Redford & Fonda

Robert Redford in The Company You Keep plays a somewhat older character than we are used to seeing him play. But he still has a somewhat middle-aged demeanor.

What is less well known is that Redford [who doesn't look or show his age] is the same age that Henry Fonda was when he starred in On Golden Pond; 76.

This seems remarkable. The perception and definition of what it means to be old [or even elderly] has changed in the last 30 years. Granted Fonda was suffering from heart disease late in life, which compounded how old he looked.

Redford plays the father of a 12 year old girl in the movie. It would be tough to imagine him playing an elderly patriarch in a movie like On Golden Pond just as surely as it would be hard to imagine Fonda playing the role that Redford plays in The Company You Keep.

Lost Island of VHS...XIII

The Earthling - Peter Collinson - 1980

William Holden is dropped off on a dirt road that overlooks the Australian wilderness. He looks out over the valley, gives a gritty, toothy grin and says, 'I remember you!' Thus begins one of the few cool movies out there about the beauty of traveling through wild nature. But, of course, it is much more than that.

Holden plays Patrick Foley a man dying of cancer who wants to spend his final days trekking through the Australian forest to his boyhood home where he can die peacefully in the same place his parents are buried. After a brief, terse good-bye to a couple friends he sets off.

On his journey he comes across a ten-year old boy named Shawn whose parents have been killed in a horrible accident. Patrick would just as soon leave this kid be. But his instincts tell him to approach the boy and, at the very least, point him in the right direction to get back to civilization.

The boy [played by Ricky Schroder] is too shocked to hand his situation and being rather young and inexperienced with outdoor living he is completely at the mercy of the wilderness. Patrick has no choice, he's got to take the kid along for a while and teach him a few survival tricks. But this is where the movie gets good - because Patrick doesn't want to be bothered with helping this kid and he lets him know. Many conflicts arise including one moment where he leaves the kid to scale a cliff by himself as he's pursued by wild dogs.

Patrick's method is of the 'throw the kid in the pool to teach him to swim' school. He doesn't want to be a nice guy primarily because he doesn't want to form an attachment at this juncture of his life. He just wants to go die. Even when he gives advice he has a tough time being sincere. "There's nothing to be afraid of except the cold wind, which will kill you if you stand around looking stupid."

The Earthling keeps itself [barely] above the formulaic fray by basically sticking closer to reality than to the sentimentally one would expect from the material. Perhaps that's one reason it failed at the box office and is still not available on DVD. See it if you can find it. VHS can still be found and it is streaming on YouTube. [It was streaming on Netflix].

Scheme Caller

Upstream Color

Shane Carruth is some kind of genius. Either that or his films deal with such complex, elaborate narratives that it just seems like he is a genius. But he has developed a cult following; his last movie, Primer, has websites dedicated to figuring out the various timelines. [Here's an amazing timeline jpg].

He takes his stories one step further into a morass of [il]logic than such films as Memento or Inception by Christopher Nolan. Which is perhaps one reason he is not yet well know and perhaps one reason he is self distributing his latest film.

I'm not going to spend time recounting the plot. If you want all the bits and pieces described succinctly and well go here. [Although preferably after you watch it].

I think it's best to go into the movie cold, knowing as little as possible. Suffice it to say it is a romantic thriller, science fiction film that deals with such unrelated things as maggots, natural narcotics, memory loss, pigs, mind control and Thoreau's Walden. Not necessarily in that order.

One aspect I particularly like about Upstream Color is that it keeps its engrossing, enigmatic narrative to the end without letting the audience down with a disappointing, banal [is-that-all-there-is] ending. Too many films have a fantastic start but then peter out by the end with the usual Hollywood let down.

Part of the reason is that the film develops its own internal logic that defies what we would call normal everyday logic and therefore keeps you guessing long after the credits.

For a really terrific interview and FAQ with Shane Caruth go here.

Go see it.

Industrial D'amour

Delitto D'Amore AKA 'Crime of Love' - 1974 - Luigi Comencini

This is a very good Italian film from the 1970's about two factory co-workers who fall in love. He is a northerner and she is a southerner so you know from the start that they don't match well. He, Nullo - marxist, pragmatic, middle working class; She Carmela - religious, cautious and working lower class. Both live with large families. His rather eccentric and lazy, her's fiery and superstitious.

On the surface the film deals with conflicts that derive in their relationship from region, class, working conditions and social conditions. He wants to marry her right away but she knows her family - headed by a violent brother - won't like the idea so they hide their love.

This is a well observed love story first and foremost. For that reason, it's important that one not know how the story ends or what happens along the way. I saw the movie cold only knowing that it was a 1970's film from Italy that dealt with working class issues. That's all one should know. If you haven't heard of it or seen it I highly recommend you look for the Raro video* edition. And stop reading here because spoilers will now be revealed.

The strength of the film comes from the fact that it develops the characters, the situations they find themselves in and the milieu of both the factory and the industrial region of Milan, in which they live, before it sets upon a plot of any kind.

The plot develops slowly and about three-fourths the way through shifts gears significantly to the point that you realize it is almost a message picture. Fortunately, Comencini - who wrote and directed the film - keeps the message fairly subtle instead continuing to focus on the two characters rather than hitting us over the head over the fate that befalls Carmela. Because of this the ending is much more effective and authentic.

Anyone watching closely will realize that the first scene and the last scene are the same. However, since the characters are not yet developed, it's tough to know exactly what that first scene is telling us. Like a Franceso Rosi film there is a murder at the beginning - but unlike a Rosi film this one presents us with events so quickly the film doesn't feel like a flashback or predetermined as it plays itself out.

The two leads are well cast. Giuliano Gemma has a strength and confidence but remains fair and intelligent while Stefania Sandrelli fits the role well as a young woman who is both guarded and aggressive as she tries to nudge against the familial and religions obligations she thinks is expected of her.

The film reminded me a bit of Antononi's Red Desert in that the polluted industrial environment plays a role not only as scenery but driving the plot. The difference being that the fears become more real for he characters who, in this case, are working class.

* Don't read the synopsis on the Raro page. Gives away too much.

R.I.P., Roger Ebert

R.I.P., Roger Ebert. A sad day.

I’ll miss his reviews, his sensibilities and his open mind.

Here are all his top ten lists from 1967 to 2006

I’ll also miss his sharp barbs. Here are a few. [Via]

North, 1994
"I hated this movie. Hated, hated, hated, hated, hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it."

Stargate, 1994
"The movie Ed Wood, about the worst director of all time, was made to prepare us for Stargate."

Mad Dog Time, 1996
"Mad Dog Time is the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time. Oh, I've seen bad movies before. But they usually made me care about how bad they were. Watching Mad Dog Time is like waiting for the bus in a city where you're not sure they have a bus line."

B.A.P.S., 1997
"My guess is that African Americans will be offended by the movie, and whites will be embarrassed. The movie will bring us all together, I imagine, in paralyzing boredom."

Armageddon, 1998
"No matter what they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out."

Godzilla, 1998
"Going to see Godzilla at the Palais of the Cannes Film Festival is like attending a satanic ritual in St. Peter's Basilica."

Battlefield Earth, 2000
"Battlefield Earth is like taking a bus trip with someone who has needed a bath for a long time. It's not merely bad; it's unpleasant in a hostile way."

Crocodile Dundee In Los Angeles, 2001
"I've seen audits that were more thrilling." 
 
Freddy Got Fingered, 2001
"This movie doesn't scrape the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn't below the bottom of the barrel. This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels."

The Brown Bunny, 2003
"I had a colonoscopy once, and they let me watch it on TV. It was more entertaining than The Brown Bunny."

The Village, 2004
"To call it an anticlimax would be an insult not only to climaxes but to prefixes. It's a crummy secret, about one step up the ladder of narrative originality from It Was All a Dream. It's so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don't know the secret anymore. And then keep on rewinding, and rewinding, until we're back at the beginning, and can get up from our seats and walk backward out of the theater and go down the up escalator and watch the money spring from the cash register into our pockets."

A Lot Like Love, 2005
To call A Lot like Love dead in the water is an insult to water."

Bucket List, 2007
"I urgently advise hospitals: Do not make the DVD available to your patients; there may be an outbreak of bedpans thrown at TV screens."

Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen, 2009
"If you want to save yourself the ticket price, go into the kitchen, cue up a male choir singing the music of hell, and get a kid to start banging pots and pans together. Then close your eyes and use your imagination." 
 
The Last Airbender, 2010
"The Last Airbender is an agonizing experience in every category I can think of and others still waiting to be invented."

Seven Days In Utopia, 2011
"I would rather eat a golf ball than see this movie again."

Three from Japan

Every once in a while it's enjoyable to dip into some of the fine films that were made in Japan in the 1930's and early 1940's.

Here are three I watched recently:

Hideko The Bus-Conductor [1941]
Mikio Naruse made what film critics have called shomingeki [lives of common working class people] dramas. All of his films have an easy style with very tight scripts and good character development. With rather simple technique, in most of his films, he is able to convey a lot about his characters. Many of his films are like novellas. Hideko The Bus-Conductor is only about an hour long and not as complex as some of his films but memorable still.
Hideko (Hideko Takamine) is a young woman working as a ticket-taker on a slow bus line. She and her co-worker come up with a plan to turn the bus into a tour bus. They get a friendly writer [visiting from out of town] to compose a script for Hideko to read. They convince their penny pinching, crooked boss to agree to their plan and end up winning a potentially legal battle with him with help from the writer. Naruse captures the small town milieu with beautiful fog shrouded mountains in the background and the quiet roads that probably won't benefit from a tour bus. The ending is both sweet and ironic. Good film.

Our Neighbor, Mrs Yae [1934]
Just who is Yasujirô Shimazu? Because I didn't know better I confused him with Hiroshi Shimizu who has four films on the Eclipse box set. But Shimazu was a wonderful director in his own right. Our Neighbor, Miss Yae is about a two families that live next door to each other. It just so happens one family has two boys and the other two girls. The younger sister (Yumeko Aizome) is in love with the older brother and she flirts with him often even though she is too young to marry. When her older sister comes to visit - due to marriage trouble - it causes a rift because she too fancies the older brother. Shimazu presents a slice of life in pre-war Japan that appears easy going but that has many modern issues such as divorce and extra-marital affairs. The film's style is elegantly effortless. The opening shot in particular is fine and some of the transitions are quite dynamic - such as when they all go to the city to see a movie. There is also a good scene at a baseball game. Not a perfect film but a good one.

The Lady and the Beard [1931]
Yosijuro Ozu is known by everyone as the filmmaker who made dramas about regular folks who struggle with trying to find love and fit into Japanese familial and societal obligation. A good number of his earlier [silent] films were light comedies with a much more rambunctious style than he had later in his career - when he never moved the camera. But these early films too dealt with this obligation - albeit in a less stringent way. The Lady and the Beard is a silent 'student comedy' about a bearded young man named Kichi who is independent and oblivious of what people and society expect of him - especially regarding his appearance. He is also a Kendo champion which comes in handy when he prevents a couple thieves - led by a woman gangster - from robbing a young woman. The grateful woman comes back into his life and tells him that if he wants to get a job he should probably shave the beard. In time, other woman fall for him including the female gangsters he once challenged. It's a simple but terrific film. The actor who plays Kichi is played by Okada Tokihiko who has a great physical presence.

Otto e Mezzo slideshow

Fellini's Otto E Mezzo released 50 years ago. Here's a slideshow.

National Society of Film Critics

National Society of Film Critics Award for Best Film:

Year Winner Director(s)
1966 Blow-Up - Michelangelo Antonioni
1967 Persona - Ingmar Bergman
1968 Shame - Ingmar Bergman
1969 Z - Costa-Gavras
1970 MASH - Robert Altman
1971 Claire's Knee - Éric Rohmer
1972 The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie - Luis Buñuel
1973 Day for Night - François Truffaut
1974 Scenes from a Marriage - Ingmar Bergman
1975 Nashville - Robert Altman
1976 All the President's Men - Alan J. Pakula
1977 Annie Hall - Woody Allen
1978 Get Out Your Handkerchiefs - Bertrand Blier
1979 Breaking Away - Peter Yates
1980 Melvin and Howard - Jonathan Demme
1981 Atlantic City - Louis Malle
1982 Tootsie - Sydney Pollack
1983 The Night of the Shooting Stars - Paolo and Vittorio Taviani
1984 Stranger Than Paradise - Jim Jarmusch
1985 Ran - Akira Kurosawa
1986 Blue Velvet - David Lynch
1987 The Dead - John Huston
1988 The Unbearable Lightness of Being - Philip Kaufman
1989 Drugstore Cowboy - Gus Van Sant
1990 Goodfellas - Martin Scorsese
1991 Life Is Sweet - Mike Leigh
1992 Unforgiven - Clint Eastwood
1993 Schindler's List - Steven Spielberg
1994 Pulp Fiction - Quentin Tarantino
1995 Babe - Chris Noonan
1996 Breaking the Waves - Lars von Trier
1997 L.A. Confidential - Curtis Hanson
1998 Out of Sight - Steven Soderbergh
1999 Being John Malkovich - Spike Jonze & Topsy-Turvy - Mike Leigh
2000 Yi Yi: A One and a Two - Edward Yang
2001 Mulholland Drive David Lynch
2002 The Pianist - Roman Polanski
2003 American Splendor - Robert Pulcini and Shari Springer Berman
2004 Million Dollar Baby - Clint Eastwood
2005 Capote - Bennett Miller
2006 Pan's Labyrinth - Guillermo del Toro
2007 There Will Be Blood - Paul Thomas Anderson
2008 Waltz with Bashir - Ari Folman
2009 The Hurt Locker - Kathryn Bigelow
2010 The Social Network - David Fincher
2011 Melancholia - Lars von Trier
2012 Amour - Michael Haneke

Older Film Discoveries 2012

Here are a few fine films I finally caught up with or discovered in 2012.

Two by Grémillon - Light yet heavy:
Lumière d’été (1943)
Le ciel est à vous (1944)

Two by Preminger - Well written and great characters:
Daisy Kenyon (1947)
Anatomy of a Murder (1959)

Two by Aldrich - Fun films not message movies:
Emperor of the North (1973)
All The Marbles (1981)

Two by Naruse - Like short novels:
Repast (1951)
Ginza Cosmetics (1951)




Two from the 70's - Full of gritty hope:
Charley Varrick – Don Siegal – 1973
They Might Be Giants - Anthony Harvey - 1971

Two from the 50's - The darker side:
The Music Room – Satyajit Ray - 1958
The Big Heat – Fritz Lang – 1953

Two Silent Flms - When editing was king:
The Last Command - von Sternberg - 1928
Salt for Svanetia – Mikhail Kalatozov - 1930

One Psychedelic 60's film - Rare and rarefied:
La Prisonnière - Henri Clouzot - 1968

Best Movies 2012

Another year has passed and it's time to try and make a best film list. I watched a good many new films in 2012 but still managed to miss many that could make this list. Nonetheless, a list must be made so here it is - in no order.

The Kid With The Bike
Moonrise Kingdom 
This Is Not A Film
Unforgivable
Lincoln
Argo 
Footnote
Rust & Bone
The Turin Horse
Django Unchained
Farewell My Queen 
Searching for Sugar Man

The next twelve:
9.79*
Barbara
Beasts of The Southern Wild
The Hunter [Australian]
The Hunter [Iranian]
In The Family
Intouchables
Once Upon a Time in Anatolia
Premium Rush [pleasure - no guilt]
Silver Linings Playbook
Starlet
Women on The Sixth Floor

A few that had good moments:
The Avengers
The Deep Blue Sea
Haywire
The Loneliest Planet
Miss Bala
The Master
Perks of Being a Wallflower
Prometheus
The Sister
Wuthering Heights [the first half]
Zero Dark Thirty

As always there are a good many I have yet to see that may make these lists as I catch up with them.^

^Updated 3/14/13

Zero Dark Thirty

In case you hadn't heard, the controversial movie of the season is Kathryn Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty.

Lot's of opinions are being tossed around. Great coverage of many of the different views can be found here.

Here is my take on the controversy about the use of torture in the movie.

Zero Dark Thirty does not propose that torture directly resulted in the capture of bin Laden. However, torture is alluded to having happened in such a way to terror suspects that it remains enough of a threat that the suspects decide it is best to give info so they won't be tortured again. Therefore, the message is that torture can work. That's a bad message in my view. Especially if it did not work in real life.

Here's the thing. We pretty much know torture was used at black sites by the CIA. What we are told by the CIA, though, is that torture was not used in getting info leading to the capture of bin Laden. But the movie plays it many ways trying to cover all [narrative and historical] bases with regards to what may have happened. This, to my mind, is a mistake.

However, despite these issues, I find some of the criticisms launched at Bigelow to be beneath contempt. Some have tossed around the name Leni Reifenstahl - as if Bigelow is somehow a government filmmakers churning out fascistic propaganda. Come on, people.

Zero Dark Thirty is in no way 'pro torture'. The early scenes that show torture are not pleasant at all. We are not made to feel they are a good thing or that they work. The movie is also not a rah rah pro-military movie either. The raid on the compound is very well done but it is presented much more realistic than it is Rambo-style. And when mission is accomplished it does not consist of high-fives and celebrations. So chalk one up for objective, documentary style filmmaking.

But I will say that while Bigelow is very smart about movies [and movie making] she is maybe not so smart about the affect the message of her movie may have on people who watch it. The message the movie conveys is most likely historically incorrect. The movie takes itself seriously and therefore I do think the filmmakers owe it to the audience to try and get it right. Or to, at least, tell us at the beginning that the movie - while based on real events - also fictionalizes some of them for dramatic effect. Perhaps as the movie rolls out across the country in 2013 they will add that to the movie's opening.

A couple other links not in the link above are:
David Thomson's review. He hated it.
Glenn Kenny takes on Glenn Greenwald's assertions.

Some Links

Ten American Indie films in need of restoration.

Profile on Michael Haneke.

Glenn Greenwald writes about 'Zero Dark Thirty' and Bigelow and Riefenstahl - without having seen the film.

Noir of the week is a cool site I just stumbled upon.

J Hoberman on 'Lincoln' - the ultimate mensch.

TCM's Movie Morlocks on John Ford's rarely seen and unavailable comedy 'The Whole Town's Talking'.

Salt for Svanetia

Every now and then I see a film that renews my faith in the aesthetic power of cinema. Salt of Svanetia is such a film. No English translation in the embedded film from YouTube below but you don't need them to get the message. It is directed by Mikhail Kalatozov who is best known for the classics The Cranes are Flying and I Am Cuba. [A subtitled version is available here]

Clouzot in chains

La Prisonnière (Woman in Chains) - 1968

Henri-Georges Clouzot is best known for his thrillers The Wages of Fear and Diabolique. His lesser known works include Quai des Orfèvres and Le Corbeau. Each of these films is available on the Criterion collection label. But his least known films are close to impossible to find. One such films is La Prisonnière.

If you happened to have seen the documentary L'enfer d'Henri-Georges Clouzot you'll recall the amazing visuals that Clouzot used for the film L'enfer, which he never finished due to a heart attack and a loss of funds. What that documentary didn't tell viewers is that a few years later Clouzot directed La Prisonnière, which tells a somewhat similar story and extensively uses the cool experimental visual elements that made L'enfer seem so enticing.

The film deals with a young woman named Josée (Elisabeth Wiener) caught between Gilbert - her artist husband - and Stan - a gallery owner / photographer who she takes an interest in.
Gilbert produces intriguing optical illusion art, which are showing in Stan's gallery. Stan also takes S&M photos, which Josée [the suppressed housewife] finds herself drawn to both out of curiosity and an attraction to some odd element of humiliation. But too she has fallen in love with Stan. Only he is a rather creepy guy who takes more pleasure in voyeurism than he does in real human contact or emotions. This, of course, causes a problem in their relationship because she wants a warm loving man.

Gibert finds out about the relationship and goes to confront Stan. The story continues....

The strength of the film is the visual design, shot selection [shot by Andréas Winding] and editing [edited by Noëlle Balenci]. Clouzot plays up a mod avant-garde optical illusion aesthetic to the point that you could actually just start watching the film at any one scene and find it fascinating to look at. [Antonioni's Blow-Up comes to mind as a film that may have been influenced by this one].

Three scenes in particular stand out; one is an early scene in which Gilbert and Josée take a train and notice converging train tracks, high wires crisscrossing and various other visuals one can see from a movie train. The second scene is a gallery opening where every shot is designed to show off optical illusions on display and the third scene is a three-and-a-half minute montage toward the end of the film that encompasses visions, thoughts and experiences Josée has had up to that point as she lays in a hospital bed most likely spaced out on morphine.

Below is a link to that scene.
La prisonnière

In short, if you feel that a real opportunity was missed because L'enfer was never finished then rejoice because La Prisonnière more than makes up for it. The only problem is finding a copy. I managed to find a DVD at a local video store in Los Angeles [yes, they still have those.]

Election Night TV

I don't normally talk politics here but watching the returns on each of the major networks on election night made for pretty good TV.

The most compelling, however, was when the networks called Ohio for Obama because then we knew Obama's win was assured.

What I found interesting, at that moment, was the way in which FOX News and CNN handled the call. From my perspective CNN was much better, more sophisticated and succinct. But FOX had better drama even though with regards to technology they still seem like they are locked in the 1980's.

What does CNN have? A beautiful interactive map, which John King would use to bring us informative visuals. He could zoom in on a state and drill down to each county and show the number of votes and percentages reported. This was the exact method King used to show us why CNN called Ohio when only about 65% of the vote had been counted. To the point, all the Republican counties were counted at close to 100% and the only areas on the map left fully uncounted were Democratic areas.

FOX News, on the other hand, did not have an interactive map. They had talking heads and graphics that only showed states and overall numbers. When Ohio was called they had no way of showing us why it was called. So that lead to a good bit of off-the-cuff live television that began with the now famous meltdown, rant by skeptical Karl Rove. So what did FOX do? In order to get answers they sent co-anchor Megyn Kelly into the basement [!] to get facts. Here it is.

Yes, rather than have the decision desk be right there in the studio they have it located downstairs nowhere near any cameras. The fact that FOX News has such an antiquated system is a bit unbelievable considering that they are hardly some small time network. They are usual #1 in ratings and owned by one of the wealthiest men in the world. 

I should note that an article in New York Magazine claims that an insider at FOX said the call to send Kelly walking downstairs was a good one because it gave them an opportunity to show the audience her legs. Yes, they sent a woman to do the work so audiences could look at her legs. What can I say? Good television and bad television in part because it is so old fashioned and out-of-date. But then again their core audience is predominately older, conservative and white.

Lost Island of VHS...XII

Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man - Bernardo Bertolucci - 1981

This is far from Bertolucci's best film and since it came out after his streak of better films including The Conformist (1970), Last Tango in Paris (1972) and 1900 (1976) it can't help but fall short. However, seeing it this many years later - well away from the expectations that moviegoers had for a new Bertolucci film -- it is fairly good.

A wealthy cheese factory owner named Primo (Ugo Tognazzi) witnesses his son being kidnapped by terrorists. A while later they demand a ransom that will cost him a fortune - not to mention his business, which is already going bankrupt. His wife (Anouk Aimée) has no hesitation in wanting to pay the ransom. But he does. Especially when he begins to get the feeling that he is being set up and maybe there has been no kidnapping at all. He comes up with a plan - along with two young leftists who work in his factory - to get the ransom money and reinvest it into his factory.

The film was made in an era when radical youth groups were still a topic of discussion and that plays a central role in the film. Much like The Spider's Stratagem [in which a son looks for a father] this one deals with a subject Bertolucci had done before. But it also emphasizes characters having to make choices they are not comfortable with making.

It is not top drawer Bertolucci but it was shot by Carlo Di Palma whose style lends itself well to Bertolucci's sometimes operatic scenes. And the story is a good one - if not slightly cynical in nature. The acting overall is above average - Tognazzi is agreeable as the lead actor while Aimée seems to walk through her role.

So why is this self made factory owner a ridiculous man and what is the tragedy? In part, the two concepts go together. On the one hand, he cares more about his material possessions than his son, but on the other he has fallen into a trap that he should have known better than to get caught in. He too seems unaware of his responsibility as a father, a husband and an employer of many people who rely on his weekly wages. The tragedy is that he may lose everything but he decides to use the event as a way to save his business. His love for success means more than the safety of his son. However it may all be a ruse anyway and he seems to sense it.

This film is only available on VHS and [surprisingly] can still be found brand new on Amazon.

Herzog's Glass

I've never been a fan of Werner Herzog's Heart of Glass but I did know that he had hypnotized the cast during the filming, which made the film - at the very least - of note. I'd filed the film away in my mind as a film that was fun to talk about but one I'd probably never see again. But then I happened upon the book Every Night the Trees Disappear, which is about the making of the film, so I thought it was time to revisit the film so I could read the book and be able to relate better to whatever it was the author was writing about.

I still feel it is not a great film - rather vacuous and not well enough developed characters or plot to make it as strong as his best movies. The book though, by Alan Greenberg, is often quite good. Greenberg was on the set during the filming. Much like Les Blanks's documentary Burden of Dreams the book gives insights into Herzog's peculiar and oft-times inspired mind.

One issue I have with the book is that every other chapter is simply a part of the film's script, which sort of gets tedious and makes watching the movie redundant. But the other chapters that comprise what seem to be notes and memories that Greenberg had on set are quite entertaining. Here are some excerpts:

*"My goal is always to find out more about man himself, and film is my means. According to its nature, film doesn't have so much to do with reality as it does with our collective dreams - film chronicles our state of mind.... My task involves a kind of alchemy, to get to the very real life, to keep open to signs or signals of life. And what I chronicle is often the conformity that deforms the soul."

*She begged Herzog for a position on his production team. He was taken by the intensity of her plea.
"Walk from Vienna to Munich," he said, somewhat seriously. "That will tell me how much you want the job."
Regina went home. Shortly thereafter, wearing painfully new boots, she trekked across the wintry, mountainous terrain. Eleven days and twelve Band-Aids later, she arrived at Herzog's house.

*"The rhythm of a film is never established in the editing room. Directors who rely on editing are cowards. Rhythm is made in the shooting - that is filmmaking."

*"If this scene succeeds." he declared, hoarsely, "I will dive into the river and swim across it and back beneath the ice."
Work resumed, and after Hias and Ludmilla had done their task well an hour later, Herzog staggered to the riverside and, without hesitation, began to disrobe....he dove into the water and swam beneath the ice as he vowed to do earlier.... [Read book to get more info....]

*"My characters have no shadows," Herzog had remarked prior to shooting on location.... "Each of them is a character without a past, or whose past does not matter. They come out of the darkness, and people who come out of the darkness cast no shadow...."

*"I never use close-ups," Herzog replied firmly. "Mostly, as close as I allow myself to come in from the breastbone up. Close-ups are a personal violation of the actor. They destroy his privacy, and at the same time they intrude upon the viewer's solitude. I have more respect for those who view my films than to ruin their solitude." 

There's plenty more. Read it.

Enigmatic movies

There is a recent LA Times article by Stephen Farber titled: 'The Master' is too muddled to be a masterpiece.

I have no problem with Farber not liking the movie. I myself didn't much care for it. And I also don't have a problem with the headline in general. But I do have a problem with one particular part of the article, which to my mind, is completely wrong headed and naïve. He writes - in all seriousness:

"The Master" epitomizes the rise of a new school of enigmatic movies, which parallels similar post-modern developments in literature and music. Recent movies embracing inscrutability hark back to landmark European films of the 1960s that shattered traditional narrative conventions. Films like Ingmar Bergman's "Persona," Michelangelo Antonioni's "Blowup" and Luis Buñuel's "Belle de Jour" incorporated surreal dream sequences and built toward mysterious, sometimes impenetrable endings that delighted art house audiences of the era.

This cryptic style of filmmaking has resurfaced in recent movies by Terrence Malick — "The Tree of Life" as well as his newest effort, "To the Wonder" — and even Christopher Nolan, who made the mind-bending thriller "Inception" that tantalized many audiences (and left others befuddled). And this same oblique approach to storytelling has characterized a new generation of European filmmakers such as Lars von Trier and Michael Haneke. "The Master" aims to join this company, but its release only proves to me that the cult of incoherence is beginning to pall. Too many movies, novels and even TV series dispense with all sense of logic; they revel in unintelligibility and dare audiences to enter their tangled web.

How does one begin to tackle this absurd view? With a straight face he is criticizing a slew of movies for essentially being non-formulaic and hard to follow. He actually has the audacity to say that movies that 'dare audiences to enter their tangled web' are a bad thing! How can we take Farber seriously as a critic if he favors a Hollywood mainstream mentality over movies that challenge him, expand his horizons or make him think?

He has to know that most all children's movies, action films, comedies, romantic movies and feel good dramas are depressingly formulaic. This, no doubt, has been the case since movies were silent. We can forgive many of these movies [especially the older ones] because part of the evolution of the art form was one of mass entertainment. This has been the case for 100 years and continues today. But one thing a smattering of movies in each decade and particularly movies in the 1960's and early 70's did was to accept the fact that the audience was made up of adults who wanted to be challenged just a little bit. Rather than lay out the plot in an obvious [boring] manner some of these movies allowed the audience to partake in or contemplate the movie's precarious or, at times, intellectual narrative; Movies such as The 400 Blows, Persona, Red Desert, Weekend, 2001 A Space Odyssey come to mind. They allowed moviegoers to exit the theatre and have a conversation about the movie rather than just have them nodding in agreement and then forgetting what they saw.

I don't know how Farber can call himself a critic if he is not open-minded enough to understand that the art form simply cannot move forward if these kinds of 'enigmatic' movies are not made. What's more, he seems to be holding a 40 year grudge against movies that 'shattered traditional narrative conventions.' That debate should be long over at this point.

To call The Master enigmatic or a film that defies understanding is to be incorrect [it's not that hard to understand]. But then to up the ante on the critique and embrace an idea that tells the world you don't enjoy following a non-formulaic narrative and that [just maybe] you are turned off by movies that make you think is odd. I don't believe that is a message any critic in any field wants to leave his readers. But until further clarification by Mr Farber I have to conclude that is what he wants us to believe.

Anatomy in Cement

I found this in a historical info flier [pdf] for Anatomy of a Murder from the Marquette County History Museum. [Lee Remick gets a hand from Otto Preminger while a couple of guys look on].

During the period when the cast was in Marquette County, it was decided that the community should have a permanent reminder of the filming of Anatomy of a Murder. Members of the community arranged to have large slabs of concrete poured into molds in front of the Marquette County Courthouse. One by one, the stars and director of the film placed their feet, hands and signed their signatures into the cement. The plan was for these slabs to be placed in front of the new Marquette Chamber of Commerce when the filmed was released. However, local officials felt the film was too controversial and should not receive formal recognition. In danger of being destroyed, they were saved by a local farmer who kept them for many years. In 1984, they were installed in the sidewalk in front of the Nordic Theatre, with bricks that stated the name of each person. Over time, the slabs deteriorated due to the road salt being poured to melt snow on Washington Street. They were removed and now are stored by the City of Marquette. Unfortunately, they are completely illegible. Somewhere, however, there is rumored to be molds of the original slabs. If you have in-formation about the whereabouts of these molds, please tell the staff here at the Beaumier Center.

The Master

The Master is a film about a man who needs to get laid.

I wish I was being sarcastic. But just go see the film for yourself and see if, indeed, the main character needs [or at least thinks he needs] anything other than a good woman to save him.

The time is postwar America. Young men have come back from the stress of war hoping to achieve the American dream by starting businesses, having families and, in essence, moving America forward. But some of the men who came back have suffered in one way or another and are trying to find a way to fit back in to society. Enter Freddie [Joaquin Phoenix] a completely fucked up, lonely, unstable, drunk who - despite an ability to make a killer drink [paint thinner and all] - can't hold a job or find a friend. Escaping into the dusk after having been accused of trying to kill a fellow worker he jumps aboard a small vessel right into the clutches of a cult leader name Lancaster Dodd [Philip Seymour Hoffman] who has a growing legion of devoted fans and is looking to make an impact to further his religious / self help cause.

This being a Paul Thomas Anderson film the themes are have the semblance of being big and the emotions run high. But it's also a film, unfortunately, in which some of Freud's creaky ideas [psycho sexual, the male id and all] play a big role. So much so that it borders on irony - although I don't think it is. [Despite Phoenix's claim that he felt the movie was a comedy].

Freddie is mentally probed and broken down by Dodd who feels obligated to cure him of his base, animal self. But Freddie's [actually Phoenix's] squinting, snarling scowl, oft times impatient anger, explosive fits of rage and frustratedly pacing through scenes tells you this is not going to happen. And, frankly, the guy needs medication - not spiritual help.

Phoenix does not so much act as pull a big stunt here. So much so that - other than a few moments of genuine emotion - the performance is rather distracting. He's like a reality show character who's dropped in on a movie. How will he top himself next? Hoffman, on the other hand, is quite good as the charismatic, quack cult leader and shows some character growth. The two form a bond that feels right and honest much of the time. The film's script by Anderson is best when they are together and it seems, to me, that the film was written around these key scenes. Other than that the film does not hold well enough together to be as powerful as it could be. Instead, we get a series of good scenes strung together amounting to little except an idea of something bigger and better. All the other acting in the film passes muster but doesn't deliver. Amy Adams, for instance, is given a side role as the wife of the cult leader who has her own draconian way of demanding fealty from Freddy.

**Spoiler of sorts**

In the final scene Freddie is shown having sex with a young women he has just met in a pub. Mission accomplished. What took so long? Whether or not he will remain happy - given his highly volatile nature - seems unlikely. But since he is no longer involved with the cult leader [father] or his judgmental wife [mother] or the skeptical family members [brothers and sisters] he can move on with his life into the void of his own disturbed and lonely psyche.

----------
Kent Jones at Film Comment has an insightful review.
Richard Brody at The New Yorker [blog] also has a good review.