by Sam Juliano
The dog days of August are approaching, and many of us are doing what we can to stay clear of the oppressive heat. Others couldn’t be happier to indulge in outdoor pursuits. The Greatest Television Series Countdown moves ahead triumphantly with all the writers and comment section regulars making for an astoundingly successful venture. Another great week for essays, comments, page views, likes and diversity. The countdown will be taking a brief break from Friday August 4th until Friday August 11th, but will resume on Saturday, August 12th, continuing on till the final day, September 23 when the Number 1 finisher will appear. Thanks to all who have been placing the comments, with a special shout out to Jeff Stroud, Jon Warner, Dennis Polifroni, Frank Gallo, Ricky, Bobby J., Adam Ferenz, Celeste Fenster, Robert Hornak, Karen, Peter, John Grant, Tim McCoy, Pierre de Plume, Maurizio Roca, David Schleicher, Patricia Hamilton, and David Noack for your regular engagement.
Lucille and I managed two films in theaters this past week. The total would have been higher, but viewing writing time for countdown entries and other responsibilities, prevented anymore than that. We saw:
Dunkirk ** 1/2 (Friday) Edgewater multiplex
The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) **** (Saturday) Film Forum
The Second World War is one of my most obsessive subjects; Christopher Nolan’s “Interstellar” was my favorite film of its release year, yet his new highly-praised “Dunkirk” is a dramatically lifeless affair, with not a single developed or interesting character, and an unending parade of pilots bombing beach heads. The film is technically redundant and the “story” is the very definition of tedium. What were the critics thinking? Didn’t such a great subject deserve more than this unfocused, overwrought film? Lucille, Sammy, Jeremy, Bart Talamini and I saw the film this afternoon in Edgewater. I am still shaking my head, especially as the first ten to twelve minutes of the film were spectacular. IMHO the 4 minute searing steadicam sequence shot by Seamus McGarvey in Joe Wright’s humanist 2007 “Atonement” (my favorite film of that year from any country) said more about Dunkirk physical and psychological devastation than the new scattered film “Dunkirk” did in its entire running time. Wright’s stunning re-creation of the scene has the cumulative effect of being transported in a time machine without compromising the cinema verite urgency of a harrowing time in history. Soldiers are milling around aimlessly, while some sing patriotic songs in defiance, and still others engage in the terrible act of shooting horses because food for them has run out. The war-ravaged and chaotic landscape is framed by a ferris wheel in the background. Amid the booming artillery, damaged ships, and soldiers frantically seeking food and shelter, Wright repeatedly employs a close-up on Robbie’s face (James McAvoy) to give the war-weariness an intimately human perspective. The expansiveness of the segment is staggering for sure, but the effect is wholly emotional, comparable with the Adagio movement of a four-part symphony. This is one of the most masterful single scenes in the cinema over the past 20 years.
1974’s The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is a film we’ve seen multiple times, but a cousin was dying to see it so we went again (Part of FF’s New York City in the 70’s series).
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
Got back from California today, so I haven’t been up to date on the blog/countdown. Will play catch up tomorrow. As for your review of Dunkirk, I’ve been very suspicious of all the positive reviews myself. I get the feeling I’ll probably come down on the same side as you for some reason. It’s just a hunch naturally, but I’ll be seeing this latest Nolan film soon enough.
Maurizio, I accidentally left you and Ricky Chinigo off the list of commenters above. My bad for that. The last time I made a comparable unintended oversight, ah well I won’t even get into that. Ha! Anyway I have inserted both of you in the post proper now, and do thank you for your comments and engagement. As to DUNKIRK, I have taken my lumps on FB and elsewhere for my position with even one person opining I didn’t care for war films, when of course the opposite is actually true. I am planning to see it a second time in an IMAX theater, but I am skeptical that the scene-specific issues I have can be easily dispelled. My own expectations of a film on this famed event are quite different than what Nolan’s are but I see he is laughing his way to the bank. I am eagerly awaiting your verdict my friend!
Your reaction to Dunkirk was a big surprise, Sam. But I plan to see it this week and I’ll return with a report.
Frank, it was a big surprise for me too. As I entered the theater I was 100% sure I’d be in the company of greatness for all sorts of reasons. Looking forward to your report my friend.
Sam, I did like the film a little more than you did, but I do recognize there were flaws. When that soldier ran through the deserted streets trying to beat the gunfire I was thinking we’d have a different film than we did. I did really like the time devise Nolan used. And the photography was breathtaking.
Thanks for the report Ricky! Yes, the vast majority like it much more than I have, and I can both admire and respect that. I too fell head over heals with a previous Nolan film (INTERSTELLAR) but I felt this was a different animal altogether. The devise you speak of was a smart artistic choice without a doubt. I had no problem at all with that. And yes Hoyte van Hoytema ‘s cinematography was beyond reproach.
Sam — About Dunkirk… you just saved us time and money. Thank you!
Ha Laurie, as always thank you for the confidence! Still, this may well be one caswe where we are not completely in agreement, as you could end up liking it more. But there are always the other ways to see it down the line my friend. Thank you so much!
Yes, I was certain you would be singing its praises. Some are saying your position is judging it for what it isn’t rather than what it is. How would you answer that?
Peter, that is an excellent inquiry! Yes I have heard that and my response would be that I understood what Nolan was trying to do, but we’ve seen the war-is-hell and the maddening no-holds-barred madness of attack in the opening reel of Saving Private Ryan, and in Full Medal Jacket and as far back as the war trench ferocity of All Quiet on the Western Front. The “narrative” here was one track, whether intended or not. I’ll see it again in IMAX, but remains more than skeptical I’ll se eit in another light. But I’ll give it that chance. Thank you!
Sam, just watched this last night with my brother and cousins. I agree wholeheartedly with you. All the things you have said as criticisms are completely tune with my own assessments and it seems that Nolan, in an interview for the BBC Radio 4 show, ‘The Film Programme’ – deliberately choose not to have any empathic scenes and character building ones for audiences to care for.
I think it plays the ‘Saving Private Ryan’ ruse of having an intense opening to grab the audience – except that Nolan never really eases off and to set up a film, but more of a white knuckled roller-coaster ride for 100 minutes plus ride. And as a roller coaster comes to an end, the film takes it’s characters into the bright English countryside and an Elgar-ish theme. Nolan’s broken the rules of film-making but at it’s heart, but those fundamental rules are there for a reason, what’s really left is really an fairground summer blockbuster. Hans Zimmer’s score is in tune with it but it is one-dimensional and bombastic. The fragmented time-play didn’t work for me and made the experience less than satisfactory.
Two stars out of a possible 4. Far behind ‘Inception’, ‘Batman Begins’ and his others. I think I’ll have myself a season of Ozu films, just for the sheer contemplative serenity. Or something along those lines.
Loving the TV countdown.
Bobby, I do feel rather vindicated as a result of your report. I fully concur that Nolan did this all by plan, but a 105 minute film on the single note irregardless of the stylistic device he employed to thematically tie it all together, needs more than just a buffo opening. After the first 15 minutes I was certain we were going to get a staggering war masterpiece. This never developed. I do plan on seeing it in IMAX a second time, but I remain unconvinced I will be changing my position at least not substantially. But I’ll chance it. And for once I have to agree with you on Zimmer. This was deafeningly bombastic. All I can seem to vividly recall are those endless hooded pilot close-ups and Kenneth Branagh who looked like he was in the wrong movie.
Thank you my friend! Your involvement in the countdown has been a real treat!!!
Mark saw it with his friends on Saturday and he loved it. I will try and get a more specific report from him and discuss it further. As far as Atonement, it is truly one of my favorite movies ever.
Celeste, Mark is one of an overwhelming majority who did think the film great, so I’m not surprised. And I fully understand. I’d certainly love to compare notes. Thank you!
Apropos of nothing, here’s a partial list of Susan Sontag’s favorite films compiled in late 1977 (not in order):
1. Bresson, Pickpocket 2. Kubrick, 2001 3. Vidor, The Big Parade 4. Visconti, Ossessione 5. Kurosawa, High and Low 6. Syberberg, Hitler (a shockingly low ranking of #80 in Wonders TV poll!) 7. Godard, 2 ou 3 Choses… 8. Rossellini, Louis XIV 9. Renoir La Regle du Jeu 10. Ozu, Tokyo Story 11. Dreyer, Gertrud 12. Eisenstein, Potemkin 13. Josef von Sternberg, The Blue Angel 14. Lang, Dr. Mabuse 15. Antonioni, L’Eclisse 16. Bresson, Un Condamne a Mort… 17. Gance, Napoleon 18. Vertov, The Man with the [Movie] Camera 19. Feuillade, Judex 20. Anger, Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome.
Sontage also mentions Vivre sa vie, Les Enfants du Paradis, The Seven Samurai, Playtime, Greed, Persona, The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant, Intolerance, La Grande Illusion, The Searchers.
I’m not in love with all of these movies (haven’t seen the Anger picture), but Sontag’s list is certainly a debate sparker. In the words of Mike Myer’s Linda Richman, “Discuss amongst yourselves.”
The Postman Always Rings Twice (James M. Cain, 1934) Reader, you may need a pair of asbestos garden tongs to turn these hot pages. For obvious Production Code reasons, the 1946 movie adaptation, good as it is, doesn’t begin to touch the sex and savagery of Cain’s story — the frenetic screwing beside Nick’s fresh corpse, etc., etc. I’ve never seen Bob Rafelson’s roundly booed 1981 remake, but I have an idea that Jessica Lange makes a very good hell cat out of Cora (“I’m not the first woman that had to turn hell cat to get out of a mess,” the mess being her marriage to a dull, greasy old Greek (avuncular, old Cecil Kellaway in the Lana Turner movie). Kellaway vs. John Garfield! Now, ladies, who would you prefer to fuck?
Also read Betty (‘The Egg and I’) MacDonald’s 1955 “Onions in the Stew,” her riotously funny account of living en famille (husband, two teenage daughters) in a ramshackle house on an isolated island in Seattle’s Puget Sound. MacDonald was the precursor to the much lesser humorist Erma Bombeck.
Sam, ‘Dunkirk’ isn’t even on my radar right now After ‘Saving Private Ryan’ why?
Mark, I want to say at the outset that the reason why HITLER: A FILM FROM GERMANY did not finish higher was that many of the voters confessed they hadn’t seen the work. Up until recently it wasn’t at all easy to watch. The voters who admitted they hadn’t seen it had others works by Kieslowski, Bergman, Fassbinder, Burns, Ken Clark, Dennis Potter, Peter Watkins and Ken Russell on their ballots, among others. It is absolutely up their intellectual street and would have finished higher had people seen it before ballots were completed. I can tell you that I had it extremely high on my own ballot and consider it a staggering masterpiece. Great to see Sontag had it in such a lofty position. Yes her list is as you say a “debate speaker” but I’d say it is magnificent all things considered. Many are films we’ve readily ourselves consider among the best. it is gloriously diverse, and I particularly like the prominence of Bresson. I have no issue with your disclaimer on the original THE POSTMAN, which though a most engaging work is indeed intrinsically flawed. That much I concluded a while back. The Rafelson re-make is dire. “Onions in the Stew” sounds most interesting. I will have to investigate that volume.
Ha, precisely! We DID see that battle madness before and in a BETTER film!
Thank you my friend!
Saw Dunkirk today and liked it slightly more than you (***). Still, it was disappointing. I don’t mind nonlinear films but I found really no reason for it here, and there was not one character it made me care about.
John, I hear ya loud and clear. Sounds like you and I are thinking in the exact same terms. Last night a good friend accosted me online basically saying that I was judging the film for what it was not. We have seen the frenzy of war in previous films, and as you say there was nothing new here. Without a humanist context for this event we are witnessing a barrage of redundancy. Like you I normally do not mind non-linear films. e.g. Malick. Also, it is so true what you say that there isn’t one character to win one’s empathy. Defenders of the film will reduce that absence to us wanting something corny, which of course isn’t the case at all. Thank you!