motors, who wants him to race under their banner. However, Speed decides to stick with the family, and this infuriates his would-be boss, who vows that from then on, Speed won’t win, won’t place, won’t even finish a race.

A lot of major companies make a lot of money off of racing, and they negotiate and plan the outcomes of major races. Sure enough, Speed is forced off the track at Fiji, and Pops comes under investigation for alleged IP infringement. But the mysterious Racer X (Matthew Fox) has been investigating the link between the big companies and the underworld (represented by some downright Victorian British gangsters), and on finding out that racer Taejo Togokhan (Korean pop sensation and Stephen Colbert nemesis Rain) has been in their pay to protect his sister Minx (Nayo Wallace), he and the wonderfully named Inspector Detector (Benno Fürmann) try to get him to testify. In exchange, Taejo wants to protect his family’s company from a buyout, and to do that he plans to win the Crucible, the team cross country race that ended Rex’s career. Speed Racer is offered the third position on the team, and sneaks off, over his father’s objections.

All this and more takes place in a universe that is a giant live action and CGI cartoon, rendered in bright basic colors. The drivers race along impossibly twisted tracks, and are saved from crashes and explosions by being encased in spheres of foam. This encourages the racers to get a little violent, and even the good guys have to fight and inevitably force competitors off the road. The race sequences are insanely kinetic, but though the flood of color and motion is overwhelming at first, a rhythm soon emerges, and usually a shot will focus on a specific car or racer. In a way this mimics the look of the cartoon, in which, as in many anime shows, static characters would be surrounded by speed lines and signs of motion. The same balance of images is shown in the less actiony scenes- even though we’re seeing lots of things on screen at once, there are clever emphases and patterns that emerge. Royalton’s office is bedecked in royal purple, and when he tries to convince speed that the racing world is driven entirely by money, background colors fade and we’re surrounded by black and white.

This is a film full of whimsy and imagination, and tiny details and not-quite-necessary things are everywhere. The Crucible race is started when the Queen of Casa Christo looks out and sees the sun; various on-track “assassins” take the form of sexy pink-haired girls with phallic tire spikes a la BEN HUR (Speed combats them with tire shields, and right now Freud wishes he were still alive to analyze that), Viking marauders, and mercenary soldiers; Speed’s younger brother Spridle (Paulie Witt) and his monkey pal Chim Chim imagine themselves in the action of a superhero cartoon they watch; out-of-focus hearts appear in the background when Speed and his best girl Trixie (Christina Ricci, whose looks are made for anime) lay eyes on each other. There are vicious gangsters and ninja and caverns of ice, and the cars themselves have useful gadgets a-plenty, though some are less legal than others (the Mach-5’s jumping springs, which get it out of tight situations, are A-OK, but the spearhook, used to catch cars in a deadlock, is bad form indeed.)

All of this is handled with a good sense of humor; there’s an inevitable level of camp in the proceedings, obviously, though the movie tries not to let that undermine the story. We end up laughing with the film’s absurdities more than at them; we’re not asked to really accept anything as plausible, just as cool. This is a universe where logic and physics are subservient to aesthetics, and everything that happens, happens because it would be totally awesome if it did.

One doesn’t expect much from the acting in a movie like this, but some thought seems to have gone into this as well. To be sure, we’re dealing with cartoon characters, who must be strong and basic in their motivations and drives, but the cast works hard to make these personalities come across. Nobody breaks character, or goes through the motions; in particular Goodman, and Susan Sarandon as his wife,are very strong as Speed’s ever-supportive parents. One part of the film that works very well is its emphasis on family; a lot of kids movies will try to tell us that a given family is strong and supportive and so on, but this one makes us feel it; a bond between the characters is always apparent. Ricci is a treat as well, and there are a few fun cameos here and there. Hirsch carries the lead well, and though there’s not a lot to really distinguish his performance, it’s the kind of work that we would have noticed more had it gone horribly wrong.

Family is one of the main themes of the film, of course, as is the struggle of the athlete against corporate corruption of the sport. Some critics have made a point of calling out the film as insincere on this point, since it is, after all, a big budget summer movie replete with merchandising tie-ins; obviously SOMEONE involved cares about the money. But the point really seems to be that corporations are a bad thing when they try to reduce it to be ONLY about money, when they work against the passion that drives sports as well as filmmaking. The big message of the movie, I think, is a very idealistic one- that you CAN stand against the system. That nothing is so big that it cannot be brought down. And on this point the film is very strong.

I can, off the top of my head, name one flaw in the movie. Spridle and Chim Chim have a little too much screen time. They’re the film’s big comic relief, and though they’re not unfunny, they pop up a little too often. I’m also trying to remember the exact point at which Rex’s fortunes turned, but maybe in a film this overstuffed it’s inevitable that something will slip one’s mind. There is an interesting point where we get what seems like the climax, and an unusually long denouement, until we realize that the third act is in fact still around the corner. This is a long movie, to be sure, but despite that weird shift it’s never dull, and I do have to give the film credit for actually making me buy into the false crisis and false dawn.

And so here I am. I have to give this an A; the film almost never steps wrong, and there were many chances for it to do so. Not only is it fun, not only do we see John Goodman fight a ninja, but so help me God it is genuinely a compelling experience. You want Speed to win and to root out the corruption in his world, and there are moments of true suspense and elation. I cannot fault it. I honestly do not see the problem.

See this picture while you can. The box office apparently has not been good (nowadays we can predict these things before the opening weekend is even over, and if that’s not a grim bit of fatalism infecting the movie world I don’t know what is), and this blast of color and cheer does call for the big screen. SPEED RACER is a wonderland, a feast, a glorious over-the-top sports opera that looks wide-eyed at the drive we feel to be our best and what we have to do to stand up to a world which seeks to crush ambition. It’s fun, it’s funny, it’s clever, and it’s downright heartfelt. It’s honestly better than THE MATRIX, and I think the Wachowskis have genuinely redeemed themselves for the missteps made in the sequels. This film works when it really shouldn’t, and perhaps if you go in skeptical from the start it won’t appeal to you. Better to see it with an open mind and let it wash over you. Trust me, it’s an experience you should have.

Based on characters created by Tatsuo Yoshida
Written and Directed by the Wachowski Brothers

Grade: A

Introducing...

2008-05-08T22:56:00.000-07:00

This is the part where I shamelessly promote my new personal blog, Southland Cinephiles.

I know what y'all are thinking: this'll never last. He went and deleted his last blog without a word after a coupla lousy months. Sucks to him! Bah!

Well, shut up. I disagree. This time, I don't have to struggle to think of new content.

You'll notice it appears to be sort of a regional blog, aimed solely at Los Angelenos. Well, yes, that's its main purpose. I longed for a place on the web that, in one easily readable place, would list and discuss the overwhelming amount of daily screening opportunities in L.A. Since I've never found a satisfactory manifestation of that desire, I figured I'd make it myself.

But I'm hoping that folks outside of L.A. will participate as well. The variety of films screening from day to day is astonishing -- this Friday's choices include Lawrence of Arabia, My Fair Lady, Moustapha Akkad's The Message, Forbidden Planet, A Quiet Place in the Country, The Letter, and more. I know all the filmies out there have something to say about at least one of those.

So say something.

I plan to expand the content past just lists. Recommendations, reviews, articles and the like are forthcoming. But all shall be geared as much as possible toward cinema available to L.A. I'll maintain a regular presence here to post about everything else.

Three for the Dance

2008-05-06T23:14:00.000-07:00

Solo

Not so long ago, I attended a screening at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art of Powell and Pressburger's The Tales of Hoffman. Overall, the experience was a disappointment. I failed to note beforehand that they'd being showing the film on video. The picture and sound quality left much to be desired, but that couldn't detract from the work of Moira Shearer, screen goddess. The woman is impossible to look away from, the very definition of poise and grace. At the end of her "Doll's Song" performance, the audience burst into applause:

Duet

I suppose I love an underdog, so all due respect to the very worthy Fred and Ginger, but my heart belongs to Fred and Kay.

Fred Astaire was pushing 60 and Kay Thompson was just under 50 when they co-starred in Funny Face. It's not every movie musical romance that lets its superstar ingenue (Audrey Hepburn) disappear for a bit while the two middle-aged pros hoof it in a showstopper. The Gap recently revived interest in Hepburn's easily lovable beatnik bar dance number, but I go for the admittedly not-so-innovative-but-a-helluva-lotta fun "Clap Yo' Hands":

Pas de trois

Fuck Baby Mama! The real female buddy comedy to watch and learn from came out in 1997, and it's called Romy and Michelle's High School Reunion. The women here are just as foul-mouthed as any Judd Apatow slacker ("Why don't you go fuck a sheep, or your sister, or yourself?!"), their situation is true to life, and they get away with some blessedly weird moments. Observe the climactic three-way dance scene:

Dancing Poll

2008-05-06T17:33:00.000-07:00

I'm experimenting with the polls: I've never been too good at coming up with quizzes and polls and the like, but, hey... this time around - let's acknowledge another neat blogathon - this one, the Invitation to the Dance from Ferdy on Film. I shall go straight to the top: for all my rather well documented love of Busby Berkeley film, and less documented love of Gene Kelly films, there is no one like Fred Astaire - and no Astaire movies like the ones he made with Ginger Rogers. And so I ask you: which is your favorite? I believe I have answered that question somewhere online - notably, my favorite Fred and Ginger movie is NOT the one that contains the Greatest 5 minutes of Film Ever Made! Vote! comment! sing along!

In Theaters: Iron Man

2008-05-05T11:25:00.001-07:00

It may be a good sign that the first summer blockbuster of the year is as intelligent as IRON MAN. (I just know that statement is going to backfire on me.) It’s a solid action film, but what’s memorable about it is how much thought has gone into it. A superhero film that technically follows the structure of such things but does so with an offbeat attitude, the big screen debut of Marvel’s armor-suited guardian doesn’t pander to its audience the way big movies are expected to. Which isn’t to say it’s a great movie, or without its flaws, but it’s well put together, and the acting alone is of a caliber you don’t expect to find in films like this.

Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark, head of Stark Industries, which manufactures weapons, aircraft, communications systems, basically anything big and metallic that the government pays lots of money for. He’s a brilliant inventor and a millionaire playboy without Bruce Wayne’s angst, bedding beautiful girls and jetting around the globe, always with a drink in hand and a dry quip at the ready. He’s in Afghanistan making a sale to the Army when his convoy is ambushed by a mysterious terror group, who take him prisoner. In the scuffle he is injured by shrapnel from one of his own missiles, and a doctor who’s also being held prisoner comes up with a crude mechanical heart plug that stops the one unremovable shard from burrowing in further and killing him. The terrorists (known as the Ten Rings, and being more would-be conquerors than religious fanatics) want Stark to build missiles for them, but he takes advantage of their resources to instead build a giant suit of powered armor which he uses to escape. On getting back to civilization, Stark wonders how his weapons ended up in the hands of the enemy, and shuts down the weapons division of Stark Industries, rousing the ire of his partner Obadaiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), who once ran the company. Stark develops his suit technology further, unaware that Stane and the Ten Rings are conspiring against him.

While most superhero movies seem to be driven by a particular script or director’s vision, it’s clear that IRON MAN is built around the casting of Downey. In the comics, Stark has struggled with alcoholism and bad-boy behavior (unfortunately current continuity has him in a rather dour authoritarian role), and though it’s hard to say how much the actor drew on the parallels to his own life, he’s obviously worked hard to create a fully realized character. Downey’s droll, deadpan attitude always works just right against his character’s excesses, both as playboy and superhero. It’s really fun to watch the performance, and the character created by it; it infuses a spirit of wild anarchy into a $186 million franchise picture. Movies like this aren’t allowed to take these chances, in theory, and though the film isn’t quite as radical with genre conventions as, say, Ang Lee’s underrated HULK, it shows what you can sneak in while still delivering what audiences come to see.

The writing is surprisingly strong as well; I have a feeling that Downey was allowed to take liberties with the script, but the dialogue is sharp overall, full of memorable quips. The story is literate, and though it actually takes a while for “Iron Man” himself to make his debut, the material leading up to it is good enough that it doesn’t matter. I would complain that the film doesn’t really have the time to deal with some of the things it gets into; the arms smuggling plot in particular doesn’t feel quite resolved. But then, delving too much into any one aspect of the film’s plot would probably slow things down, and though there are a couple of slow bits the filmmakers wisely keep up a steady pace, with no time for detours. The emphasis the film places on banter between its characters is also welcome; because studios depend on international grosses to cover overhead for almost every film they release, and because witty repartee isn’t guaranteed to translate at all, it’s often sacrificed in favor of physical humor. (Of course, as I write this, the film has made $96 million outside the US, so maybe the conventional wisdom can at last be put to bed.) There are some really funny lines in this film, and not just because Downey delivers them.

Actor/director Favreau demonstrates a solid grasp of pacing, and both the action and humor benefit from good timing. As much as Downey dominates, Favreau is sure to surround him with a strong supporting cast; Gwyneth Paltrow is decidedly strong as Pepper Potts, Tony’s long-suffering secretary, Bridges injects a very odd sense of humor into his villainous role, and there are strong turns by Terrence Howard, Shaun Toub, and Faran Tahir (as well as an uncredited appearance that- well, just wait through the credits, is what I’m saying.)

Upon initial viewing, the film lacks whatever extra quality that would make me put it into the A range, but that may just be the first viewing. It’s solid enough that it’ll definitely hold up well over time, and I absolutely recommend it. It’s pleasing to see such a big movie being as smart and spry as this, and to see a film as smart as this to be an apparent hit. If IRON MAN falls short of epic, it’s still a damn good time.

Based on a character created by Stan Lee, Don Heck, Larry Lieber, and Jack
Kirby
Screenplay by Mark Fergus & Hawk Ostby and Art Marcum & Matt Holloway
Directed by Jon Favreau

Grade: B+

L'avventura

2008-05-01T18:40:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while, I'm asked "what is your favorite movie?", which in truth is an impossible answer for me, because it's so hard to choose just one. One moment I'll say Days of Heaven, then I'll say it's Blow-Up, or maybe it's The Sweet Hereafter, or Badlands, or La notte, or Mulholland Drive or Russian Ark. But for the purpose of the conversation, I tell them it's Antonioni's L'avventura (The Adventure), probably because of its epic scale, its daring break with convention, and its controversial history. And it's as good a choice as any of my pantheon of favorites.

For those who haven't seen it and don't want spoilers, stop here.

It's ostensibly about the search for a missing woman, but it becomes about something else. That's what sent its first audiences into a tizzy, that the first issue never gets resolved. I guess it's the law in movieland that all questions must be wrapped up before the film ends. Or at least, the "most important" ones. Maybe the dispute is over importance. Certainly the disappearance of the woman (Anna) seems to be central to the story, so it's unforgiveable then, that the filmmaker wouldn't lead us to the answer to that question.

His mistake might have been that of assuming his audience would recognize in the end that Anna's whereabouts wasn't the real point of the story. But for some of us who are headstrong enough to insist what must happen in a film, rather than let the director lead the way, it can easily become a disappointment.

If the film were shown in theaters today, I think it would have similar reactions as in 1960, because in general people don't know what's come before them, so the wheel is going to keep on being reinvented. And the average film of today is as conventional as they were fifty years ago, except with more f-words and sex and violence. But the structure of most films hasn't changed much.

In this film, as with many Antonioni films, he likes to make use of landscapes to reflect his characters' emotional states. And I found a little ditty of a scene here, which is one of my favorites, because it has this otherworldly effect on me by the way it was composed.

The camera slowly pans across as though a third entity is present, as they (Sandro and Claudia) are searching for any sign of Anna. They drive up into a deserted town in the hills, perhaps one of those "experimental" communities the government built, only to fail to attract any residents. Much of this is filmed in wide-angle shots, which further isolates these characters in their environment, or shows their 'true scale' in the landscape. They find nobody present, Sandro sees what he thinks is another settlement down the hillside and then turns around to look at Claudia, and she, being a wee tad more observant, tells him no, it's actually a cemetery. (Sorry no subtitles here, it's the only video I could find of this scene.)

You see, Anna was Sandro's girlfriend, but in the process of looking for her, Claudia is falling for her best friend's guy. She tries to fight it off, because she can really feel it not right, but also she is very weak. That's basically what the movie is about, is Claudia's constant struggle with her emotions. They still have to "look" for Anna, and Claudia really wants to find her, but at the same time she's at this point half-hoping they don't succeed. She's not a ditz at all. Unlike Sandro, she has a real sense of her place in the universe, which is all the more scary to her, and is why love is such a powerful elixor here.

Anna could be dead, or lost, or not knowing the answer alone is what is eating at Claudia's psyche, and she almost can't deal with the pain--but there is the power of Eros, ready to steal her away from her troubles--so it's little wonder why immediately after this scene here (which gets cut off at this point), she and Sandro "make out" by the railroad tracks.

In Theaters: The Forbidden Kingdom

2008-04-28T15:31:00.001-07:00

There’s something refreshingly old-school about THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM, a kung-fu adventure that, oddly, marks the first time Jackie Chan and Jet Li have shared the screen. It’s very much a tribute to the history of wire-fu extravaganzas, reaching back to the early days of the genre to produce a fun and colorful romp that’s a welcome change from the more glum martial arts epics that have become common in this decade. The ads have cunningly concealed what’s already a sore point among genre fans- namely, that the real protagonist is a white kid from New York- but this isn’t handled too badly, and even adds to the retro vibe. A kind of NEVERENDING STORY for Shaw Brothers fans, as it were.

The white kid in question is Jason (Michael Angarano, who was the lead in 2005’s SKY HIGH), a teenage kung-fu enthusiast who frequently browses a Chinatown pawn shop for the latest bootlegs. A local gang bullies him into helping them break into the shop after hours, and when the elderly shopkeeper is shot, he hands Jason an antique staff, telling him to return it to its rightful owner. Jason is chased by the hoods, falls off a building, and ends up in- well, Mythic China, the spirit-infested medieval world of so many kung fu films. Jason falls in with Lu Yan (Chan), a drunken master of kung fu who tells the boy that the staff belongs to the Monkey King, an immortal spirit imprisoned by the evil Jade Warlord (Collin Chou), who now rules the land with the proverbial iron fist. The staff must be returned to the King to free him and defeat the warlord, so Jason and Lu Yan, assisted by the beautiful and vengeful Golden Sparrow (Yifei Liu), head towards the titular kingdom, and the fortress where the petrified Monkey King waits. There’s one problem- Jason knows no actual kung fu, unlike the Jade Army and pretty much everyone else, and when Lu Yan starts to educate him, he’s the classic slow learner who doesn’t understand the point of all these meaningless repetitive exercises (one would think he’d remember such things from the films, but then maybe he fast forwarded through those parts.) The group is completed when a mysterious monk (Jet Li) shows up wanting to learn the secrets of the staff, and he and Lu Yan decide to teach Jason together.

From the opening credits, featuring a montage of poster images from 70s kung fu epics, you can tell this is a film made by people with a deep and abiding love of the genre. Granted, I’m not sure anybody else makes martial arts movies, or at least any worth remembering, but the level of self-awareness in this particular adventure adds to the appeal. We’re meant to have a little fun with all of this, and enjoy it as a reinforcement and reconstruction of the central tropes of these films. I think what makes a successful pastiche is both the inherent enthusiasm and an understanding of what makes the genre work- we get the good parts, with most of the cruft cut out. (The early training sequences, wherein the kid still resists the messages of discipline and control that Lu Yan is trying to impart, do go on a bit, though.)

The characters are simple but strongly defined- Chan is essentially doing his “drunken master” character, Li’s enigmatic monk will be familiar to his fans (his characterization seems a little odd but is eventually explained), Golden Sparrow is the one with the personal vendetta against the bad guy, and the kid is, well, the kid. Certainly, building the whole thing around a white wanna-be kung fu master isn’t going to make Edward Said happy, and the ad campaign for this film has been unfairly deceptive, but in the end Angarano plays the part well and makes his character’s journey interesting. His lessons are the kind of psuedo-Zen wisdom that’s familiar to anyone who’s watched these films, but is still good to hear. Kung fu is described as an art, something done through intuition and the development of a clear consciousness, something that can’t be overthought or forced. It was a nice reminder for me since good writing is done in much the same way (at least before editing.) The villain has a generic lust for power, but is appropriately fearsome.

The fantasy world of the film is a vivid one, replete with elixirs of immortality, giant temples leading to the top of the world, lush jungles, and vast deserts. The sets and costumes are nicely elaborate, and the special effects are fairly convincing. The actual kung fu action doesn’t have any particular standout stunts, but serves the story. The film’s never very serious, animated instead by the playful spirit of the Monkey King himself. Chan and Li are both in superb form, and their physical and verbal sparring is quite fun.

THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM marked the first time I’d actually been to the movies in a while, and it’s the kind of spectacle you may as well see in a theater. Certainly you can afford to miss it, but it does what it does quite well, and left me with a pleasant feeling as I left. Consider it a kung-fu appetizer before the big summer movies start rolling out, and enjoy.

Written by John Fusco

Directed by Rob Minkoff

Grade: B+

Poll!

2008-04-24T17:52:00.000-07:00

Being a lazy so and so, I have not yet written anything related to Film at 11's Andrew Sarris blogathon. But it's a neat idea - to put the internet hive mind to work classifying directors since 1968 - analyzing them, describing them... It gets me thinking about directors - where do they belong? Some I'm pretty clear about - the Pantheon types: Altman, Lynch, Cassavetes, Scorsese, the Coens and - if it isn't too soon - Wes Anderson; some of the others - Spielberg, Demme, Spike Lee, say, all seem Far Side of Paradise; Ang Lee seems like a good vote for Strained Seriousnes; doesn't Christopher Guest belong in Make Way for the Clowns? Paul Morrissey as Expressive Esoterica... But others, I'm not sure. Or - I have my thoughts, but I'm not sure how pther people see them. And that is a segue to the poll I just added on the side.

What do people think of Woody Allen these days? There were a couple Woody Allen posts on a blog I read (because I got into a fight with one of them last year) that made me realize, to my surprise, really, that I have seen 2 Woody Allen films from the last 20 years. This is more surprising because I had seen almost everything he made in the 80s when it came out - some of them (Zelig and Broadway Danny Rose) more than once, and happy to do it. He was, it occurs to me, the first filmmaker I probably learned to recognize and seek out. But now - who cares? How did that happen? Once I got geeky about films, I didn't give a crap about Woody Allen anymore...

But what do other people think? I don't remember seeing a lot of talk about Allen - not as a filmmaker anyway. What do you think? Answer the poll! Express an opinion! try to talk me into renting something other than Sleeper or Zelig again! Help explain why I couldn't' care less about Woody Allen yet like very much (to love) the likes of Whit Stillman, Noah Baumbach, Hal Hartley, etc.

Magic of Technology Post

2008-04-18T10:00:00.000-07:00

That is to say - Amtrak is trying out wifi on some of their trains. Allowing one to take a picture out the window, and more or less immediately, post it on the web, for anyone to see. Thus:

Nothing exciting, just a nice little bit of small town America. The biggest hassle in this process is actually my somewhat antiquated laptop, which doesn't allow me to edit pictures quite so well as I might otherwise. That one came out a little bit bigger than I would like... But otherwise - technology is great fun!

Andrew Sarris Blogathon

2008-04-14T04:48:00.001-07:00

I posted this at my blog, but it belongs here too - if you're looking for film discussion: there should be quite a bit coming out of Film at 11's blogathon in honor of the 40th anniversary of the publication of Andrew Sarris' The America Cinema.

answer to Beetlejuice opening

2008-04-11T16:21:00.000-07:00

No, no, no...that's not the right music for that scene. Try this tune:

Credits?

2008-04-11T04:20:00.000-07:00

How about fake Saul Bass?

Though, now, I can't resist adding the real thing:

Opening Credits: Beetlejuice

2008-04-10T20:13:00.000-07:00

Hey, if it's a video war y'all want, I'm game!

Hands down, my favorite opening credits sequence is from Beetlejuice. The blaring, completely awesome Danny Elfman score suggests macabre things going on in this sleepy little town we're flying over, and...what's that? A spider on the...? Heeeeey!

video comment

2008-04-10T16:29:00.000-07:00

You want an opening credits sequence? Okay, I'll see that Pulp Fiction of yours and raise you my favorite opening credits sequence:

Opening Credits Sequence Theatre: Pulp Fiction

2008-04-10T12:48:00.001-07:00

I thought this might be interesting to crosspost here. Over on my blog I'm a big advocate of movies having opening credits sequences- they're too often skipped over, and they represent a good opportunity to really transition the audience into the film's world. That can be achieved by other means, but I think a lot of times this gets ignored solely because the producers are scared of losing people's attention.

Anyway, for this installment, let's look at PULP FICTION.

So simple, yet so ostentatious- here the music's the thing, with Miserlou's ferocious surf riff telling us that things can only get wilder after the opening. Of course, the great title design helps- the way the title itself is used, almost filling the screen, implies a largeness to the entire project. This may be a low-budget film, but it's going to be a bit epic as well. And then, of course, we change stations, throwing us a bit off and transitioning into the next scene, without losing any energy.

Any more thoughts?

Dana Carvey Returns!

2008-04-08T14:41:00.000-07:00

I remember sitting down to watch Dana Carvey's new sketch comedy show twelve years ago. I was greeted with dancing tacos, Bill Clinton breastfeeding puppies, and the Church Lady repeatedly calling Princess Diana a slut. My mother found it offensive. I thought it was a riot.

A day or two after the first episode aired, I remember reading newspaper articles about the outrage Carvey's show was causing. Sponsors were threatening to pull out! How dare he depict Bill Clinton...breastfeeding...puppies. Well, at least we know that hysteria over television content has always been as ridiculous as it is now.

The show was canceled after seven episodes aired. For years now, I've been hoping to see it again on DVD. While that hasn't happened yet, Netflix has the next best thing: you can watch every episode online using their "Watch Instantly" feature.

Naturally, some of the humor is dated. Bob Dole Is Old and Refers To Himself in the Third Person jokes expired a decade ago, but the wackier material is still a hoot. Alongside Carvey, the cast included Steve Carrell and Stephen Colbert. The writing staff boasted Robert Smigel, Louis C.K. and Charlie Kaufman. And let us not forget the skinheads from Maine:

There's really no reason not to check this out.

Kansas

2008-04-07T22:48:00.000-07:00

You guys have to look at this.

April. Worst Month Ever! Contribution

2008-04-06T17:55:00.000-07:00

In response to the several posts by Adam at DVD Panache who has designated the month of April as the worst month ever (you know, taxes, crappy films, warm weather, pictures of cute kittens in a wicker basket etc.), I humbly contribute this piece on the worst actor ever.... Nicholas Cage. If you want an actor to stumble through a film with zero chemistry, then call Nic. If you want an actor to sport a terrible hair piece (see his latest film trailer for evidence of this here), then definitely call Mr. Cage. And of course, if you want an actor to overact in every possible sense of the word, then get Nic on the phone immediately. I do not understand the box office draw of this guy. He was funny in "Peggy Sue Got Married" until I realized he wasn't really trying to be funny. And this macabre shtick has been perpetuated on the movie-going public for over 20 years now. Sad. Sad indeed. Regardless, he does provide the world with one brilliant piece of time waste in the form of Neil Labute's "The Wicker Man", a film that very well may be the worst movie I've seen in a theater in a very long time. And to commemorate his dreadful screen presence in that film, we have the glories of You Tube to freeze these very bad moments in time forever. Enjoy the worst actor ever montage!

Charlton Heston

2008-04-06T07:00:00.001-07:00

Charlton Heston has died. Many links and tributes can be found through Greencine. He was every bit the movie star.

I will commemorate him with some clips from the best film he was ever in. His performance isn't always given its due - he's stiff and strange and about as Mexican as I am, but I still think he came pretty close to nailing it. He gets across a mix of heroism and high rectitude that defines the character perfectly. Watching that last confrontation, tailing Quinlan and Pete under a bridge, then facing Quinlan alone in the garbage - it might be Welles' finest hour, but it's hard to imagine it working as well without Heston. He plays off Welles' tragic decay, emotionally, Vargas all business, cutting through Quinlan's excuses and guilt and defeat, and physically, with his sleek athleticism, and almost complete control. Welles gives him just enough to do, physically, to make the point. It's good stuff.

Maybe I should leave Heston's politics out of it - but looking at a Touch of Evil, can I? The end of his life, devoting his authority and reputation to dubious ideas (at least, dubious extensions of ambiguous ideas), has a bit more in common with Hank Quinlan than it should. We shouldn't let it obscure what he did on screen.

Especially when he had a director who knew how to put pictures together....

Cross-posted at my blog.

Fantasy Moguls

2008-04-05T19:00:00.001-07:00

I posted this over at my blog, in case anyone is interested. A Fantasy Football of sorts for movie fans.

Upcoming Greatness: Red Balloons and Walking Toasters

2008-04-04T18:05:00.000-07:00

This weekend in New York, two weeks from now in Los Angeles, and whenever wherever else, the best film I saw last year is getting its general release in theaters: Hou hsiao-hsien's Flight of the Red Balloon. Do not miss this one.

Hou was commissioned by Paris' Musee d'Orsay to make the film, which is loosely modeled after Albert Lamorisse's 1956 short film The Red Balloon. Apparently, everyone in these United States except me was shown that film at some point during their childhood; I had to wait for a college screenwriting professor to grace our class with it. I vividly remember looking in shocked disbelief at a classmate who labelled it "dumb" -- I thought the dialogue-free story of a little boy befriended by an independently mobile red balloon was among the most joyful, bittersweet things I'd ever seen.

Those warm-and-fuzzies came back tenfold watching Hou's film, which alters the balloon's function in his story. No longer a constant companion to the boy, the balloon just drifts in and out of young Simon's story from time to time -- it even disappears for long stretches. Hou focuses on the relationship between Simon, his frazzled mother (an electrifying Juliette Binoche) and his new nanny, a Chinese film student played by newcomer Fang Song. All three are artists of various experience: Binoche stages carefully crafted children's puppet shows (yes, there are shades of Hou's wonderful The Puppetmaster), Song is planning a film based on the Lamorisse work, and Simon is a budding piano player. There's little drama between the three -- the loveliest part of the film is watching them get along. What tension there is comes from Binoche's contentious relationship with a tenant in her building, and the prolonged absence of her husband. It's not a movie about big dramatic confrontations, but about little moments of kindness between the three leads.

The film unfolds in beautiful long takes, the acting is subtle and naturalistic -- some might think these are code words for "boring", but I found it to be pretty damn riveting. If virtuoso camera work and small moments of delight aren't enough to entice you, at least go to see Binoche deliver the best work of her career. I could not have loved this film more. Gush gush gush!

-------------
Also, let me quickly add my voice to the chorus telling you to tune in, set the DVR, or whatever for the fourth season premiere of Battlestar Galactica tonight on the Sci Fi channel. Those who find every movie on the Iraq war lacking might just find what they're looking for here. It's a show refreshingly free of absolutes -- no character is all good or all bad, cathartic moments in one episode can easily be erased in the next episode's opening minutes. There's no other show on television operating at this level. Get caught up!

deus ex machina

2008-04-04T09:40:00.000-07:00

Hey Everyone:

I'm on the mailing list for dictionary.com, so I get a word in the mail everyday. Look at today's offering:

deus ex machina \DAY-uhs-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\, noun:

1. In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2. Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty.

Were you guys aware of this word/phrase? Were you aware that was what Fellini was showing in La Dolce Vida? I believe it's in one of the opening shots, right?

I'll always miss Fellini. He is one of the all-time greats for me. No one was like Fellini.

Electricity

2008-04-01T15:51:00.000-07:00

Happy April Fool's day! It is a Happy Day indeed - Fafblog has returned, if only for the day. If that means nothing to you, I'm not sure I can explain.

Another marker of the seasons might be the return of that very hardy perennial, the Argument about Auteurism: here hosted by Girish, which may help ensure a higher light to heat ratio than usual. Though I'm soon to join in, which is bound to dissipate much of the energy.

I don't know if I should add this or not - but I helped play an excellent April Fool's day prank on myself today. A co-worker came complaining, "My mouse does not work!" I supplied her with a new mouse - it still did not work. "Hey," I said, observant as they come, "your keyboard isn't working either!" It was not. So we plugged things into various USB ports, but no changes. So we took the laptop out of the dock and lugged in the keyboard and mouse - Worked like a charm! So I said, "This is a problem with your docking station - you have to call the Help Desk!" She grew petulant. But she called the help desk. The support fellow went through all the basics, having her try things in different ports, coming in remotely to check the drivers. She scowled. She put the man on mute - thus saving some small trace of dignity in this saga - and says to me, "he's having me check all the plugs! We already did that!" I said, " they have to go through the kabuki; when he's done he'll send you a replacement." She said, "I know, but it's a waste of time - I told him - I work for IT!"... Anyway - he finished the kabuki - he said he'd send her a replacement. I went away.... Some time later, another coworker went by and heard all the complaining, and kindly offered to track down an extra dock while the sufferer was waiting for the replacement. She then leaned over the desk and said - I am told: "Where's the power cord?"

Random Movie Report: The Cat Returns

2008-03-30T11:04:00.000-07:00

O hai. I've been meaning to post something here, and this is as good a time as any to start.

Back in 2002, when Disney released Hayao Miyazaki’s magnificent SPIRITED AWAY in America, it kicked off a nice business partnership between the two companies, a side effect of which has been the release of several Studio Ghibli films on DVD here. THE CAT RETURNS is a particularly interesting entry
in their collective body of work, both tying in loosely to a past film and marking a young director’s debut. It’s very cute, whimsical, and imaginative, and fits into the Studio Ghibli tradition nicely while not being a total retread. You sort of know what to expect, but there are surprises along the way.

Our protagonist is Haru (voice of Chizuru Ikewaki), a girl in high school going through all sorts of problems. She’s habitually late, not very popular, and hopelessly swooning over a boy who’s already got a girlfriend. Typical teenage girl drama, until she saves a cat from being hit by a truck. The cat stands up and thanks her, and later that evening an entire procession of cats arrive with their king in tow, informing her that she has in fact saved the prince of the Cat Kingdom. The cats start sending her gifts, and promise that as a capper they will take her to their kingdom to marry the prince. This, needless to say, freaks Haru out, but a mysterious voice and a fat white cat named Muta (Tetsu Watanabe) lead her to the Cat Bureau, a miniature house inhabited by a handsome catman named Baron (Yoshihiko Hakamada). He promises to help her avoid her fate, but a herd of cats quickly bears her off to the Cat Kingdom, and Baron and Muta have no choice but to follow her.

This film is technically a follow-up to WHISPER OF THE HEART, a 1995 Ghibli production which introduced the characters of Muta and the Baron. Apparently the original idea was to revive them for a short film for a planned theme park, but when that didn’t go through the Studio decided to expand the story into a feature and use it to test out the directing skills of animator Hiroyuki Morita (by this point Hayao Miyazaki was eager to find a potential successor, though judging from the IMDB his retirement still has yet to arrive.) Once again I have not actually seen the important preceding work and so can’t make any comparisons.

I will say that this is a very sprightly picture, never dwelling too long on one thing or in one place. This is a blessing and a curse; the film can never develop any one aspect in a lot of depth, but at the same time it never gets stuck exploring something uninteresting. It’s light fare, of course, never very serious in the way some Ghibli films can be, and this again has its ups and downs. On the one hand, it makes the film less memorable, on the other,
it’s a film about a kingdom of cats and there’s only so much gravity you can get out of that to start with.

Cat lovers will get a kick out of the film, that’s for sure- though many of the cats here stand on two legs and talk and wear something resembling clothing, they’re not anthropomorphic to the degree most cartoon animals are. They are, in their mannerisms and even dialogue, cats, and their kingdom- originally conceived by author Aoi Hiragi as a kind of kitty heaven- is a weirdly farcical land where the sun is always at its peak and the tyrant king (voiced with great enthusiasm by Tetsuro Tamba) defenestrates subjects who displease him. This is pretty much how a cat civilization would be run, and the combination of cuteness and insanity is appealing.

Like many Ghibli films, THE CAT RETURNS deals with a spirit world separate from our own, and interestingly enough briefly raises the concept that objects that an artist puts his or her heart and soul into gain a spirit of their own (this explains how Baron manifests in this world, sort of.) This, of course, plays off the animism and spirit worship that has long existed in Japanese culture, and as in similar films the spirit world serves as a place where the protagonist can work out her emotional and developmental issues. In this case, Haru is suffering from a lack of identity- she doesn’t know who she is, or believe in herself that much, and in the Cat Kingdom this is particularly dangerous; there she runs the risk of losing herself altogether and actually becoming a cat. It’s an interesting conflict, and Haru is a charming enough character that we enjoy her development.

All in all, a solid first venture for Morita as director, and as such a good sign for Studio Ghibli’s continued success whenever the older guard finally steps down. Parts of it border on forgettable, but it’s entertaining and something I wouldn’t mind watching again. A lesser entry in this particular studio’s body of work, but that’s not saying a lot. By a more objective standard, this is a darn good time.

Adapted from a comic by Aoi Hiragi
Screenplay by Reiko Yoshida
Directed by Hiroyuki Morita

Grade: B+

The Band's Visit

2008-03-29T06:12:00.000-07:00

This is an Israeli film about an Egyptian police ceremonial band invited to play at an Arab cultural center in Israel. By accident they end up in the wrong town and are forced to find accomodations somehow, because the last bus in this quiet outpost has left for the day.

The film attempts to emphasize the common humanity between Arabs and Jews, and there is not much about the movie that is controversial, but it has been banned in Egypt anyway. I think the censors felt uncomfortable with the kissing parts, but you can make up your own minds as to why.

Anyways, there is this awesome song played in the closing credits following the piece the band plays to close the film. Enjoy:

Richard Widmark

2008-03-27T04:32:00.000-07:00

More bad news: Richard Widmark has died, aged 93. He left a couple iconic roles - Tommy Udo, one of the screen's great villains; Skip McCoy, the pickpocket caught in international espionage, in Sam Fuller's great Pickup on South Street... and he was good everywhere, livening the screen when he appeared on it.

It reminds me of the last I saw him in - a reel of Two Rode Together - a John Ford western featuring Widmark and Jimmy Stewart rescuing white captives from Comanche.... it was shown as part of a program of "pink films" - color films gone bad.... this film had washed out to pink, but left patches of other colors - a green lamp; the yellow in Widmark's lieutenant bars - that pushed those objects out of the screen - it looked like an Ozu film! Anyway - I don't now if the film itself is any good - it looked like there was going to be a lot of forced banter and conflict between the leads, with no one believing a word of it... but I wish I had seen the rest, just to watch Widmark and Stewart together in a John Ford film.

Two for Easter

2008-03-23T17:15:00.000-07:00

Jesus Christ Superstar (Norman Jewison, 1973)

Inland Empire (David Lynch, 2006)

Green Mountain Film Festival

2008-03-22T12:53:00.000-07:00

The only magazine subscription I have is Vermont Life. One reason is because it only comes out quarterly, so being the pack rat that I am, I don't have a lot of issues piling up fast that I have to not throw out. But also I get them for the stories, and--the pictures. Oh, the pictures.

I found in the latest issue a story pertinent to the conversation here. At this moment the Green Mountain Film Festival is going on in a small town in Vermont--their state capital--at the Savoy Theater (their single-screen art house) and the City Hall Arts Center. They have about 38 or so films showing for its duration, about half of them documentaries. The thing runs from March 21-30 this year.

A couple things I find interesting about it:

They don't give prizes or rank the films, for the organizers of the event view it as a distraction. They feel anyway that such a thing seems kind of arbitrary. I like how they think!

Also there is no open call soliciting films for each year's festival, and there's no application fee that other festivals often use as a source of revenue. Rather, a committee scours the world for films. It is a curated festival. And, they don't do themes. They just want the best (mostly current) films they can find, plus give a nod to local talent.

The centerpiece of their festival is the film critic event. They get notable film critics like Kenneth Turan to attend by convincing them that Montpelier is the place they want to be at the end of March. I don't know how they do that exactly... This is also the perfect time for Vermonters to attend such an event, because as most other places have four seasons, Vermont has five--spring, summer, fall, winter, and mud. Things are just starting to warm up, and people are getting out more after the long winter--but it's a bit messy for outdoor activity, so this event comes at about the right time.

Wolfman's Got Nards!

2008-03-22T11:07:00.000-07:00

In his recent round-up of L.A.'s current glut of fantastic revival screenings, Dennis Cozzalio covered just about everything going on in the Southland that could make a film lover drool. But he missed one very special double feature that made my heart leap.

Last night, at the New Beverly Cinema, the marquee looked like this:

When I was a young lad in the Philadelphia suburbs, the local cable service included a channel called Prism. It carried all the Philly sports games, concerts recorded at Philly venues and just about every movie I recall fondly from childhood. (Remind me to tell you one day of the epic arguments my childhood friends and I still have to this day about which Mannequin movie is better. It's the first one, just so you know.)

My sister and I recorded The Monster Squad from Prism, and probably wore out the VHS tape watching it so much. Here was a movie where little kids cussed, read Stephen King, and fought monsters by kicking 'em "in the nards". It seemed designed specifically for me.

Before last night, I hadn't seen the film in a good fifteen years. I was worried. I didn't want to end up realizing this fond childhood memory is actually a terrible, terrible piece of shit.

Thank God, it's not. That feeling when I was ten years old -- that the movie was designed specifically for me -- came about because it was designed specifically for me, and all the wide-eyed, movie-loving youngsters like me. For those who don't know, the movie's about a group of monster-obsessed grade-schoolers who are somehow pitted against the "forces of evil", embodied by just about every famous movie monster ever:

I'm embarrassed to admit that I got a little choked up at some of the film's sentimental shots. The best among them involves one character watching a drive-in horror movie through binoculars from the roof of his house, munching on popcorn with his father. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a screen grab of that one, but I did find this one, which illustrates every young boy's wildest dream:

I wasn't the only one looking for a trip down memory lane. The show was sold out, something I've never seen before at the New Beverly, though it's easy to see why: not only were they showing the only 35mm print of the film known to exist (loaned by a private collector, they said), but the director of both films on the bill, Fred Dekker, was in attendance for a Q&A between screenings. Dekker was good-humored and friendly, and provided an interesting look at someone who didn't have great success in the industry. After making the two films from last night, he directed Robocop 3, which he described as "a film everyone hated." Though the audience clearly had great affection for The Monster Squad, the reality is it was a box office flop. "If these movies had done bettter," said Dekker, "you would've seen a lot more from me."

Then, as if someone had scripted a scene illustrating the tenuous nature of Hollywood relationships for our amusement, the moderator announced that the co-writer of The Monster Squad, Shane Black (Lethal Weapon, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang), was in the theater. He waved to the crowd and to Dekker, who proceeded to give Black shit (in a jocular way) for not returning calls about appearing on the DVD of The Monster Squad. He told Black that Sony wanted to do a Blu-Ray of the film, which would include an extra where a box appears in the bottom corner of the screen, in which one sees Dekker and Black discussing the film. "I'll talk to you about it after this," said Dekker. The moderator asked for questions from the audience, at which point Black walked down the aisle and said to Dekker, "I've got a question: what's your goddamned phone number? I have to leave." Dekker said he'd give it to him after the Q&A. Later, Dekker called out to Black for help answering a question. Someone from the back of the theater shouted: "He took off!" Awkward!

After all this mayhem, it was time for Night of the Creeps, which I'd never seen before. It's missing the nostalgia and sentiment of The Monster Squad, but it's still a funny little zombie B-movie with intentionally corny dialogue. During the Q&A, many audience members made pointed references to James Gunn's movie Slither being a rip-off of Creeps. It's possible -- the alien slugs slithering along the ground and leaping into humans' mouths did seem awfully familiar -- but Dekker tried to be kinder about it, mentioning that there was a TV show in the 70s called The Monster Squad that featured Dracula, Wolfman and Frankenstein's monster that he'd never seen.

I think it's ideal to see Night of the Creeps in an environment like last night's -- 300 rowdy movie lovers wildly applauding every inane moment, such as a gold-hearted sorority girl strapping on a flamethrower to battle a swarm of undead fraternity boys.

Last night was a reminder of the giddiness that comes about from the shared experience of movies that are just plain fun. I know we all love films that aspire to be more than just a good time, but out with it: what are some movies that make you feel like a kid again?

My Most Anticipated 2008 Film...

2008-03-21T09:07:00.000-07:00

Hey yall - I wrote this on my own blog. Thought I'd share...
_________________________

Lee Daniels is probably the only black director/producer taking risks and bringing different kinds of stories to the big screen. I admire his ability to transcend the limitations of the studios, making great, yet flawed indie films about black life...well somewhat black...which also seem to be marketed to a wider audience. And he is a marvel at bizarro casting. Take a look -

Monster's Ball
Billy Bob Thorton/Halle Berry/Mos Def/Heath Ledger/Diddy

Shadowboxer
Cuba Gooding Jr./Helen Mirren/Macy Gray/Joesph Gordon-Levitt/Mo'nique/Darnell Williams

The Woodsman
Kevin Bacon/David Alan Grier/Eve/Kyra Sedgewick/Benjamin Bratt/Mos Def

now in 2008 we have -

starring -

Mo'Nique	...	Mary
Paula Patton	...	Ms. Rain
Lenny Kravitz	...	John
Sherri Shepherd	...	Cornrows

and many, many other black actresses I have never heard of before. At least they will get to work in this flick!

For those unfamiliar with PUSH, it's bleak tale about a fat ghetto girl who gets pregnant with her father's child. It's sad and hopeless, written in a style reminiscent of Zora Neale Hurston. Lee Daniels seems to dig dreary stories, so I can't wait to see what he does with Sapphire's book. Mo'Nique does her best work in dramas. I find her to be terribly interesting when she isn't doing comedy. And Lenny Kravitz...the actor??? Can't wait.

Dame Maggie Smith Ill

2008-03-18T23:42:00.000-07:00

It was reported today that Dame Maggie Smith is ill. She's only 73--lots of roles yet to play.

I hope she beats this, as I love her, love her, love her, love her.

EDITED: Fixed the link for you, K. --Mike Doc

Linda, Linda, Linda

2008-03-18T19:21:00.000-07:00

I caught this Japanese film directed by Nobuhiro Yamashita, about a group of high school girls getting a rock band together for a performance at a school festival. Things are complicated when one of their members injures her finger and cannot play guitar, so they have to find someone else to take her place. They change course a little and pick out a song they really like and ask this Korean exchange student to be their vocalist. She isn't fluent in Japanese, but she can still do the job.

This film is important in a broader sense because of its observation of Japanese-Korean relations circa 2005. During World War Two there were about 2 million Koreans in Japan, in many cases not by choice. Afterwards many were repatriated, but maybe 1/4 stayed behind. Today there are about 600,000 Koreans living in Japan, and laws have been relaxed via their status, and many are now able to become full Japanese citizens. It wasn't too long ago when Koreans still faced a lot of discrimination in Japan, but today it is thought to be "cool" to be Korean. Things have changed a lot. (It helps to stay for the after-movie discussion with Japanese cultural experts from the university.)

What is then remarkable about this story is how unremarkable it is thought to be that a Korean is fully accepted into this group of Japanese girls. It's as if no big deal, when it used to be so. There are some hilarious scenes such as one where a boy professes his love for Son (the Korean girl), and he's trying to speak broken Korean while she's trying to speak broken Japanese, and they can barely make sense of each other, until she realizes what he's saying and says she doesn't feel the same for him.

This film also observes the subtle differences between Koreans and Japanese, such as that Koreans tend to be a little more direct and ask pointed questions, such as a scene where Son asks this guy if he's an ex-boyfriend of one of the bandmembers. Something none of the other girls would dare come right out and say. The film may seem slow and plodding at times, but it is merely observing how the girls relate to one another. Culturally, Japanese tend to be more guarded about their thoughts, especially about anything deemed provocative. So some of the girls may take a little while to respond to a question or two. Or they might communicate with subtle gestures. Though the filmmaker also likes to probe the characters' faces, and I like that in a film.

The film follows the girls through practices and hanging out together, leading up to the big show at the end. Linda, Linda, Linda is the title song that is going to bring the house down, they hope. It is a song made popular by an 80s Japanese punk rock band called the Blue Hearts. I'm not giving anything away, because you know from the start where this thing is going.

After the title song, there is this really poignant part while the rain is falling, and in a few lyrics is laid out the history of Koreans in Japan. Nice coda.

The DVD is out and available! Here's a snippet from the movie:

One of the best films of the year

2008-03-17T20:55:00.001-07:00

If you haven't seen the 3 films of Chinese director Le You, I urge you to run out and rent them now. But his first 2 films, "Suzhou River" and "Purple Butterfly", pale in comparison to the operatic and sprawling "Summer Palace", just released this week. You has taken the backdrop of Beijing in the late 80's to weave a touching and epic story of 4 college students coming of age. It's a masterpiece, kin to the grand yet intimate storytelling prowess of Zhang Yimou (epecifically "To Live") but infused with a heavy dose of nouvelle vague. See it at all costs.

The Namesake

2008-03-16T23:34:00.000-07:00

Ordered this film through Netflix because there is a large Indian population here, and I thought maybe this film might give me some insight into their culture and the transition to ours from theirs. I never expected the film to be this good.

Although it is set around Indian (Bengali) culture, it's really a film that transcends culture. It's about anyone who longs to branch out of the culture they grew up in, whether that culture be ethnically based or socially based or any other culture of our society. That said, it shows some wonderful insight into Indian culture with some gorgeous images (gosh, the women are just so . . . feminine). There are also some wonderful shots, and the director, Mira Nair is female and very talented. (Have to support those female filmmakers.) The acting is great, the shots beautiful, the characters well defined (with the exception of one stereotyped character that you'll pick out in a millisecond); it's really a very nice film.

The trailer is below, and the film is better than the trailer. Though the trailer suggests that the events of the film center on one event, that is actually not a very important part of the film and the film is much deeper than that. It's a good thing when a movie is better than its trailer--because this is one decent trailer.

It's about leaving your home, spiritually and physically. Having moved 2500 miles away from family, this film resonated powerfully for me, and this film has many very important things to say. I highly recommend it. This is an overlooked, and good, film.

2008-03-16T20:42:00.000-07:00

There is a nice write-up (When Omaha Met Cinema) in the................ New York Times about my little home town art house theater.

It opened at the end of July of 2007, and their first-ever showing was Seven Samurai. I was out of town, so I couldn't be there for that grand opening, in which Alexander Payne showed up and everything. But being that I was at a jazz festival, I didn't mind so much. Anyways, I've met Alex before, when he had his Nebraska premiere of About Schmidt in Lincoln.

The theater is situated in a fast-developing part of north downtown (the author of said article says it's in a "deserted" area, which is an exaggeration) which has so much potential, because it's between the campus of Creighton University not four blocks away, and the arena-convention center only three blocks away that is where much of our city's people gather for sporting events or concerts (like the first and second rounds of the Midwest regional next week). It is not a bad neighborhood at all, and in fact four new hotels have gone up a block away from the theater. And what's more, there is a chance that the College World Series may be moved to a new stadium to be constructed--a block away from the theater. Perhaps I can go to a ballgame one day, buy me some peanuts and cracker jacks, and see a movie afterwards while all the traffic is filing out. Wouldn't that be a great evening!

Of course also, as the Times article mentions, there's a new indie rock nightclub a few doors up called "Slowdown", which is operated by the Saddle Creek Records label--though not all acts necessarily have to have performed on their label, in order to play there. I haven't gone there, mainly because I'm not into that stuff, I guess, but if you like it, and are ever in the area, it's definitely a place to check out. It looks like a really neat place when I peer through the window.

Across the street is an empty lot--which I can only guess developers are on the verge of doing something with--but waiting on the stadium situation before making any decisions. And then there's talk of bringing back the streetcar to Omaha, which last was here in 1950 before it was put out of service, and a city planner I talked to said if that ever comes to fruition, the street the theater is situated on would probably be the route. And then just three blocks away maybe, directly south of the theater, will be a new condominium tower go up across the street from the Union Pacific headquarters building, and so there you'll have a community of residents looking for places to go evenings. So, I think they did good by the location they chose. They couldn't have done better. Location means everything, and setting up an art cinema is no small task in a midwest city, especially finding the most ideal location for it on top of the problems you'd think they'd have besides.

Several years ago, another attempt was made at putting an art cinema in Omaha, but the location was bad for it, so it failed within a couple months. It was in an old shopping center where they had a multiplex before. So some enterprising film buffs fixed the theaters up and made a go of it, but being that it's not near any university or the types of crowds they'd hope to attract to such a theater, it was doomed to fail. They even offered alcoholic drinks, but that didn't help. I remember one time watching a Japanese film on a weekend afternoon--I had the theater all to myself.

Well, if it interests you, I found a YouTube video from the Slowdown nightclub. Enjoy, if you will:

Alice Babs

2008-03-15T20:20:00.000-07:00

I guess I'm doing a series on singers-film stars. Maybe I'm just into that subject right at the moment. Well, then here's another edition:

Alice Babs. Now, she's not totally an unknown in these circles, because she sang with Duke Ellington's band, starting in 1963. She had an extreme range as a jazz singer. Duke Ellington said that when she did not sing the parts that he wrote for her, he had to use three different singers.

Before meeting up with Ellington, though, she was a star back home in Sweden. Her first big breakthrough was in a....film, of course--that's part of the subject here--a Swedish film made in 1940 in the midst of all the turmoil going on outside Sweden's neutral borders--called Swing it, magistern (or Swing it, teacher).

Now...before Sweden became this liberal progressive ABBA nation we've all come to love and admire, it was once a quite more conservative population, and in spite of Alice Babs' well-behaved and cheerful nature, she was yet the object of scandal to members of the older generations. By our standards it would be hard to understand, but in her time she really pushed the envelope.

Of course, I'm not going to let you go without a little YouTube© video to leave you with. This is from the film, Swing it, magistern--which film has recently been released on DVD, according to english.megastore.se. The song is called Regntunga skyar, which means Heavy rain clouds:
-Antonioni fan

PTA Mash up

2008-03-13T20:22:00.001-07:00

For all those fellow PTA fans out there....

Carlos Gardel

2008-03-13T16:45:00.000-07:00

"Gardel sings better every day", is a popular saying in Argentina. That statement is given all the more meaning, since it so happens that he died in a plane crash back in 1935.

Carlos Gardel owns the "King of Tango" moniker, even given the existence of Astor Piazzola. Piazzola may be better known outside the country, but Gardel was the quintessential tango singer, and the song is an essential part of tango culture. There are even scholars who study tango lyrics. His grave site at La Chacarita cemetery is a place of pilgrimage for many in Latin America, too.

Why is he revered so, to this day? Well, though what recordings he made are in mono and not of the best technical quality, at least for our modern standards, I suspect that it's because his musicality and dramatic phrasing is too good not to appreciate, at least from my standpoint. And that he died relatively young, a "tragic hero" as it were, can't hurt his cause either.

Given his singing talents, it would make sense he'd become a film star as well, and also since at the height of his career the "talkies" started coming out, so it was a natural next step for him. The photograph here above is a still from the movie Tango Bar, I believe. The YouTube clip below is a song called Tomo y obligo (I drink and I invite) from the film, Luces de Buenos Aires (The Lights of Buenos Aires). The picture quality of whatever DVDs are available isn't nearly so nice, and I don't know if restored versions exist, or if they ever got the DVD treatment. They're not especially great films either--but they're special because of his presence alone. -Antonioni fan

A list of his films:

Flor de Durazno (1917)(silent)

Luces de Buenos Aires (1931)

Esperame (1933)

La Casa es seria (1933)

Melodía de Arrabal (1933)

Cuesta abajo (1934)

El Tango en Broadway (1934)

El Día que me quieras (1935)

Cazadores de estrellas (1935)

Tango Bar (1935)

Swedish films

2008-03-12T18:24:00.000-07:00

Roughly translated as "great in building", or what some would say is Sweden's version of "Fawlty Towers", this is a musical-comedy made in the 60s about a couple enterprising young entrepreneurs starting up a business in a small town, who are by happenstance blessed with good singing voices. I'm especially fond of Thore Skogman; I love how well he annunciates his lyrics.

Then three middle-aged curmudgeons come in to try and ruin the fun. And they provide most of the comedy. I'm not sure if they're mean old developers or government officials, because the DVD doesn't have English subtitles.

But it's got a lot of good music in it, which is the important thing--including an appearance by none other than the......Strolling Stones. Ha!

There's a lot of reading between the lines necessary in viewing this film, that is, if you don't understand Swedish. But being that its comedy is mostly of slapstick variety, it makes it a bit easier to follow along with the action, than if it were say, an Ingmar Bergman film.

There's a really cool webstore called http://english.megastore.se/, that has a lot of Swedish stuff marketed to English-speaking customers. -Antonioni fan

Not from this film, but here's Thore Skogman in another:

Some Discussion

2008-03-11T17:41:00.000-07:00

I got nothing for content - maybe some links?

Should I have an opinion on Elliot Spitzer? He's in NY, I'm not, so maybe I shouldn't care. Though I'm inclined to this opinion: prosecutors who rise to power don't do it by doing anything admirable - they play to the cameras, and woe to anyone who crosses them. I someone like that screws up like this, they deserve what they get. And they do seem to screw up a lot - Giuliani was just as bad...

Still, there's not much point in caring. I't not a NY voter. Though if I were, I 'd have to vote Kant - his argment against Nietzsche (helpfully posted at Pilgrim Akimbo is all too appropriate: he's not a whore-mongering atheist...

While over there - check out the personal libraries post. If a personal library says anything about you - what it says about me is, You Have Too Many Books! I've been rearranging things chez moi - creates some ugly in between points:

All right. Let's end with a couple film related links. As always, when in doubt, head to Girish - right now, you'll find a discussion of experimental cinema (and Pedro Costa, in the comments). Lots more Pedro Costa at Unspoken Cinema and The Evening Class. And Bordwell, of course: the whole front page is good, especially the Minding Movies and Bob Clampett posts.

And - I've been monkeying around with the template, to get that shot from Robin Hood up there. I'll close with a shot from another DVD I recently picked up:

Isn't that gorgeous?

UPDATE: I want to add: there are more Robin Hood pictures and an appreciation at my blog. I'm not sure yet how they should interact - that might be the sort of thing to cross post. Also, I changed the size of the pictures here, to get them to look a bit better. And here's another one, to see how scope looks:

First Post

2008-03-09T18:09:00.000-07:00

This is the first post at the Film and Discussion blog. This is a designed as a group blog, with an emphasis on conversations about films - and sometimes TV, music, art, whatever strikes our (your) fancy. Directly inspired by this forum, but with a history that extends back many years.