Iranian director Jafar Panahi with kimono dragon pet "Iggi" in miraculous documentary "This is Not A Film"
by Sam Juliano
As the March weather in the NYC area fluctuates from winter cold to spring humidity, few have been able to retire their coats, even while bringing short sleeve tops and casual apparel out from the moth balls. On the movie front, it’s been a time for bottom-of-the-barrel multiplex fare, some most interesting documentaries in the art house bastions, and several exquisite restorations of classic films. Overall it’s not the best time of the year for cineastes, but things are starting to look better. The Tribeca Film Festival is nearing and the schedule is now up online.
At Wonders in the Dark continuing stellar work from Allan, Jamie, Peter Lenihan, and Bob Clark has showcased over the past week, and sites stats have been most impressed, especially on the past record-setting Monday, when an interview with talented blogger Stephen Russell-Gebbett was part of the mix.
With the Wellman Festival concluded (and a summary post appearing today) Lucille and I have resumed our theatrical viewings of recent releases and three cinema classics at the Film Forum in DCP (Digital Cinema Package) in what turned out to be a very busy week after all. We watched:
Attenberg ** (Friday night) IFC Film Center
This is Not A Film **** 1/2 (Friday night) Film Forum
The Ballad of Genesis and Lady Jaye ** (Saturday night) Chelsea Cinemas
Rear Window (1954) ***** (Wednesday night) Film Forum
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) ***** (Monday night) Film Forum
The Shining (1980) ***** (Monday night) Film Forum
DCP (Digital Cinema Package) is the popular digital playback system that is threatening to make 35 mm obsolete, but in reality it’s very difficult to tell the difference between the two. The prints of 2001, THE SHINING and REAR WINDOW were stunning in any event, and they brought up the desire to discuss Kubrick and Hitch for the umteenth time, during a life when those two icons have maintained the stage in every capacity. THIS IS NOT A FILM is a stunning documentary that slipped through the censors, and catches up with Jafar Panahi, the gifted Iranian director who is basically under house arrest. His discussions on the phone about his imminant prison sentence, his life in his apartment with his pet kimono dragon, his I phone and a few door calls from neighbors and associates makes for an intermittantly delightful and infuriating examination of an artist under siege from a totalitarian regime. The film’s existance of course is a miracle, and a noted film professor and friend of the director discussed it’s incubation and essence in an engaging post-film Q & A. ATTENBERG is indepted to another Greek film, the highly-praised DOOGTOOTH, but for me this is no booster at all since I was no fan of the earlier film. This new film is an idiosyncratic coming-of-age story that is far more clinical than lyrical, and it hangs it’s hat on being weird just for the sake of being weird. I must say despite the commendable quality of the acting, the film was torture to sit through. THE BALLAD OF GENESIS AND LADY JAYE was a striking of example of frivolity and jolts over substance. Disjointed and off-turning, despite a promising subject matter.
I did what I could with a fair number of links, what with the massive Wellman post also in this weekend’s mix:
Marilyn Ferdinand has penned a brave and uncompromising assessment of the Iranian masterwork “A Separation” at Ferdy-on-Films: http://www.ferdyonfilms.com/?p=13435
John Greco’s latest review at Twenty-Four Frames is a stupendous essay on Robert Siodmak’s noir classic “Criss Cross”: http://twentyfourframes.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/criss-cross-1949-robert–siodmak/
Tony d’Ambra at FilmsNoir.net has posted a most interesting and exceedingly impressive new 14 line poem with a dark slant titled “The Dark Clowns” under a screen cap of Lon Chaney in the silent classic “He Who Gets Slapped”: http://filmsnoir.net/film_noir/the-dark-clowns.html
Ed Howard again displays why he’s easily one of the finest on-line film and music writers with a terrific appraisal of Joseph Losey’s “The Boy With the Green Hair” at Only The Cinema: http://seul-le-cinema.blogspot.com/2012/03/boy-with-green-hair.html
Sachin Gandhi has authored a stupendous essay at Scribbles and Ramblings on Andrew Niccol’s “In Time”: http://likhna.blogspot.com/2012/03/in-time.html
Jon Warner has authored a splendid and appreciative essay on the Powell & Pressburger masterpiece “The Red Shoes” at Films Worth Watching”: http://seul-le-cinema.blogspot.com/2012/03/boy-with-green-hair.html
Peter Lenihan has some telling quotes up at The Long Voyage Home aimed at “For All Y’All Fordians”: http://thelongvoyagehome.blogspot.com/2012/03/for-all-yall-fordians.html
David Schleicher has penned an excellent review of Tony Kaye’s “Detachment” at The Schleicher Spin: http://theschleicherspin.com/2012/03/10/detachment/
Murderous Ink at Vermillion and One Nights broaches Japanese television during the tranasition period in a brilliant and fascinating essay: http://vermillionandonenights.blogspot.com/2012/03/100-million-idiots.html
Laurie Buchanan insightfully talks about one’s essence in her splendid new post “Paper Dolls and Oreo Cookies” at Speaking From The Heart: http://holessence.wordpress.com/2012/03/06/paper-dolls-and-oreo-cookies/
Samuel Wilson has penned another marvelous entry in his “Pre-Code Parade” series with his essay on “Merry Wives of Reno” at Mondo 70: http://mondo70.blogspot.com/2012/03/pre-code-parade-merry-wives-of-reno.html
Judy Geater takes her study of versatile American director William Wellman further with a superlative review of the 1939 rarity “The Light That Failed” at Movie Classics: http://movieclassics.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/the-light-that-failed-william-a-wellman-1939/
Jaime Grijalba takes a look at the first part of the 2011 “Frank Awards” at Exodus 8:2: http://exodus8-2.blogspot.com/2012/03/frank-awards-2011-primera-parte.html
Stephen Russell-Gebbett looks at one telling image in Kubrick’s “The Shining” at Checking on my Sausages: http://checkingonmysausages.blogspot.com/2012/02/shining-looking-at-one-image.html
Terrill Welch’s newest post at the Creativepotager, “Holding the Sea” gives cause to stop and reflect, just momentarily: http://creativepotager.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/holding-the-sea/
R.D. Finch at The Movie Projector takes an engaging look at “Seven Songs That Should Have Won the Oscar”: http://themovieprojector.blogspot.com/2012/02/five-songs-that-should-have-won-oscar.html
Pat Perry takes a candid and insightful look at “The Iron Lady” and Meryl Streep’s performance in her new multi post at Doodad Kind of Town: http://doodadkindoftown.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-big-screen-and-home-screen-capsule.html
“Explore the Dancing Image: Top Posts” is leading the way at Joel Bocko’s rich treasure trove at The Dancing Image: http://thedancingimage.blogspot.com/2011/12/explore-dancing-image-top-posts.html
Shubhajit has authored a terrific review on Jan Nemec’s “The Party and the Guests” at Cinemascope: http://cliched-monologues.blogspot.com/2012/03/party-and-guests-1966.html
Dee Dee has posted a wonderfully informative oust on the noir “Jewel in the Crown” and accompanying lobby cards at Darkness Into Light: http://noirishcity.blogspot.com/2012/02/holding-auction-month-jewel-in-crown.html
Craig Kennedy’s revamped Watercooler at Living in Cinema opens with an interesting song assessment: http://livingincinema.com/2012/03/11/bottle-rocket2000-man/
Patricia at Patricia’s Wisdom reports on another book of special worth, titled “Walter’s Muse” by Jean Davies Okimoto: http://patriciaswisdom.com/2012/03/walters-muse-jean-davies-okimoto/
Filmmaker Jeffrey Goodman at The Late Lullaby has posted a stupendous round-up of the best cinematic experiences he’s enjoyed in 2011: http://cahierspositif.blogspot.com/2012/01/my-top-10-or-so-films-for-2011.html
At Satyamshot, Kaleem Hasan has posted some striking images from “The Avengers”: http://satyamshot.wordpress.com/2012/02/12/images-from-the-avengers/
J.D. at Radiator Heaven offers up an engaging essay on the seemingly neglected Jason Jason Leigh feature “Georgia” at Radiator Heaven: http://rheaven.blogspot.com/2012/02/georgia.html
Anu at The Confidential Report has checked in with a fabulous Ten Best list that fully warrants everyone’s attention: http://theconfidentialreport.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/top-ten-of-2011
Just Another Film Buff (Srikanth) has posted another excellent review at The Seventh Art on Emir Kusturica’s “Underground”: http://theseventhart.info/2012/03/04/ellipsis-57/
Hokahey insightfully writes about ‘Chronicle’ and the ideas of his high school drama club at Little Worlds: http://hokahey-littleworlds.blogspot.com/2012/02/c
Jason Marshall has penned an excellent takedown of Spielberg’s “War Horse” at Movies Over Matter: http://moviesovermatter.com/2012/01/10/you-can-lead-a-horse-to-war-spielbergs-war-horse/
At Scribbles and Ramblings Sachin Gandhi features an engaging film itinerary engagingly seen in the light of football groupings: http://likhna.blogspot.com/2012/01/2012-african-cup-of-nations-film.html
Roderick Heath at This Island Rod takes an exhaustive look at the new “The Thing.” Typically is a master class essay: http://thisislandrod.blogspot.com/2012/02/thing-2011.html
Tony Dayoub has posted an excellent feature on the ‘Top 15 Films of 2011’ at Cinema Viewfinder: http://rheaven.blogspot.com/2012/02/titan-ae.html
At The Cooler, Jason Bellamy celebrates his fourth anniversary: http://coolercinema.blogspot.com/2012/02/celebrating-4-years-of-fun-and-games.html
Adam Zanzie at Icebox Movies has penned a brilliantly comprehensive essay on “The Day of the Jackal” at Icebox Movies: http://www.iceboxmovies.blogspot.com/2012/02/day-of-jackal-1973.html
Michael Harford, the erstwhile ‘Coffee Messiah’ offers up an engaging video about the beverage’s worldwide popularity: http://coffeemessiah.blogspot.com/2011/11/coffee-break.html
Troy Olson announces plans to commence with his Robert Bresson project at Elusive as Robert Denby: http://troyolson.blogspot.com/2011/11/argh.html
At Petrified Fountain of Thought Stephen Morton has penned a masterful takedown of “Melancholia” http://www.petrifiedfountainofthought.blogspot.com/2012/01/review-melancholia.html
Kevin Olson offers up a postscript to his recent Horror Blogothon at Hugo Stigliz Makes Movies: http://kolson-kevinsblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/italian-horror-blogathon-postscript.html
Dave Van Poppel is gearing for some updates at Visions of Non Fiction, but presently is still leading up with his very fine review of “Project Nim”: http://visionsofnonfiction.blogspot.com/2011/08/project-nim.html
At The Man From Porlock Craig explores the work of the great S. Ray with a splendid review of “Pather Panchali”: http://themanfromporlock.blogspot.com/2012/01/iu-cinema-experiences-pather-panchali.html
Jeopardy Girl has some great plans in 2013 with a vist to the U.K. in the cards. She talks about it at The Continuing Saga of Jeopardy Girl: http://jeopardygirl.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/pickmeup/
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
I saw two movies this weekend– the Tarkovsky film “Stalker” at the New School, in a presentation where it was shown on DVD and interrupted at a couple of intervals by a number of commentators, including Walter Murch, and “John Carter”. It says something about the Tarkovsky film that, even in an idiosynchratic and severely compromised screening as far as technical specs goes, it far in a way bests the mediocre eye-sore that is the Edgar Rice Burroughs adaptation, and this is coming from somebody who likes trashy space operas like this.
Well, I did have the privilege of hearing your reaction face-to-face, and much appreciative the written report on this thread my friend. Yes I would venture to second your comparison comment as well. I wish I could have joined you for the venue, but Lucille, Bob and I were happy to see you afterwards. It was great that Walter Murch spoke.
Thanks as always my friend!
Thanks so much for the mention Sam. So sorry to hear ATTENBERG was a torture to sit through as I had a different experience & recommended that to you. In my case, another reason I enjoyed that film experience was because it was a rare 35mm print of a film I had seen last year amid all digital prints.
I am looking forward to see THIS IS NOT A FILM this month provided I can get a ticket.
Sachin—
Ah yes, now I do remember you had indeed spoken highly of ATTENBERG. Well, it’s very possible I may have missed the boat, especially since I was in a tiny (negative) minority with DOGTOOTH, a film it certainly bears some telling similarities with. I can’t complain about the print that I saw at the IFC though. As always I will give the film a second shot at some point. I do hope you get to THIS IS A FILM very soon.
Thanks as always for the valued response here my friend, and thanks for much more!
A great post and I am happy to be here reading…computer went down and then I had a 4 day siege of migraine headaches ( I have not had any in 17 years???) I am frantically working to get emails back up and running and not have to run to my partner’s office and the library to post and comment…Whew! that is hard work
I am reviewing a book on Monday called the IDEA FACTORY about Bell labs – it is an amazing and fabulous book – I am glad they sent it to me to review…I think many of your readers would enjoy it…
The house arrest fellow is telling – now I would like to see that documentary, wonder how I can figure that out?
Thanks again for all your good words and keeping me into the world!
Patricia—
I am sorry to hear about the recent PC problems. We all cross that bridge and it’s never any fun. And to boot you have the migraines. Ugh. I hope you are rid of those as soon as possible. IDEA FACTORY does sound like an intriguing book. I will be looking for that post!
Yes, Jafar Panahi’s on-going persecution has caught the imagination of the world, and the international pressure that has been exerted on Iran is remarkable. It’s a miracle this documentary slipped through, and I assure you it won’t be hard to see. it’s just that I know the art hourse theatres aren’t in your back yard. Obviously a DVD is imminent. It’s funny, but while nothing really happens in the film, in reality EVERYTHING happens. i can’t get over that Panahi has a trained kimono dragon that was climbing all over him. Ha!
Thanks very much Patricia, feel better and have a comfortable week my friend!
Sounds like we had a similar weekend, film-wise. Like you I got to see a Kubrick on the big screen (in my case, Barry Lyndon, which at this point is probably my favorite Kubrick), and I too saw the great “This is Not a Film” which is important in so many ways, politically and aesthetically. I had been under the impression that the whole thing was going to be shot on an iPhone (which it obviously wasn’t) but somehow those lo-fi moments where he picked up the device and started recording for the first time were among the most powerful in the movie – like somebody taking their first steps again after being paralyzed for a while. I don’t know if it made it’s L.A. debut this year (I believe it screened in NYC last year) but if it were to get nominated for an Oscar, I would take a year off from my boycott in spring 2013. At any rate, what a movie.
On a side note, though, that’s an iguana not a Komodo dragon!
Tonight I got to see Terrence Davies speak after a screening of the excellent “The Long Day Closes.” Tomorrow he will be speaking again after his short film trilogy. I’m hoping to catch that, though I’m not sure yet. It’s been fun splurging on screenings – probably the most I’ve gone to at one time in 4 or 5 years.
Bummed you missed the Tarkovsky though, Sam – but I’m glad Bob made it.
Yeah, I’ll try to keep an eye open for any anime screenings in LA to repay. I found a screening of either “Paprika” or “Evangelion” in Ohio of all places sometime ago, but that doesn’t really help anyone.
You had a fabulous weekend Joel! Hearing Davies speak was awesome! I can’t wait to see that film and the Dardennes THE KID WITH A BIKE! I think it’s thrilling that you have attended so much and are having such a great time. As I say, hearing Davies up front is quite a treat.
I completely agree with you that BARRY LYNDON is Kubrick’s greatest film, though 2001 and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE for me push close. I did see the discussion below with you, Mark and Jamie, and will chime in as soon as I can.
I stand corrected on that non-existent Komodo dragon!!! hahahahahaha!!
And I’m supposed to be a fan of Tennessee Williams’s THE NIGHT OF THE IGUANA!!! LOL. I had Lucille laughing when I told her.
I would have liked to see that Tarkovsky venue for sure, would have loved to in fact, but it was Broadway Bob’s call this week, so that really had no chance. Bob Clark did give me the full report face-to-face afterwards at the Dish, where he met Lucille, Broadway Bob and I at around 9:30. Thanks for the fascinating additions to the THIS IS NOT A FILM literature and I quite agree for all sorts of reasons it’s an incredible and inspiring film.
Have a great week my friend! Many thanks as always!
Davies was fantastic – the highlight was him extensively reciting the lyrics from Seven Brides for Seven Brothers and moaning in ecstasy at all the puns and references in the verses. I’m hoping to catch the short film trilogy screenings tonight but I would have to leave in a few minutes so I’m not sure if I’ll make it. At any rate the Joel bank shuts down after this weekend so it will probably be a while before I have another binge, but it was worth it!
The lyrics from SEVEN BRIDES AND SEVEN BROTHERS? Now that really must have been a hoot! You did have quite a binge, and I hope more opportunities will come your way!
Just to note: This is Not a Film couldn’t ever get nominated for a Best Foreign Film Oscar, because those all have to be submitted by their countries of origin, and it goes without saying that would never happen. As for the Documentary awards, I don’t know, but the rules for those are so convoluted I would be surprised if it even qualifies, much less gets nominated.
Thanks for that clarification Stephen. That’s too bad about that rule, but it figures.
Good point – I had in mind other categories as well, but I was sort of absent-mindedly thinking it could get a nod as Foreign Film. To be honest the perfect category to nominate it in wouldn’t be Documentary (I’m not sure how much is set up ahead of time – but I suspect more than it would seem) or even Picture (not because it shouldn’t be, but because they’d never do it) but Director. That’s honoring Panahi himself, but I don’t know that a documentary director has ever gotten a nomination in this category to be honest. Also, as I said, the film would have to be premiered in L.A. this year (it’s playing here now, but I don’t know if it made its debut on this coast last year) and I believe not have been played in any festivals in the area or on TV or something…I’m not sure. I believe it could have opened in NYC last year while still being eligible for 2012. So many silly rules.
Anyway, I suspect I’ll be boycotting the ceremony as usual come February 2013, sadly.
WOW!!!!! REAR WINDOW, THE SHINING and 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY on the big screen?!?!?
I wouldn’t have known which theatre to sit in first.
Well, actually I do, but I won’t get into why it would be 2001 as my love for that masterpiece has been noted on these boards over a thousand times.
Kubrick is so hard to peg when thinking of a favorite and, on any given day, I could love any one the most and the best. It’s funny to think that Stanley’s personal goal as a director was to master every genre he covered in his films and, practically, delivered on his goal ten-fold. THE SHINING is one of the 10, if not THE, greatest horror movies of all time. Nobody would deny that, while uneven at moments, SPARTACUS is one of the greatest biblical epics of them all. DR. STRANGELOVE is a candidate for the best black comedy ever made and 2001, well, c’mon, it IS the finest Science Fiction movie of them all.
BARRY LYNDON, however (and I have to side slightly with Joel on this), is a definate candidate for Stanley’s very best film. It’s long, tedious and misanthropic at times… However, it’s visual beauty, technical audacity and deep emotional/human thrust is so pronounced that you know you’ve not only seen, probably, the most meticulous and breathtaking period drama of them all, but have been raped by it’s feeling. Some say that Stanley was a cold director, devoid of a heart and soul…
Take a look at BARRY LYNDON carefully, Stanley’s heart is all over that film…
I would have given anything to be there in the theatre with you just to watch Sammy Jr.’s reactions to these monumental films on the big screen…
After seeing these films the way they should be seen is it any wonder why most think Stanley was the greatest American filmmaker post 1960?????
Dennis—
There is no doubt you would have been in your glory the night we saw 2001 and THE SHINING in DCP. Gorgeous prints and state-of-the-art presentation. i happen to agree that BARRY LYNDON is Kubrick’s masterpiece, though on any given day several others push very close. 2001 is one that leaves you in awe, though as others on this thread have argued, it’s a very frustrating film too. I don’t find it as such, but I understand these conclusions. Yes I also agree that THE SHINING is a horror film par excellence, and SPARTACUS one of the greatest Biblical epics. DR. STRANGELOVE is also among the greatest black comedies (I can only think of KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS to match it in that sub-genre) As always your enthusiasm is contageous! Thanks as always my friend!
Sam,
Thanks again for the shout out. “Rear Window” is my absolute favorite Hitchcock film. I was fortunate enough to see it on the big screen back in the 80’s, at the, D.W. Griffith theater, when it was re-released. That film plus the two Kubrick films make for a nice threesome. My own viewing consisted of a couple of classics and a few pre-codes of varying quality. Hope everyone has a great week!
Friends with Kids (***1/2) Can romance and sexual attraction between couples survive having a baby is the question being asked in this entertaining and smartly done comedy that manages to stay away from the standard traps of romantic comedy.
Criss Cross (****1/2) Classic film noir with Burt Lancaster in the sap position and Yvonne DeCarlo as the dame who puts him there. A must see for any noir fan. Review currently up at 24frames.
The Sand Peebles (****1/2) Excellent portrayal of the prevalent racism and colonialist attitudes prevalent at the time. A U.S. gunboat finds itself stranded during Chiang Kai-shek’s people’s revolution. Filmed on a grand scale, beautifully photographed and nicely acted by Steve McQueen in what may be his best performance.
Girl Missing (***) Stranded at a ritzy hotel in Palm Beach, two gold diggers, Glenda Farrell and Mary Brian help solve a kidnapping and murder. Light hearted pre-code mystery that shines thanks to Glenda Farrell’s sassy motor mouth. Look for a very young Walter Brennan in a small role.
The Strange Love of Molly Louvain (***) Michael Curtiz directed this racy pre-code story with Ann Dvorak in the title role of a young woman from the wrong side of the side of the track whose life continues to spiral out of control. Lee Tracy is a wise ass reporter who falls for the fallen woman. Sexy lingerie, out of wedlock child and racy dialogue add to the fun. An uneven script though is a minus.
Suspense (***) From Poverty Row’s Monogram studio, an uneven film noir about the rise and fall of a drifter who murders his benefactor, seduces his wife and takes over his business. Cinematography by Karl Struss is the real standout here adding a nice moody atmosphere. Well known character actor Eugene Pallette’s last film. Overall, an average work most notable for being one of Monogram’s most expensive films.
Havana Windows (**) Joan Blondell and Glenda Farrell, two of Warner Brothers sassiest dames, are desperately broke showgirls who team up and head down to Cuba with plans to snag themselves a couple of rich men. Disappointing comedy despite pleasurable performances from the always dependable Blondell and Farrell.
Meet Boston Blackie (**1/2) Blackie has to clear his name of a murder charge and jewel robbery. Typical Boston Blackie film. Rochelle Hudson, who was in William Wellman’s “Wild Boys of the Road” and married the director co-stars.
John—
I can’t blame you for considering REAR WINDOW as your favorite Hitch. As you may recall it was named the greatest film of the 1950’s by respondants to the decade polling two years back:
https://wondersinthedark.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/hitchcocks-rear-window-and-vertigo-place-no-1-and-no-2-in-best-of-the-1950s-movie-poll-at-witd/
Yes, it really was a special treat to see the two Kubricks as well in DCP, and to have Lucille and my sons Sammy and Danny aboard.
You are now the second person I respect who is giving a decent assessment of FRIENDS WITH KIDS. I hope to see it later in the week, and am happy to hear it avoids the usual trappings.
I saw THE STRANGE LOVE just recetly and admit I like it a bit more, but I understand the issue with the script. I always appreciate Dvorak.
As to CRISS CROSS, I did indeed read and comment on your terrific review of the noir classic!
I’m a bit lower on THE SAND PEBBLES, but you are it most persuasively there. Agreed on SUSPENSE and GIRL MISSING, but never never seen HAVANA WINDOWS and MEET BOSTON BLACKIE.
Another banner week my friend, and a marvelous report! I wish you and Dorothy the best week yet to come!
I’ve been wondering about the changes in showing a film in theaters is going, and appreciate reading your view here – although now that I think of it, hearing the projector noise was half the fun, let alone the occasional blackout on the screen –
Thanks to the film fairy, we saw the Woman In Black and, having not read any reviews, thought the tension was very good, although the Harry Potter (sorry, don’t remember his name) did a good job, he still looked too young for that part – and also will have to look into the original –
Hoping to catch more here and Thanks again Sam – you’re the Best = Cheers!
True what you say there Michael. It’s similar in that sense to the time when vinyl was replaced by CD. People attested to the natural, warmer sound of vinyl, ands the various aural imperfections to be heard on the playback. Still it is exceedingly difficult to see the difference between CP and 35 mm, and I don’t really have a preference at this point. Yes, Daniel Radcliffe is growing up too fast, but he’s a fine young film and theatre actor. I agree that the tension (and atmosphere) were the best things about THE WOMAN IN BLACK, and happy to hear you had a chance to see it over the weekend.
Thanks as always for the kind words my friend, and I will be responding to the e mail tonight.
Sam,
Thanks for the kind mention!! Anytime seeing 2001, The Shining, and Rear Window in the same week means one has had quite a week. Can’t go wrong with that selection. I am to read your Wellman write-up and will comment over there as well. So, this week was about getting back to normal. So I had hoped. Haha! We all came down with a rather nasty cold and congestion. My oldest has an ear infection and my youngest and I have bronchitis. Jolly good fun I tell ya. Anyways, I did catch up with several newer films last week in fact.
A Better Life- Not a masterpiece by any stretch, but a very fine story and well acted by Bechir who gives a tremendous performance. I actually would have voted for him way before voting for Dujardin.
Another Earth- This film was a huge surprise and I had no idea what to expect going in. Great introspection here and I really loved wallowing in the depressing mood. This actually for me is probably going to be one of my 10 favorite films from 2011.
Martha Marcy May Marlene- On the other hand, there’s this piece of trash. Boy this film thinks it’s good, but it’s definitely not and I think that makes it all the worse. It’s an Antonioni/Polanski-like ripoff that was uncomfortably voyeuristic, poorly paced, poorly written, and not even well acted IMO. This, in the end, is one of my most hated films from 2011. Absolutely hated it!!!!!
Up this week for me: The Makioka Sisters, Identification of a Woman, The Lower Depths, The Headless Woman, King of Kings, Secret Sunshine.
I must admit though, I’m heading into a dry period of film watching as I’ll be spending a huge amount of time watching March Madness. That does leave most of the next 3 days though to get ahead! Have a great week Sam!
Jon—
I’m so sorry the flu has descended on your abode, and that several of you including the kids have been stricken. It’s been a tough year for so many I know, but you had just return from a trip to boot. Ugh! I agree with what you say there about A BETTER LIFE except for the comparison to Dujardin! Ha! I was alos a fan of ANOTHER EARTH and appreciated it’s errie atmosphere and spare design. can’t blame you for responding to it in a big way. I also cared very little for MARCY MARLENE, but it seems like you and I are in an extreme minority. I promised to look at it again at some point, but I’m in no rush. Ms. Olson was very fine though, but the film was so frustrating. You have some great stuff coming up there, methinks, especially the ravishing THE MAKIOKA SISTERS and the Korean SECRET SUNSHINE. But I also like IDENTIFICATION, THE LOWER DEPTHS and KING OF KINGS, with only THE HEADLESS WOMAN forgettable. But again with that one I know just about everyone has praised it.
Please get well soon my friend, and the same to the family. Thanks as always.
Sam – The weather you described sounds like you were reporting directly from our front yard in Crystal Lake, Illinois. Yesterday we drove around in balmy weather with the windows down; today we’ve got rain.
You so intrigued me with what you wrote about THIS IS NOT A FILM that I went out to YouTube and saw a 6.5 minute clip with English sub-titles. Incredible that something like that could take place. Captivated, I watched another clip, this one of Juliette Binoche in tears over what’s happening to Jafar Panahi. I didn’t hear or read anything about it, but one wonders — and hopes — if Amnesty International is working on his behalf.
Ha Laurie! It does seem like we’ve enjoyed similar weather over the past weeks. Today it reached 70 degrees in Central Park, and it was much the same here in Fairview. The forecast for the rest of the week is mid to high 60’s so many are smiling. And yes, balmy for sure! Looks like you got some rain to “cool things off!” LOL!
The Iranian government is under a lot of international pressure in behalf of Panahi. I am hardly surprised that Binoche reacted that way. THIS IS NOT A FILM isn’t a film indeed, it’s a miracle.
Thanks as always my very dear friend for the great report, and I wish you and Len a terrific week!
As I stated at your Wellman post, it is simply remarkable that you followed up those 39 viewings with three more epics on the big screen at the scene of the crime. And then three new releases! I’ve heard so much about This is not a Film and can’t wait to see it!
Well Frank, I’ll admit I had the three films in DCP planned for months, but didn’t realize teh screenings would be only days after the Wellman Festival ended. THIS IS NOT A FILM is a must-see. I implore you to find some time.
Thanks as always my friend! Have a great week.
Sam –
I’m going to set aside some time this evening to savor your Wellman post, so that I can give it the attention it deserves. Meantime, I thank you for the link. Sometime soon, I hope to have some new posts up, but life keeps getting crazy here.
The Kubricks at Film Forum sound wonderful. In college, I saw 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY on the big screen, but didn’t appreciate it at all. I found it baffling, but was amused by the distinct aroma of cannabis being enjoyed by some fellow audience members (it was th ’70s, after all) wafting through the auditorium, and wondered if partaking would have helped me appreciate the film more. Nowadays, when I come across 2001 on TV (as I did a week or so ago on TCM), I’m just mesmerized by it. I’d love the chance to see it again on the big screen. (Ditto for BARRY LYDON, which I also underappreciated on first viewing, but find equally mesmerizing on the small screen now.)
Despite the lack of output at the blog, I have had a culturally enriching week. We saw CAMINO REAL in preveiws at the Goodman this week, not a good experience. I fault the production and the director. It’s not Tennessee Williams’ most accessible play, of course, but while the text seemed to contain some lyrical and moving vignettes, the in-your-face, over-the-top vulgarity and shock tactics overwhelmend the play’s fleeting moments of emotional impact. It wore me out.
I also read, with great fascination, the first of the HUNGER GAMES books – I was unable to put it down all weekend. I find that I am eagerly looking forward to the film opening on 3/23, particularly with Jennifer Lawrence in the lead. As the character is stirkiningly similar to her WINTER’S BONE character, I think she is an inspired choice to play Katniss Everdeen.
Finally I caught W.E., a pretty but shallow and unsatisfying film. Madonna is a marginally better director than she is an actress; she does get a fine performance from Andrea Risebourough as the Duchess of Windsor. But the film is just so much whitewashed baloney about how really great and misunderstood the Duke and Duchess of Windsor really were (she brushes aside the well-documented charges that they were Nazi sympathizers, and even goes so far to suggest that the Duke was a thwarted, would-be social reformer!), and the counterpart story set in 1998 is tedious and underdeveloped. I also saw WHATS YOUR NUMBER, vulgar and dopey, but with a redeeming performance by Anna Farris, who deserved far better.
Have a great week, Sam and all at WITD!
PAT-
Don’t be hard on yourself. 2001 is not an easy film to grasp on a first viewing. To be honest, it took me all of about twenty years and dozens of viewings to read what Stanley and Arthur Clarke were intending (if you ever have a full hour to spare I can relay my theories on it). Roger Ebert said that trying to explain 2001 would be a three hour lecture for him and it really all goes for nothing as everyone has a different theory on what it all means. However, I feel that’s precisely the point. Stanley never intended (from everything I’ve read about the making of the film, not to mention the very good A LIFE IN PICTURES doc on the reclusive director) 2001 to be given a “definative” interpretation by the viewer. From what I understand, his feelings about the film and what it means is really up to what the individual viewer brings to it.
Is it about God?
Maybe.
Is it about our tiny place in the universe?
Absolutely?
Is it about our eveolution and the assistance we got to help us climb the evolutionary ladder?
Take that to the bank.
What makes 2001 special is the way we interpret it. Some see Stanley’s theories as something that are easily read on the first viewing whereas many of us slowly grasp what it’s hinting at over time.
What the film does immediately, for everyone, on the first viewing, is take you out of the confines of a movie in a theatre and puts you in the middle of a wonderful experience.
So many see the film as a negative (the rise of our dependence on technology, technology over-powering us, the loss of our humanity in light of the technological age). How wrong they are to think that.
If you look carefully, 2001 reveals itself as one of the most hopeful and wonderous of Stanley’s films. It’s a total positive that reflects the journey that nature will demand we take.
That’s what Dave doesn’t understand at first.
It’s something that HAL knew and understood all too well.
2001 really is a magical film.
No other film in history has so brilliantly fused the provocative with the entertaining…
Personally. I’d rank it as one of the 10 greatest American movies of all time.
PS-I have seen 2001 one both “baked and straight on many seperate occasipons. At first, I thought it was a film that was catering to the stoner and that only those that we wrecked would get it. The funnny thing is, the more I saw it “straight”, the more I began to see the direction Stanley was pointing us all. I will admit, though, the senses are really given a run for the money when you have a little “help” from “Captain Cannibus”…
This is one of the few films that absolutely demands it being seen on a huge screen with full blown stereo surround (although, the current Blu-Ray, on a 50 inch Sony LCD with Bose surround sound and DTS, is not a bad way to go!)…
“If you look carefully, 2001 reveals itself as one of the most hopeful and wonderous of Stanley’s films. It’s a total positive that reflects the journey that nature will demand we take.”
I completely agree with that, and while that’s the major problem I have with the film, if you buy into Kubrick’s (and Clarke’s) point of view there it is a pretty enchanting film (and I do find large portions of it to be).
It’s worth pointing out that although Tarkovsky didn’t make Solaris as a response to 2001, he did retrospectively question Kubrick’s fetishization of technology, and a refusal to place it within the context of what he saw as fundamental spiritual questions–and so in those respects it can be seen as a response nonetheless.
The sad thing is– considering we’re talking about Film Forum, the screens really aren’t that much bigger than an HD set. This is one of those movies I’ll wait for until it’s at a theater that can do it justice.
Bob, I get your point, but this is rather a severe exaggeration on your part. The screens are maybe ten to fifteen times the size of HD sets, and Screen #3 in the theatre behind the concession theatre is the biggest one of all. It’s equipped with state-of-the-art capabilities, and it was the theatre where the DP festival was conducted. The screen is quite formidable in that theatre, and 2001, THE SHINING and REAR WINDOW all looked spectacular in every sense.
Hm, I might’ve gone if I’d known it was a larger screen than some of the others, but I’m more or less spoiled by the genuinely huge screens of local theaters and even some of the multiplexes around me. I wonder if a DCP style presentation could be leased out to theaters in the same way that the Met Operas and other such live performances are shown in multiplexes, nowadays…
Dennis – I would take you up on that hour, once I get a chance to see the entire film again. The last two times I’ve come across 2001 on TV, it was while channel-surfing or at some inopportune time. I need to get the DVD someitme soon.
PAT-don’t waste your time with DVD. Yes, they still offer high quality for viewing, but an upgrade to Blu-ray is really the only way to go.
Sam and I both purchased the KUBRICK COLLECTION box set (Spartacus, Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut) on Blu-Ray, as well as THE KILLING, KILLERS KISS and PATHS OF GLORY on CRITERION Blu-Ray, and if ever there was a body of work that screamed for an upgrade to the best possible video representation then Stanley’s canon is the one.
The picture quality on all of the Blu-Rays is spectacular (although the intentional grain on CLOCKWORK throws a few people off) and it shouod come as no surprize that, of them all, 2001 has the most seamless and spectacular transfer. Add to it a 5.1 DTS digitally remastered stereo soundtrack that envelopes you when watching it.
I have a 32 inch Sony LCD in my home office and I thought that was the screen that would see the best picture quality (big but no gargantuan)… I purchased 50 inch Sony LCD for the living room a few months back and, to my utter amazement, got even better quality on the big screen. Blu-Ray is THE way to go. The colors are vibrant and devoid of bleeding (particularly strong are the once problematic reds and oranges) and the clarity is crystal clear.
You owe it to yourself to see these film at least in this way.
Besides, we all deserve to give ourselves a gift from time to time.
Please contact me if you need to get ahold of Blu-Rays of these titles.
Dennis- Thank you very much,and I will certainly let you know… once I get my Blu-ray player. It’s my secret shame as a professed cinephile that I still haven’t gotten around to obtaining one. These Kubrick titles will be added to the others that I’m planning to obtain on Blu-Ray(WINGS OF DESIRE and THE GODFATHER, for starters) and are a welcome reminder that I need to get myself out and buy a Blu-Ray NOW!!! I do have a 47″ HD TV, however, that will help.
Pat—
Ya wanna laugh? Lucille and I just got back from a local Target department store, with Sammy and Danny in tow to pick up some pants for the former. While we were there we picked up the blu-ray + digital copy of THE DESCENDANTS and Lucille was looking for the first “Hunger” book for Melanie. Until I read your response here yestyerday I can’t say I was familiar with this newest literary phenomenon. Or maybe I’m overstating it. In any case I join you in excitement for that March 23 opening and the next appearance of the talented Ms. Lawrence, who was indeed unforgettable in WINTER’S BONE. As to W.R., I have avoided it like the plague even though our friend Broadway Bob seems to have positive things to say on it. I’m inclined to think you have called it right.
And then CAMINO REAL on stage (gosh, you really did have the culturally enriching week, that’s for sure!) I have seen many Tennessee Williams plays, but not that one. I can certainly apply some of your criticisms to some other minor plays in his canon, but as you say there were some resonating emotional passages, much as there are in Eugene O’Neil’s work I would pose. Agreed on WHAT’S YOUR NUMBER?
And yes, in the day there was pot smoking for those Kubricks and a number of other films we both remember growing up. I didn’t join them (to this day I have honestly never even tried pot a single time) but I had friends who helped to create that distinct smell. Ha! But I would say that your mature perceptions and value judgements, would yield a completely different viewing.
Anyway, congrats on that fantastic week, and will be talking to you soon. Thanks as always my very good friend!
Ah Pat, once you go blu, you’ll never go back!
Sam, I’m guessing that This Is Not A Film has enough buzz to reach Albany now so I look forward to seeing it, especially as Panahi is my favorite Iranian director. I spent much of last week working through TCM’s Guy Kibbee marathon, though as is often the case it was questionably programmed in that few if any of the films counted as a star vehicle for him. It did show off Kibbee’s range as he rose to virtual stardom within the Warner stock company. I saw some of the same films John Greco did (Strange Love of Molly Louvain, Girl Missing, Havana Widows) and added Laughing Sinners, a ringer from M-G-M with Kibbee briefly as a drunken salesman and Gable as an ex-con Salvation Army man(!) who wins Joan Crawford away from showgirl life and sleazy Neil (Commissioner Gordon) Hamilton; The Silk Express with Kibbee as a cunning, ambitious sheriff whose murder investigation interferes with Hamilton’s urgent attempt to break a corner on silk; and Merry Wives of Reno, as you so generously mentioned, which apparently set a benchmark of sleaze and helped spark the backlash of 1934.
Also tuned into Frank Borzage’s History is Made at Night, a romance somewhat preminiscent of Titanic, toward the end but with a happy ending except for Colin Clive, whose last film this was; Fred Niblo’s The Temptress, a typical silent-era misogynist melodrama slickly shot and partly redeemed by a knockout final drunk/mad scene from Garbo; Paul Wendkos’s Angel Baby, a 1961 Elmer Gantry knock-off with elements of The Miracle Man, elevated by some Haskell Wexler cinematography; and Jay Roach’s Game Change, which illustrates the limits of docudrama despite Julianne Moore’s fine, implosive performance as Gov. Palin. For this sort of film the central character needs a big, defining speech, yet the writers are understandably reluctant to make one up for her, yet assume such familiarity with her utterances that we’re shown little more than famous sound bites. Inevitably under such constraints Moore is at her best in Palin’s “meltdown” phase when she lapses into troubling silences and ignores people around her. The overall effect was weird because Moore was far more committed to total impersonation than Ed Harris was as McCain. He never ceases to be Ed Harris — he may as well be doing Saturday Night Live, except he has no funny lines — while Moore is uncanny. Only Woody Harrelson can really stand up to her. But we’re probably too close to the events to make art of them using the characters’ own names.
Samuel—
Sorry to get to your banner submission late, but it has been taking me longer than usual to address all the comments here, many of them exceptional. And in about 40 minutes I’ll be leaving the house with my two oldest boys to see a science-fiction movie that received sharply-divided reviews (JOHN CARTER) at our local Edgewater multiplex. I see the film is headed for financial disaster:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2012/03/john-carter-could-lose-165-million-analyst-projects.html
I do hope that you get THIS IS NOT A FILM soon in the Albany area, and I’m confident you will be chiming in with enthusiasm in reponse.
Yep, you did indeed watch some of the same TCM offerings that John Greco looked at, and as I said to him I liked MOLLY LOUVAIN a bit more, but probably because I managed it at a recent pre-code festival. That’s a most interesting focus there with Guy Kibbee, and excellent that you took advantage of it! I haven’t seen many in that grouping I’m afraid.–LAUGHING SINNERS and MERRY WIVES.
Of the others I have seen THE TEMPTRESS and ANGEL BABY and am not far apart on your own summary assessments. You had an absolutely incredible week there, but thi I know is typical for you. I’ll certainly be looking for some of the reports.
Thanks again and have a great week my friend!
Boy would I have loved to be there for “2001”.
So is that pet in “This is not a film” a kimono dragon or an iguana? Which is it? lol.
Peter–
After further research, it has been confirmed that it was an iguana. Joel was correct there.
I’m sure there will be further viewings of 2001, as it’s always shown somewhere in the city numerous times over the course of a year.
Thanks as always my friend.
A Kimodo Dragon is far bigger than an iguana. They are born big and can grow to the size of a large alligator. The biggest ones anyway…
If you recall THE FRESHMAN, starring Marlon Brando and Matthew Broderick, the lizard in that film was a KIMODO DRAGON and so big it took the efforts of both Frank Whaley and Matthew Broderick to pick it up and put it in the back seat of a Grand Marquis. Even with two people they still struggled to get that monster in the car…
Aye Dennis, I do indeed recall THE FRESHMAN, and I’m still laughing at myself for that mistake. Ha!
I’d rather not get sucked into the black hole that is ‘2001’, but, seriously, why does this film exist, why did Kubrick feel compelled to make it? Is it a sequel to ‘Strangelove’, the arms race transposed to outer space, Reagan’s SDI fifteen years before the fact? Sam, I ask this question with all gravity, because I’ve never understood the raison d’etre of Kubrick’s space epic, which has left me comatose the half dozen times or so I’ve seen it. Here we sit 12 years into the new millenium, and so much for the film’s (and the book’s) powers of prophecy.
For profundity I’ll take ‘Monty Python’s Meaning of Life’ over this cosmic snooze any day (and if ‘2001’ is satire it’s utterly devoid of humor). Give me back Buck Turgidson, Merkin Muffley et al.
As for ‘The Shining’, I’d give that four stars just for Shelley Duvall’s performance alone. The girl’s like a wonderful creature from another planet (maybe she should have played the fetus in ‘2001’).
Haven’t seen any new films this past week, though I have been reading ‘Our Lady of the Flowers’, Genet’s exquisitely wrought dream novel written in a prison cell, his so-called ‘epic of masturbation’, where erotic love is the equivalent of nullification, his canticle of lust with thieves, murderers, boy-queens, pimps and toughs spilling from the pages to excite the author to climax, the Parisian gutters abloom with exotic and dangerous creatures of the night. A wonder Fassbinder didn’t tackle the novel. How I wish he’d taken on ‘Our Lady’ over ‘Querelle’.
+1, all around.
Have you ever seen any of Genet films? As a fan of his books (I’ve read 5 or so) I sought out ‘A Song of Love (Un chant d’amour)’ and must say I really liked it a lot. It’s a highly charged tale of sensual muscularity with several very evocative images (and/or imagery sequences). Highly recommended, as are Oshima’s ‘Diary of a Shinjuku Thief’ (that uses Genet’s ‘Thief’s Journal’) and the three part ‘Poison’ by Todd Haynes with the third segment called ‘Homo’, that uses Genet’s ideas very heavily to tell its story.
I’ve also never been that enthralled with that particular Kubrick, so I applaud your thoughts here. I’m virtually ambivalent to it (at least many of its themes, as I like much of how the story unfolds and how it moves), bettered only by the rabid nonsensical fanboy cheers it receives.
Jamie, unfortunately I’ve never seen a film of Genet’s work, though I’ve heard that ‘The Maids’, part of Eli Landau’s AFT series of the 70’s with — get this, Glenda Jackson and Susannah York — is excellent, as is a controversial 1960’s film adaptation of the play called ‘Les Abysses’, on which Genet refused to participate.
I’ll definitely seek out those other films you’ve mentioned.
Oh yeah, I always forget about ‘The Maids’, I like that film a lot. In generally many of those AFT’s are good (a few wonderful Pinter or Pinter adaptations in there).
I should reclarify too, the Oshima isn’t based on a Genet, but rather it bounces (wonderfully) all over the place and several times mentions the Genet book openly (one time its English first edition cover is displayed, which is important as that version has a forward from Jean Paul Sartre).
I have all these should you need them.
Mark—
I haven’t seen any Genet to this point but much appreciate your recommendation and scholarship on the subject. As to 2001, what can I say? I know there are some out there who will remain baffled and unconvinced till the end of their days. I have always found it a kind of artistic seduction with the visual and aural ravishments, in this quest for the missing link that goes from ape to angel. It’s intellectually challenging and it’s cryptic and sometimes almost ponderous, but in the end I found thye entire enterprise emotionally overwhelming. Yeah I do need to say so much more, but I’ll save it for our next Kubrick thread.
As always my friend thanks for raising the bar!
Jamie, I may take you up on that offer, esp. ‘The Maids’ and ‘Chant d’amour’.
No problem, just email me.
Mark, in all honesty, I think you could probably ask this question about most Kubrick films (at least post-Strangelove, though there’s evidence of it before too), and many have: why? Yet that’s sort of what I like about them – their ambiguity, the way the seeming message is at times subverted by the style or aspects of the story of the general approach. I mean if 2001 is supposed to be a parable of the advancement of the human race, why are all the humans in it so bland? If Barry Lyndon is a wry, cynical satire why is it so deeply romantic and beautiful and epic? If The Shining asks us to observe a decline into insanity, why is
I can definitely see why some grow frustrated with Kubrick and his reputation (and I realize here you’re focusing on 2001, but I’m pivoting to make a larger point if you don’t mind!) and I’ve often questioned what he’s doing myself – particularly his decision to shoot locally after Lyndon, which compromises to various degrees Shining, Full Metal Jacket, and Eyes Wide Shut (while also offering them an interesting quality). But ultimately what draws me back to his work, and makes it so delightful to experience and reflect upon, for me at least, is this for lack of a better word weirdness of a perfectionist filmmaker whose work seems to contradict itself and wander off into the uncanny…
oops – why is its central character, and indeed the very film itself, kind of batshit insane from the get-go?
I should also note that Kubrick’s ambiguity is unusual – it doesn’t seem particularly self-aware, but rather an almost unconscious achievement, odd for such a nitpicking director. I can’t put my finger on what I can’t put my finger on, but hopefully that points in the general direction!
(That last is to finish my thoughts on The Shining)
Yeah, Kubrick is a big, tangled mass of contradictions, sprawling all over the film landscape, with his strange peregrination from classic Thackeray to the lowbrow pulp of Stephen King then back to highbrow Schnitzler. His belated formal take on Vietnam, especially after ‘Apocalypse Now’ and ‘Platoon’ (not to mention his much earlier and much superior antiwar drama ‘Paths of Glory’) has always puzzled me. Maybe some of his projects have such long gestation periods that by the time they hit the screen they’re already passe.
HIs ‘A Clockwork Orange’ ultimately fails for me because the anglicized Russian, the Brave New World newspeak Anthony Burgess created is impossible to translate to film — it comes off very arch-sounding (though he got a good performance out of McDowell, and some of the set pieces like the Korova Milk Bar are splendidly sinister).
Well, at least ‘Strangelove’ (my favorite Kubrick) beat ‘Fail-Safe’ to the theaters, rendering the latter film hopelessly irrelevant.
Kubrick’s a genius, but his choice of materials can be wildly erratic – though I applaud him for having the balls to take on ‘Lolita’ way back in the prim, early 60s and to do a superb job on another yet another difficult novel that lives and breathes through its words and linguistic acrobatics.
I hear ya Mark, but I love him. He’s one of the movies’ true geniuses, a true original whose traveled down many roads to astonishing success.
Ah good, another Lolita fan! I find that film doesn’t get a fair shake but to me it’s a wonderful riff on Nabokov (I don’t really view it as a straight-up adaptation more like an “inspired by” combined with a Mad Magazine parody – I think Kael nailed it in her review at the time).
As for Kubrick, “puzzling” and “erratic” are good descriptors – qualities that I have found both frustrating and thrilling – but truth be told, thrilling more than frustrating. Like everyone & his granny I like the first half of Full Metal Jacket more than the second but I need to see it again. He definitely creates a cinema that grows on you – so many of the films received mixed reviews when they came out yet have grown in stature since (as Maurizio has pointed out, a dozen years ago neither The Shining nor Barry Lyndon had the level of critical appreciation/praise they seem to now). And on a personal level I find Eyes Wide Shut improves with memory and re-viewings. It’s such an odd film – the fake-feeling sets, Kidman’s rather annoying line deliveries, the way it seems to be going for Lynch and somewhat miss the mark – yet boy does its mood linger afterwards.
And doesn’t hurt that the man’s eye was fucking golden…
STAN’S LABYRINTH
The star of Kubrick’s ‘The Shining’ isn’t the inestimable Jack Nicholson or his leering, eye-rolling caricature of writer’s block. Instead, it’s a snowbound hermitage called the Overlook Hotel (the exteriors were shot at the Timberline Lodge on Oregon’s Mt. Hood, and to give the place that haunted, desolate look, Kubrick and his scriptwriter Diane Johnson came up with the bogus pretext that the lodge must close between October and May because the winter snow’s too deep to make vacationing possible (then why the hell build a giant lodge in prime ski country in the first place?) This is one of the many unintentional mysteries of ‘The Shining’. Another is the fact that the hotel is built on sacred Indian burial ground, though not much really comes of this either — the slaughter seems capricious and intermittent and widely spaced in time. But the sprawling architectural monstrosity of the Overlook Hotel does make it possible for Kubrick, the indefatigable technology nut, to stage an endless series of tracking shots down miles and miles of empty corridors and through an intricate outdoor maze of shrubbery.. Even many of the hotel’s carpets, bedspreads and wall hangings are covered in vertiginous M. C. Escher explorations of tessellations and infinity. Kubrick’s tracking trick, which produces some spectacular visual and sound effects, especially with the boy and his plastic low-rider tricycle, becomes wearying in this 146-minute film because once the Steadicam wears out its welcome (and it does very quickly), there’s nothing left to watch but Nicholson’s decomposing face and the recurring images of a hemorrhaging elevator.
I honestly have no idea what ‘The Shining’ is supposed to be about (I’ve never read Stephen King’s pulp novel, but I’ve heard King was unhappy with the film), but I’m guessing — just guessing — that reincarnation is the theme, and that we poor mortals are forever caught in a cycle of violence and horror from which there is no escape — thus the elevator gushing a Niagara of blood over and over, a slow-motion shock image that looks like one of those motion machines from the 60’s that simulate breakers on the ocean. Amid all these sanguinary metaphysics, the gifted Shelley Duvall gives the role of Jack’s beleaguered wife almost more conviction than it’s worth, and at the film’s climax her paroxysms of fright are extraordinarily effective. It’s Duvall, not Nicholson, who burrows beneath ‘The Shining’s campy horrors to at last give the audience those vicarious jolts of terror it’s been hungering for from the outset.
Sam and MovieMan (Joel?) this in a nutshell is how I see ‘The Shining’ after staying up until 3 a.m. last night watching and pondering its elevated and bewildering status in the Kubrick canon.
I enjoyed the write-up, Mark, though you left out the biggest head-scratcher of all: why the hotel manager (so casually, too) brings up the recent ax murder in a job interview and why Nicholson seems so relaxed about it. Also there’s some really funky dissolves in the film – it’s visually dynamic but no one could really describe it as gorgeous – it’s kind of ugly in a way, but in a lurid, fascinating way, the best kind of ugly.
Here’s the thing – why I think Kubrick frustrates a lot of people, and why maybe you find many of his films baffling: despite there being many fascinating themes and subtexts in his work, at heart he is not really a director of ideas at all – he’s a director of effects. Many ideas are attached to these effects but as secondary features. A lot of stuff in his movies doesn’t “make sense” yet it works. His methodical way of working, the aura surrounding him, a lot of the stuff he says in interviews, and probably the effect and timing of 2001 all contributed to this notion of him as an intellectual filmmaker but really he is all about cultivating unusual aesthetic experiences. To my mind, anyway.
Apparently the King novel is a metaphor for alcoholism, a subtext which Kubrick more or less ignored. I’d say its strongest “idea” is a deadpan yet fascinated ridiculing of masculine arrogance and aggression. But, as noted before, this more or less follows from the aesthetic decisions he makes rather than inspiring them which to be honest is an approach I generally admire, though it can sometimes lead to baffling results.
Also, I think this (Kubrick willing to sacrifice ideas to effects) explains why Clockwork Orange is such a spellbinding visual-aural experience but such an unfortunate and glib gloss on the book.
Well, SK started out as a photographer for Life Magazine, maybe that’s why every one of his films, even those that don’t work (for me), is a visual banquet. I plan to watch ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ this weekend, although the film’s self-consciously clever title already has me predisposed against it.
Definitely a visualist first and foremost. Although apparently a chess master (he used to play against the hustlers in Washington Square all the time) which is probably were the “mentally imposing” vibe comes from, but with Kubrick I believe the end was to create a sensual experience, and all the ideas and themes were just means, compromisable if necessary to that end.
I’ll be interested on your take on EWS. Especially if you watch it twice – that’s a film that I think I felt was an interesting failure when I first saw it, but over time (on reflection and re-viewings, I think I’ve seen it 2 or 3 times at this point) the emphasis grew to be on the “interesting” part more than the failure (but tell me if you can why Kidman received such praise for it; I think she’s really grating, Cruise is actually stronger). I guess that’s probably true for a lot of his films for many people. I’m not sure any of them received blanket positive press on release. Dr. Strangelove might be the last one whose notices weren’t decidedly mixed (and I might be wrong about even that one, as the NYT for one seemed hesitant) – Clockwork Orange was generally positive, but with some very notable and vocal detractors.
That’s generally a good sign though. Every year critics, Oscars, and audiences gravitate toward certain films – and a decade or so later we generally find that the films with the best legs slipped under the radar at the time. Certainly in America anyway.
Thanks a lot Sam for the kind mention. Yes, I did notice that you’ve already posted a write-up on the mammoth Wellman festival that you attended which is most certainly yet another feather in your already jewel-filled cap.
Here’s what I managed to see in the meantime. Of course, you’d already be aware of that as you’ve left some wonderful comments at those posts.
– Bela Tarr’s majestic masterpiece Satantango
– Ray underrated gem Devi
– The British romantic movie Brief Encounter
– The brilliant Czech New Wave satire The Party & the Guests
– A recently released Hindi thriller called Kahaani
– The absolutely delightful Rohmer film My Night at Maud’s
– Bunuel’s trenchant & surrealistic satire Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie
– The beautiful Kieslowski film No End
– Another recent Hindi release called Pan Singh Tomar
Shubhajit—
Thanks for the compliments and very kind words!
It was an amazing 21 days to be sure, and one my family will long remember. I have indeed seen some of your reviews here and will soon be checking out the new ones I haven’t yet read. You are on quite a quality roll yourself, my friend, and you’ve been amazingly prolific.
Thanks again and have a great week!
Hello Sam and everyone!!!!
Woow… sorry for being late with my chime in with your stupendous diary, I thank you for the link, as always, and you’d love to look at my blog now, it has three new entries and I’m quite proud of most of them, specially the last one, even if it’s a bit content-less.
Anyway, you had quite a relaxing week in comparisons, with some great classics and new films equally. For example, I’ve seen The Shining and it’s my fourth favorite movie of all time, and 2001: A Space Odyssey is just a stunning masterpiece, both deserving the ***** mark. For the meantime, I haven’t seen Rear Window, even if I love Hitchcock, and I know I’m missing out, but yeah, can’t wait. Of the rest, I wanna see This is Not a Film, interesting document.
So, my first week of the last year of university was last week… phew. On monday I had my first class of China: History and Culture, interesting and hard subject to tackle, but I’m looking forward to it. On tuesday I had my first class of Korea: History and Culture, and with that I finish my Asian minor. That same day I had the class of Fiction Workshop, the one I failed last year, so there I was, a bit bored, but what can you do. On wednesday I had classes, but I volunteered (with a pay) to show the new equipments and stuff that the university acquired, so that’s that. On thursday I had my first class of Videoclip Worshop, incredibly interesting and I’m sure I’ll like to do some.
On friday I had to go to work, since I have no classes, but then on the weekend we worked hard painting the new room we’re having in our house, hard work but with a reward: an evening with my girlfriend.
On the film front I saw:
– Alice Guy tourne une phonoscène sur la théâtre de pose des Buttes-Chaumont (1905) *** One of the first making-off of one weird form of film from the early XXth century, the phonoscene, a first kind of experiment with sound and film. This is a short film where we see people filming one of these, besides that, not much else.
– Game Change (2012, Jay Roach) **** The HBO movie for television, while not as good as the earlier 2008 film ‘Recount’, it is on its own league based on acting alone, thanks to Julianne Moore’s excelent performance as Sarah Palin. The film is well told, excellently shot, great visuals, great script, but in the end it seems that it’s a bit apologetic towards McCain, his choices, ideals, and while I still think he’s not a bad person (as opposed to the dangerous ignorance of Palin) it still is dissapointing in its viewpoint.
– Gyo (2012, Takayuki Hirao) ****1/2 This is an anime, and you’ll read soon enough what I have to say about it.
– Halloween (1978, John Carpenter) ***** I needed to see this film, so I ended up watching a extended edition, that is equally good to the original cut. The film is paused and a masterpiece of horror in many ways. In my latest post at my blog I post some images of the film and talk about what is the greatest thing about the movie: its paused tone and slow pace overall, as well as the chills that you get when you see the face of horror.
– Nostalgy of the Light (2010, Patricio Guzmán) ****1/2 A visual delight, that played on TV in Chile past saturday. It’s just an amazing film on the way it relates about the universe and our past as a country and all the things that are hidden right before our eyes, what can the universe tell us about what we should be remembering and looking for. One of my favorite chilean films of all time, and an excellent documentary at that.
– The Prowler (1981, Joseph Zito) *** A slasher about a man in a soldier outfit (right out from the WW2) starts stalking and killing girls and men equally on the night of the prom dance. Yeah, it has been done, yeah, the acting isn’t really good, but the special effects are really the best thing about the film: truly stunning, it almost seems like watching people die, and that is pretty disgusting to look at, but still entertaining in the way of admiration of the overall look of the film.
– Samba Ye (1980, Pablo Perelman) *** A music video for a chilean band in the form of a visual experiment short film by this chilean director. The song is catchy, but the effects are nothing more than the first digital enhancements, like colour saturation and negative image. Stunning for our country, but not much else, like an effects reel.
– Sin City (2005, Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez, Quentin Tarantino) **** This film hasn’t aged well when you see the special effects, because they are so discontinuous, I mean, sometimes the visuals are really stunning and great, but then there are some really ridiculous shots. The story is compelling and the short structure works most of the time, but then there are some times where it just simply feels short, as if we need more context or just a larger movie to hold all the stories.
– Le voyage á travers l’impossible (1904, Georges Méliès) ***1/2 Way too similar to Trip to the Moon to be excellent, but it’s still good on its own, maybe just because on pure visual and amazement level. Still, sometimes it feels way too long for its own good.
And that’s all! Thanks Sam and everyone, have a good week!
Jaime—
I have completely flubbed the ball this week. How is it possible that I had it in my head that I had answered all the submissions on this thread? I don’t quite know how this happened? At any time feel free to notify me of my error by e mail. I am truly red-faced, and would not have realized this if filmmaker Jeffrey Goodman had not chimed in here today, catching my attention. please accept my apology. I am very sorry. I see I did not even respond to Judy and Mark here. Be rest assured I will be checking out all your new entries at EXODUS: 8:2 when I prepare the new Diary later tonight. Great to see you are in agreement with the top ratings for those two Kubricks. I have always known you adore THE SHINING. I do believe you will think the same of REAR WINDOW. Great job with the Asian culture and history classes, and with the Videoclip Workshop!
And great reward too with the night out with Carol.
Of that remarkable line-up of films I agree that Carpenter’s HALLOWEEN is a top-rank classic horror film, Guzman’s NOSTALGIA OF THE LIGHT is a very good documentary, the Melias (yes not as good as the other) is quite nice, and SIN CITY (which Allan likes quite a bit) has it’s moments. The others I need to see, but appreciate teh superb capsules.
I am very sorry for the late arrival, but my mind was playing tricks on me. Have a great Sunday and upcoming week my excellent friend!
Hi Sam, Interesting to hear your thoughts on digital playback. A few years ago a projectionist let me and a couple of friends go in the booth and see how he spliced the film together – sad to think that this is already becoming a thing of the past.
Having said that, I didn’t get to the cinema this week but did see quite a few old films at home. I saw several from 1929, trying to keep up with Allan’s alternate Oscars – The Diary of a Lost Girl, The Man with the Movie Camera, Pandora’s Box, Erotikon and The Iron Mask. All great. I also saw and loved ‘Morocco’ from 1930 – Dietrich is wonderful in her first Hollywood role.
And I also saw four Wellmans in preparation for commenting further at your amazingly comprehensive write-up from the festival – ‘Roxie Hart’, which was a repeat viewing of a film I find thoroughly enjoyable, and three titles which I hadn’t previously seen, ‘The Story of GI Joe’, ‘Darby’s Rangers’ and ‘The Happy Years’. ‘The Story of GI Joe’ is by far the best of these (I was given the DVD for Christmas), a powerful war film with a great performance by Robert Mitchum – definitely one which I will be watching again to take in the things I missed.
Not in the same league or anywhere near it, but I also quite liked ‘Darby’s Rangers’, or the second half of it anyway, when it gets into the combat zone and starts to remember that it isn’t just a comedy about the soldiers’ love lives. Wasn’t a big fan of ‘The Happy Years’, sorry, Sam, though the Technicolor looks beautiful and there are some fun scenes along the way.
Have a great week, also to all at Wonders!
Judy—
My apologies for failing to address this comment sooner. Yesterday I realized I had let four comments on this thread go unanswered for days, figuring erroneously that they were answered. Those earlier silents you saw are indeed great, I quite agree. And I fully expected that stellar response from you on Wellman’s THE STORY OF G.I. JOE, which is the director’s favorite of all his films. I had known you weren’t a fan of THE HAPPY YEARS. I know that film isn’t one that will please everybody, and Allan is with you there. Great Xmas present too with G.I. JOE! DARBY’S RANGERS is one I have not seen yet, but appreciate the response.
True what you say about the era of the projector winding down.
Thanks again my great friend. Sorry for the inexplicable delay.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, JERRY LEWIS!!
Or should I say Bon Anniversaire!
Ha! Mark! He’s revered in France, but I think all os us have much fondness for what he’s done!
Sam, thanks so much for the wonderful mention! And so sorry for the late reply. I’ve been out of town all week.
I’m really interested in seeing that Panahi documentary. And, of course, any day seeing those Kubricks and Hitch films on the big screen is a good one.
Not much to report on the movie front this week. But I will be sure to rectify that in the next couple of days.
Here’s to an awesome weekend, Sam. Thanks so much for all that you do!
Jeffrey—
Your support has been astounding and as steadfast as the Northern Star! To say that it has been flattering would be teh understatement of the year. I really can’t thank you enough for all YOU have done! Hope you had an eventful and productive week, though I think I know the answer to that! I also hope that the Panahi documentary makes it’s rounds down in the Bajou soon. I think it is your kind of film! Yes, after the Wellman extravaganza it was a change of pace to fast-forward to the Kubricks in DCP and seeing REAR WINDOW at any time is a real joy. I know you have been busy, and I always check at THE LAST LULLABY. Have a great week my friend. Many thanks!