A film swap of sorts

[soitgoes...]

So Brightside, Qrazy and myself are doing a little film swap. We each suggested 5 films for the others to watch. We will watch them in a rotation giving each a brief summary. The order of films will be:

The Passion of Anna (Bergman) - soitgoes... (recommended by Brightside) (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=182126#post18 2126)
Juliet of the Spirits (Fellini) - Brightside (recommended by Qrazy) (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=182463#post18 2463)
Dragon Inn (Hu) - Qrazy (recommended by soitgoes...) (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=183616&post183616)
Khrustalyov, My Car! (German) - soitgoes... (recommended by Qrazy) (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=184117&post184117)
Floating Clouds (Naruse) - Brightside (recommended by soitgoes...) (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=185977&post185977)
Whity (Fassbinder) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside)
L'ange (Bokanowski) - soitgoes... (recommended by Brightside) (http://www.match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=187038&postcount=133)
Mind Game (Yuasa) - Brightside (recommended by Qrazy)
Enamorada (Fernandez) - Qrazy (recommended by soitgoes...)
My Friends (Monicelli) - soitgoes... (recommended by Qrazy)
News from Home (Akerman) - Brightside (recommended by soitgoes...)
Farewell to the Summer Light (Yoshida) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside)
La Cienaga (Martel) - soitgoes... (recommended by Brightside)
My Friend Ivan Lapshin (German) - Brightside (recommended by Qrazy)
Landscape in the Mist (Angelopoulos) - Qrazy (recommended by soitgoes...)
Onibaba (Shindo) - soitgoes... (recommended by Qrazy)
The Color of Paradise (Majidi) - Brightside (recommended by soitgoes...)
Innocence (Hadzihalilovic) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside)
In a Year with 13 Moons (Fassbinder) - soitgoes... (recommended by Brightside)
Minnie and Moskowitz (Cassavetes) - Brightside (recommended by Qrazy)
Wife! Be Like a Rose! (Naruse) - Qrazy (recommended by soitgoes...)
Gate of Flesh (Suzuki) - soitgoes... (recommended by Qrazy)
Cyclo (Tran) - Brightside (recommended by soitgoes...)
A Real Young Girl (Breillat) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside) (http://www.match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=186254&postcount=93)
Partner (Bertolucci) - soitgoes... (recommended by Brightside)
Do You Remember Dolly Bell? (Kusturica) - Brightside (recommended by Qrazy)
Intentions of Murder (Imamura) - Qrazy (recommended by soitgoes...)
The Maggie (Mackendrick) - soitgoes... (recommended by Qrazy)
Leibelei (Ophuls) - Brightside (recommended by soitgoes...)
My Night at Maud's (Rohmer) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside)

I'm up first, and I should have it watched in the next couple of days.

[B-side]

Nice.

[MacGuffin]

Are these supposed to be favorite movies of the person who recommended them or just films of interest? Good luck.

[soitgoes...]

Are these supposed to be favorite movies of the person who recommended them or just films of interest? Good luck.
The ones I recommended would all rate at least an 8.5/10.

[B-side]

The ones I recommended would all rate at least an 8.5/10.

Yeah, I recommended all films I myself really enjoy save for Farewell to the Summer Light, which I didn't dislike, but I don't hold it in the same regard as the others.

[soitgoes...]

Are these supposed to be favorite movies of the person who recommended them or just films of interest? Good luck.


The ones I recommended would all rate at least an 8.5/10.
Also I've seen 5 of the films Brightside and Qrazy recommended to each other, and enjoyed all of those too. I'm excited to hear some thoughts on a number of the films listed. It's nice that the films tend to lean towards the obscure, at least from what is mentioned on this site.

[soitgoes...]

Yeah, I recommended all films I myself really enjoy save for Farewell to the Summer Light, which I didn't dislike, but I don't hold it in the same regard as the others.
Out of the ones you recommended to Qrazy, that is the one I'm most jealous I didn't get. :lol:

[Qrazy]

All films I quite like, not necessarily absolute favorites.

[B-side]

Also I've seen 5 of the films Brightside and Qrazy recommended to each other, and enjoyed all of those too. I'm excited to hear some thoughts on a number of the films listed. It's nice that the films tend to lean towards the obscure, at least from what is mentioned on this site.

Yeah, I wanted this to be more about exposing others to films each of us are rather fond of that few seem to have seen.


Out of the ones you recommended to Qrazy, that is the one I'm most jealous I didn't get.

I wasn't aware you had such an affinity for Asian films. If I'd have realized that before, I would've recommended it. But then again, I may have thought you'd already seen it.:P

You can add it as a 6th rec for you if you want.;)

[Spinal]

A Real Young Girl (Breillat) - Qrazy (recommended by Brightside)


Oh, this should be fun. :)

[soitgoes...]

Oh, this should be fun. :)I'm also intrigued how he'll react to My Night at Maud's.

Qrazy, have you seen any Rohmer?

[Qrazy]

I'm also intrigued how he'll react to My Night at Maud's.

Qrazy, have you seen any Rohmer?

I've seen Suzanne's Career which I thought was OK but found instantly forgettable and have since forgotten it... and Chloe in the Afternoon which I liked a fair amount but again it did not leave a huge impression. Maybe something like...

Suzanne's Career - C-
Chloe in the Afternoon - B-

[Derek]

Oh, this should be fun. :)

Looking into the future, I see...


:frustrated:

[soitgoes...]

I've seen Suzanne's Career which I thought was OK but found instantly forgettable and have since forgotten it... and Chloe in the Afternoon which I liked a fair amount but again it did not leave a huge impression. Maybe something like...

Suzanne's Career - C-
Chloe in the Afternoon - B-
Yeah, I'm interested in how Maud fares with you. It doesn't seem like a Qrazy film, nor does the Breillat.

[Qrazy]

Oh, this should be fun. :)

I did not hate Fat Girl, but I did not love it either. Breillat strikes me as the type of arthouse director I will usually find interesting on certain levels but ultimately not become overly enamored with her individual films.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, I'm interested in how Maud fares with you. It doesn't seem like a Qrazy film, nor does the Breillat.

Yeah I avoided the Passion of Anna rec because I was getting an Autumn Sonata vibe (could be wrong about this) and that's one of the few Bergman films I really cannot stand.

[Derek]

Yeah I avoided the Passion of Anna rec because I was getting an Autumn Sonata vibe (could be wrong about this) and that's one of the few Bergman films I really cannot stand.

Huh, I was not a fan of Passion of Anna, but I love Autumn Sonata. Not sure if that can be considered a rec for the former though. :)

[soitgoes...]

Huh, I was not a fan of Passion of Anna, but I love Autumn Sonata. Not sure if that can be considered a rec for the former though. :)
Ouch. I love Autumn Sonata too. Uh oh.

[Qrazy]

Huh, I was not a fan of Passion of Anna, but I love Autumn Sonata. Not sure if that can be considered a rec for the former though. :)

The one thing I do like about Autumn Sonata is the husband character and his opening and (closing ish?) monologue. The rest brings the rage. Speaking of Bergman and tangent-ing over to Nykvist, I DL'd Siddhartha (Hesse adaptation) which he DP'd for Conrad Rooks. Haven't had a chance to watch yet though.

[Qrazy]

Ouch. I love Autumn Sonata too. Uh oh.

Brightside has both in his top 50. So you may well like it.

[soitgoes...]

Brightside has both in his top 50. So you may well like it.I'm not too worried, as there has only been one film of his that I'm even the smallest bit negative on.

[Qrazy]

I'm not too worried, as there has only been one film of his that I'm even the smallest bit negative on.

Which?

[soitgoes...]

Which?
His first, Crisis.

[B-side]

I haven't the faintest idea how I'll react to soitgoes' recs. They'll be my first from each director. From Qrazy, it'll be my first Kusturica, German and Yuasa.

[Spinal]

Looking into the future, I see...

Oh, that film is so batshit crazy that I never have any expectations that another human being will like it. I'm always kind of amazed when they do.

[B-side]

Oh, that film is so batshit crazy that I never have any expectations that another human being will like it. I'm always kind of amazed when they do.

I love it. My favorite Breillat so far.

[soitgoes...]

Oh, that film is so batshit crazy that I never have any expectations that another human being will like it. I'm always kind of amazed when they do.
This is the only film that has dared to show me what an earthworm cemetery might look like.

[Bosco B Thug]

God, I am wasting my time. I've only seen one of these (the Rohmer).

Carry on. Enlighten me with your kinky experiment.

[Qrazy]

God, I am wasting my time. I've only seen one of these (the Rohmer).

Carry on. Enlighten me with your kinky experiment.

I'm disappointed you didn't enjoy Escape from New York more but I feel vindicated about The Fog. Your only slightly lower rating for Ghosts of Mars has me intrigued, perhaps it's time I wrapped Carpenter's filmography.

[soitgoes...]

I'm disappointed you didn't enjoy Escape from New York more but I feel vindicated about The Fog. Your only slightly lower rating for Ghosts of Mars has me intrigued, perhaps it's time I wrapped Carpenter's filmography.
Ghosts of Mars is the worst film I've seen this year.

[Qrazy]

Ghosts of Mars is the worst film I've seen this year.

Haha... ahh... maybe I'll hold off then. I still have his TV films and omnibus segments to see anyway.

[Sven]

Passion of Anna and Ghosts of Mars are about the same in quality.

That being the quality of awesome. Whaddup with the ambivalence toward the Bergman?

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm disappointed you didn't enjoy Escape from New York more but I feel vindicated about The Fog. Your only slightly lower rating for Ghosts of Mars has me intrigued, perhaps it's time I wrapped Carpenter's filmography. Ratings are tricky...

Escape from New York is undoubtedly the best of the three Carpenters, and it's probably leagues better than Ghost of Mars... in theory. In theory, I'd love The Fog the best, because it's a beautiful-looking, strikingly photographed supernatural horror film. In theory, it's also rinky-dink and frivolous, while not in theory Ghosts of Mars is the most continuously stimulating and Escape from New York is the most impressive technically.


Ghosts of Mars is the worst film I've seen this year. Perhaps...

I don't know, I think it's very competent. It's just Carpenter sets his visual standards so freakin low for this one for some reason.

[MacGuffin]

What do the *'s mean?

[Bosco B Thug]

What do the *'s mean?
Ah, 2nd views. Decided to add them after my "God I'm wasting time" post, to scare myself.

[soitgoes...]

I've watched The Passion of Anna, and I'll type something up after I get home from work sometime later tonight.

[soitgoes...]

In the meantime, Ingmar Bergman had the best group of "stock" actors of any director. Discuss.

[origami_mustache]

I like this idea.

[B-side]

In the meantime, Ingmar Bergman had the best group of "stock" actors of any director. Discuss.

Pretty much, yeah.

[soitgoes...]

The Passion of Anna (Ingmar Bergman) - recommended to me by Brightside

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/23485990df4.png
Ah, Liv Ullmann. You show up in any movie, and chances are your presence is enough to make my viewing experience a positive one.


Ingmar Bergman gives us another desolate film based on his longtime home island Fârö. He started making films there with his Through the Glass Darkly, and came back 4 times. It makes sense why he filmed there. The look of the films not only are bleak, barren, but that landscape mirrors perfectly all the characters in those films. Theirs is a silent despair.

In The Passion of Anna, Bergman gives us another film in the same vein as his two previous, Shame and Hour of the Wolf. As with both of those, I think this film's biggest problem is Ingmar Bergman himself. He has things going on that he never follows up on. And those interviews! What was he thinking? Taking the viewer out of the film, breaking the desolation he has strived to build, not once, but four times! I read that he wishes he hadn't done that, and I have to heartily agree.

About two thirds of the way through the film really does come together. Anna (Ullmann) reflects on her past, and the film is able to tap into that emotion and carry it through to the amazing end. One of the last lines of the film is truly one of the most devastating lines I've heard. The sequence that takes place after is perfect. For that alone I recommend this film to everyone, but probably after you've delved into Bergman's filmography a bit.

7.5/10

[B-side]

I wasn't exactly in love with the interviews, but I didn't dislike them. A rewatch could have me leaning toward your opinion. Still, the rest of it is so good, such an issue isn't particularly prominent.

[B-side]

I'm acquiring Juliet of the Spirits right now. I'm excited. I'll see it at the soonest tonight, if not, tomorrow.

[soitgoes...]

I wasn't exactly in love with the interviews, but I didn't dislike them. A rewatch could have me leaning toward your opinion. Still, the rest of it is so good, such an issue isn't particularly prominent.
I would've loved to hear their opinions on their characters, say over end credits or something. Breaking the flow of the film doesn't make sense, Bergman has even come to say this about this film. When I read that Erland Josephson's interview response was written for him by Bergman I chuckled. What was the point? (Rhetorical question)

I do agree that overall the film is good. Better than his other films of that time period.

[B-side]

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/8529/bscap0000qa8.jpg

Rumor has it Juliet of the Spirits was both a product of an LSD-induced haze and Fellini's "tribute" to his wife. Both are distinctly probable. The film follows Giulietta through a bizarre sequence of events teasing and positing queries and scenarios regarding femininity, marriage and what it takes to be truly happy. Juliet of the Spirits is, without a doubt, among the 5 most visually stunning films I've ever seen. The saturated technicolor is breathtaking. Everything is so beautifully contrasted. Fellini's camera floats through dreamscapes, examines Masina's big, gorgeous and expressive eyes and probes the subconscious. Fellini was clearly having fun exploring his dreamy visions, and he occasionally hits on some potent and important points with his delirious surrealism.

Giorgio feels like Fellini's skinnier, more refined double. Word is Fellini was unfaithful himself, and this film could be his lament for his actions. I can see him experiencing a lot of guilt and using this film as a form of purging. Fellini attempts to rationalize and explore the psychological ramifications of his actions and how they manifested themselves in Giulietta's mind. His experiences at the circus and with psychics clearly finding their way into his vision as the whole film feels like a circus of exaggerated characters. They oppress, idolize and react to Giulietta in various ways. As probing as Fellini is, the film's best moments are fleeting. The scope and visual bombardment too often overwhelm some of the thematic communication. It's a flawed film, and probably 10-15 mins too long, but it is quite the visual achievement. Overall, it's a ride well worth taking.

[dreamdead]

I would've loved to hear their opinions on their characters, say over end credits or something. Breaking the flow of the film doesn't make sense, Bergman has even come to say this about this film. When I read that Erland Josephson's interview response was written for him by Bergman I chuckled. What was the point? (Rhetorical question)


I didn't know that Bergman had scripted their responses. That does seem to rather negate any reason for their existence, if we're not really being offered verisimilitude in their responses. And, actually, that knocks down my appreciation for it somewhat, since I really only remember the interviews, the austere landscapes, and some of that ending you speak of (though can you summarize it again.... memory is fading on that one).

This is a fun project, and I look forward to many recommendations since I've seen so little here that will be discussed.

[soitgoes...]

I didn't know that Bergman had scripted their responses. That does seem to rather negate any reason for their existence, if we're not really being offered verisimilitude in their responses. And, actually, that knocks down my appreciation for it somewhat, since I really only remember the interviews, the austere landscapes, and some of that ending you speak of (though can you summarize it again.... memory is fading on that one).

This is a fun project, and I look forward to many recommendations since I've seen so little here that will be discussed.
To be fair only Josephson had his scripted, because he didn't know what he was supposed to say. Regarding the ending, Anna and Andreas get into a fight at his place. They get in a car Anna's driving. Andreas is berating her about how she killed her husband and child, almost driving her to do the same again. Flash to the bear hanging from rearview mirror, a symbol of his cruelty matched with the same image of the dog earlier in the film. They skid out. He lays into her more. She states in a way that only Liv Ullmann can, "I came to ask your forgiveness." Heartbreaking. She kicks him out of the car. He screams and paces on the barren landscape as the camera slowly zooms in to the point where everything gets pixilated. Perhaps symbolizing his frayed psyche? Slut (The End in Swedish).

[Qrazy]

Bell Canada fucked up my internet connection as they are wont to do so the earliest I'll be back up and running is tomorrow, latest Tuesday (at an internet cafe right now).

[B-side]

I've already acquired my next film. If Qrazy is gonna be a while, we could skip him and have him catch up when he comes up next round. Meaning, he could either watch the one he's scheduled to see next, or he could watch the one he was supposed to before, and whichever one gets put aside can wait until the end... or something.

[soitgoes...]

I've already acquired my next film. If Qrazy is gonna be a while, we could skip him and have him catch up when he comes up next round. Meaning, he could either watch the one he's scheduled to see next, or he could watch the one he was supposed to before, and whichever one gets put aside can wait until the end... or something.Yeah, but I won't be able to watch my film until tomorrow night at the earliest, though I'm afraid it will be actually even later than that. I'll need to wait till my girlfriend goes to work or goes out with friends to have a chance to watch it. Sadly she's not keen on long Russian films. I have no problem giving him time. He has the film, and chances are he has watched it. He just needs internet access to post his thoughts on it.

[B-side]

Yeah, but I won't be able to watch my film until tomorrow night at the earliest, though I'm afraid it will be actually even later than that. I'll need to wait till my girlfriend goes to work or goes out with friends to have a chance to watch it. Sadly she's not keen on long Russian films. I have no problem giving him time. He has the film, and chances are he has watched it. He just needs internet access to post his thoughts on it.

Eh, yeah. I just get a bit impatient is all. Damn my ADD generation.:P

[soitgoes...]

Eh, yeah. I just get a bit impatient is all. Damn my ADD generation.:PNo worries. Life pops up and does its thing. All three of us seem to watch films at a fairly high rate, so I'm not too concerned about this lagging often.

[B-side]

No worries. Life pops up and does its thing. All three of us seem to watch films at a fairly high rate, so I'm not too concerned about this lagging often.

Yeah, I get it. I guess because I don't really have anything going it's easier for me to notice when it does lag, even a bit, y'know? I'm just looking forward to how you guys react to these films.:)

[soitgoes...]

Yeah, I get it. I guess because I don't really have anything going it's easier for me to notice when it does lag, even a bit, y'know? I'm just looking forward to how you guys react to these films.:)Oh, no doubt. :)

[Pathétique]

In the meantime, Ingmar Bergman had the best group of "stock" actors of any director. Discuss.
Cassavetes's group would give them a run for their money, I think.

[soitgoes...]

Cassavetes's group would give them a run for their money, I think.I can't really argue this as I (still) haven't seen a Cassavetes film. Unless Rowlands trumps Ullmann as the best actress ever, which some might say is possible, I have a hard time buying it. Ullmann, Harriet and Bibi Andersson, von Sydow, Thulin, Björnstrand, and Josephson all have taken turns being the highlight of individual Bergman films. Not to mention his "lesser" cast members that show up multiple times over the years to round out his films.

[Qrazy]

Dragon Gate Inn

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b28/ZenKoan/b350815a.png

I was a little bit worried after the first ten minutes of my first King Hu film. King info. dumps a plethora of characters and plot threads on the audience in a very short period of time. It's comprehensible but it makes for awkward pacing and it's too much info. too digest at once. Thankfully once the major characters begin to reach Dragon Inn the film settles down. The film's greatest strength is the balance it strikes between humor and earnestness. Playful banter between enemies in the midst of attempted poisonings remains light and hilarious while later altercations where the outcome is less assured take on a more somber note. Unfortunately this tonal contrast is not entirely successful. A half baked semi-love story between two of the leads is never fully developed and tapers off inconsequentially. But this is a fairly standard problem for martial arts movies of this sort so I do not hold it too heavily against the film.

The film shines in it's use of space, color and composition. Aside from a few mediocre minor skirmishes the fight choreography is precise, memorable and dynamic. The geography of Dragon Inn is well established which helps to clarify action and location. My only other major criticism is the end of the film. Just as the opening info. dumped too much information the end does not provide enough. Once the final enemy is dispatched the film just ends, aside from one brief final shot no time is provided to tie together the story of the surviving members of the Yu family. The general narrative is essentially treated as inconsequential. The story is window dressing for the humor, suspense and action. So while these three elements are fully delivered it's a bit disappointing that the story and plot points aren't given a bit more importance.

Rating: B

[soitgoes...]

I loved how Hu was able to slowly build the tension up during the first half of the film, and then release it. Again, not all at once, but over the duration of the remaining film. I did enjoy it more than you, but I do think the problems I had were the same as for you. They just didn't bother me too much. Glad you enjoyed it anyways. Also glad to see you watched Humanity and Paper Balloons. Great film.

[soitgoes...]

I tried to watch my film last night, but I forgot to burn the subtitles. Sadly my knowledge of Russian consists of about 3 words. I didn't think that would be enough to make it through the 2 and a half hours. ;) So I watched Bergman's High Tension instead. Good news everyone. He can make a bad film. I should've gone to bed.

I'll try again tonight.

[Qrazy]

I loved how Hu was able to slowly build the tension up during the first half of the film, and then release it. Again, not all at once, but over the duration of the remaining film. I did enjoy it more than you, but I do think the problems I had were the same as for you. They just didn't bother me too much. Glad you enjoyed it anyways. Also glad to see you watched Humanity and Paper Balloons. Great film.

Yeah aside from the two bookends that I had problems with the pacing was excellent. I also had quite large and similar narrative problems with Touch of Zen but I'll get into them at a later date.

I also just think I prefer the Japanese to the Chinese aesthetic. Hu can create some excellent compositions and he's good with lighting but he still employs many of the zooms and inserts (separate shots of characters leaping around) that I dislike about Chinese genre cinema. Thankfully he employs much fewer than most (Five Deadly Venoms for instance).

I watched Three-Outlaw Samurai last night. Gosha covers so much narrative ground in such a short time period (hour and a half). Sometimes it works well to keep things moving quickly, other times it does not work as well... the love stories again. I also appreciated how much blood he used in his fight scenes.

[Qrazy]

Also I still don't have the internet at home so it's still difficult to get new films... should be any day now though.

[soitgoes...]

Yeah aside from the two bookends that I had problems with the pacing was excellent. I also had quite large and similar narrative problems with Touch of Zen but I'll get into them at a later date.

I also just think I prefer the Japanese to the Chinese aesthetic. Hu can create some excellent compositions and he's good with lighting but he still employs many of the zooms and inserts (separate shots of characters leaping around) that I dislike about Chinese genre cinema. Thankfully he employs much fewer than most (Five Deadly Venoms for instance).

I watched Three-Outlaw Samurai last night. Gosha covers so much narrative ground in such a short time period (hour and a half). Sometimes it works well to keep things moving quickly, other times it does not work as well... the love stories again. I also appreciated how much blood he used in his fight scenes.
I definitely prefer the Japanese to the Chinese aesthetic. Generally the Chinese swordplay films look and feel as if they are made on sets, many times they can be garish. The Japanese employ more realism.

Have you seen Goyokin yet?

[Qrazy]

I definitely prefer the Japanese to the Chinese aesthetic. Generally the Chinese swordplay films look and feel as if they are made on sets, many times they can be garish. The Japanese employ more realism.

Have you seen Goyokin yet?

Nope...

I've seen:

Three-Outlaw Samurai
Sword of the Beast
Samurai Wolf I

And I've been watching Hitokiri in 2 minute installments for about 3 months now.

[soitgoes...]

I'm about an hour into Khrustalyov, My Car!, and I'm pretty certain I have no clue what is happening.

[B-side]

I'm about an hour into Khrustalyov, My Car!, and I'm pretty certain I have no clue what is happening.

Heh. Sounds like my type of film.:P

[soitgoes...]

Khrustalyov, My Car! (German) - Recommended to me by Qrazy

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/bscap00179vy.jpg

Oh man. I'm not exactly sure what it is that I watched. Absurdity. Khrustalyov, My Car! has the absolute thinnest of plots, but that isn't what why it exists. It exists as an expression of the times it portrays. A time when the characters that live in the film aren't sure what the hell is going on themselves. I can't say that this on its own would make anything close to an enjoyable viewing experience for me. Where this film does succeed, and in a way succeed is to tame a word, is the look and sound of the film devoid of the goings-on of the "story." The entire crew on this film, starting with German, does a stunning job. Set in 1953 Soviet Union, we are presented a cold, frigid world. A cold you can almost feel. Filmed in stunning black and white, German's mise-en-scene is nothing short of extraordinary. He fills the frame with so much, so many characters, that at first it is overwhelming, almost claustrophobic. You long to get back out into the open wintery landscape. People yelling, laughing, hitting each other rather randomly, sexual abuse, horns, whistles, black ominous cars, snow, snow, snow.

I have no idea how to slap a rating on a film like this. Did I find it engaging? At times, yes. Did I find it beautiful? Most definitely. But over all it was frustrating, and I suppose that is one of the reactions German intended the viewer to feel. German doesn't want to necessarily relate a story to you, he wants to relate a feeling. A feeling of what it was like to live in a time where little made sense. It's funny, writing about the film now, it makes more sense than when I was watching it. I suppose a 7.0 right now is a good place to start, but I have a feeling that rating is very fluid.

[Qrazy]

Nice, I liked it more but I agree with your general thoughts. I really want to rewatch it to see if certain scenes and characters intermesh more than I originally perceived... there's just way too much information to digest at once. Are you starting to get excited for The Arkanar Massacre? :) You should also give German's Checkpoint (The Road Test) a look when you get the chance. German followed a Fellini-esque progression in terms of his filmography ('realistic' works gave way to the more imaginative... although not necessarily better in either case). Twenty Days Without War is also good but Checkpoint is better.

[soitgoes...]

I am, but I have to admit this film was exhausting. I think I'm more geared towards realistic German first.

Do you have your internet back up?

[Qrazy]

I am, but I have to admit this film was exhausting. I think I'm more geared towards realistic German first.

Do you have your internet back up?

Nope, found a place in the house where I can leach some from the neighbor's connection, but it's a very slow connect unfortunately (won't be able to procure more films). I already have A Real Young Girl so I'll shoot for that next.

[Qrazy]

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/8529/bscap0000qa8.jpg

Rumor has it Juliet of the Spirits was both a product of an LSD-induced haze and Fellini's "tribute" to his wife. Both are distinctly probable. The film follows Giulietta through a bizarre sequence of events teasing and positing queries and scenarios regarding femininity, marriage and what it takes to be truly happy. Juliet of the Spirits is, without a doubt, among the 5 most visually stunning films I've ever seen. The saturated technicolor is breathtaking. Everything is so beautifully contrasted. Fellini's camera floats through dreamscapes, examines Masina's big, gorgeous and expressive eyes and probes the subconscious. Fellini was clearly having fun exploring his dreamy visions, and he occasionally hits on some potent and important points with his delirious surrealism.

Giorgio feels like Fellini's skinnier, more refined double. Word is Fellini was unfaithful himself, and this film could be his lament for his actions. I can see him experiencing a lot of guilt and using this film as a form of purging. Fellini attempts to rationalize and explore the psychological ramifications of his actions and how they manifested themselves in Giulietta's mind. His experiences at the circus and with psychics clearly finding their way into his vision as the whole film feels like a circus of exaggerated characters. They oppress, idolize and react to Giulietta in various ways. As probing as Fellini is, the film's best moments are fleeting. The scope and visual bombardment too often overwhelm some of the thematic communication. It's a flawed film, and probably 10-15 mins too long, but it is quite the visual achievement. Overall, it's a ride well worth taking.

Glad you liked it, I don't think the film is too long myself but I do have some gripes with it. Not really major criticisms but just moments here and there that I felt could have been played slightly more efficiently. It's probably my 6th or 7th favorite Fellini but I'm quite a fan.

[soitgoes...]

Nope, found a place in the house where I can leach some from the neighbor's connection, but it's a very slow connect unfortunately (won't be able to procure more films). I already have A Real Young Girl so I'll shoot for that next.
Sure. Go with whatever you have.

[B-side]

I have Floating Clouds. I'll have it seen in the next day or so.

[B-side]

Sorry it's taking me this long to watch the film. I'll most likely see it tonight.

[B-side]

My next film will likely be My Friend Ivan Lapshin. Is this a problem?

[soitgoes...]

My next film will likely be My Friend Ivan Lapshin. Is this a problem?No, but I'm not sure why you wanted me to come up with some order to this thing if we're all just gonna watch whatever film in whatever order. In the end it doesn't matter, but it is kind of annoying.

[B-side]

No, but I'm not sure why you wanted me to come up with some order to this thing if we're all just gonna watch whatever film in whatever order. In the end it doesn't matter, but it is kind of annoying.

I actually didn't intend for you to come up with an order for us to watch them, but I apologize if I did and don't remember. I have both Floating Clouds and Ivan Lapshin, so I could watch either, really. Truthfully, I have a bad feeling about the former. Have a strange feeling I won't really care for it. Eh, if nothing else, my tempered expectations should help my enjoyment of it.

[soitgoes...]

I actually didn't intend for you to come up with an order for us to watch them, but I apologize if I did and don't remember. I have both Floating Clouds and Ivan Lapshin, so I could watch either, really. Truthfully, I have a bad feeling about the former. Have a strange feeling I won't really care for it. Eh, if nothing else, my tempered expectations should help my enjoyment of it.
As I said, it doesn't matter. Everything will hopefully get watched.

[B-side]

As I said, it doesn't matter. Everything will hopefully get watched.

Well, you're making me feel bad, sir.:confused:

[soitgoes...]

Well, you're making me feel bad, sir.:confused:Don't. No worries. I promise.

[Qrazy]

Watch Floating Clouds B. Do what I do, you can flip films from an individual recommender (when availability is an issue) but don't skip the recommender in the ordering.

[B-side]

Floating Clouds (Naruse, 1955) [recommended by soitgoes...]

http://www.slantmagazine.com/images/film/floatingclouds.jpg

Floating Clouds strikes me as something most will rather like. I don't really have much to say about the content. It's a fairly standard post-war melodrama. It's didactic and not entirely interesting, but it works. I can't think of anything particularly excellent about it, nor can I think of anything particularly bad. It's perfectly adequate.

[MacGuffin]

Floating Clouds (Naruse, 1955) [recommended by soitgoes...]

http://www.slantmagazine.com/images/film/floatingclouds.jpg

Floating Clouds strikes me as something most will rather like. I don't really have much to say about the content. It's a fairly standard post-war melodrama. It's didactic and not entirely interesting, but it works. I can't think of anything particularly excellent about it, nor can I think of anything particularly bad. It's perfectly adequate.

I can't think of anything I can add, not only because I haven't seen the movie, but because you've made it sound generally uninteresting, where I'm sure it's probably not based on When a Woman Ascends the Stairs.

[B-side]

I can't think of anything I can add, not only because I haven't seen the movie, but because you've made it sound generally uninteresting, where I'm sure it's probably not based on When a Woman Ascends the Stairs.

Yeah, I skipped the plot details. Slant gave it 4 stars (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/film_review.asp?ID=1894), though, if that makes you interested.

[Llopin]

Naruse is always considered to be the "lost" great japanese director of the golden era, although most of his films are precisely standard fare home dramas. Some of them work mostly well, others don't add anything. My favourite film by his is precisely Scattered Clouds, his very last effort. I'd also recommend Mother and The Sound of the Mountain (the latter is based on the Yasunari Kawabata novel) - postwar melodramas don't get any more precise.

[Derek]

There's nothing "standard" about Naruse's film outside of perhaps the plots. Floating Clouds is a masterpiece, but I'm with Llopin for a change in thinking Scattered Clouds is also one of his best.

Naruse/Takamine is one of the best director/actor-actress pairings around.

[Derek]

I can't think of anything I can add, not only because I haven't seen the movie, but because you've made it sound generally uninteresting, where I'm sure it's probably not based on When a Woman Ascends the Stairs.

This post confuses me.

[MacGuffin]

This post confuses me.

You must be easily confused, then. Brightside hardly said anything about the movie. He makes it sound uninteresting. I say it's probably not.

[soitgoes...]

Naruse is always considered to be the "lost" great japanese director of the golden era, although most of his films are precisely standard fare home dramas. Some of them work mostly well, others don't add anything. My favourite film by his is precisely Scattered Clouds, his very last effort. I'd also recommend Mother and The Sound of the Mountain (the latter is based on the Yasunari Kawabata novel) - postwar melodramas don't get any more precise.
I'm not exactly sure what to make of this post, most of it stemming from "standard fare home dramas." His films are basically all home dramas, but what makes them standard fare? His home dramas all have a voice and a feel, and that voice and feel are decidedly different from what anyone else in Japan was producing. The closest being Ozu, but still, anyone who has seen a half a dozen of both men's works can tell the differences. He was unique. He made films that looked at the woman's place in a male society during a time when said society was (in some ways still is) transitioning from traditional values to modern values. No one else really did this. Ozu looked at the traditional to modern shift, but his eye was on cross-generational differences. I'll also say that outside of maybe Mizoguchi, Naruse's films are about as bitter, pessimistic as you're likely to find.

I definitely hope you weren't referring to Floating Clouds being standard, run-of-the-mill Naruse. Personally, if Brightside was so unenthusiastic for this one, he probably has no other Naruse options available to him. This film is generally considered his masterpiece, and is very indicative of what it is that makes Naruse one of the greats. He's not going to find much different in any of his other films, except perhaps his 30's films where he incorporated some experimental editing and camera techniques. Kinema Jumpo (http://wildgrounds.com/index.php/2008/12/29/kinema-jumpos-top-100-japanese-movies-of-all-time/) named it the second greatest Japanese film ever. I personally don't think it his best, but it definitely is only a small step below those I think are.

[soitgoes...]

Oh, and Takamine is one of his biggest assets. One of the greatest actresses ever, and she isn't even Grace Kelly hawt.

[Derek]

You must be easily confused, then. Brightside hardly said anything about the movie. He makes it sound uninteresting. I say it's probably not.

But why would you or anyone think this:


"where I'm sure it's probably not based on When a Woman Ascends the Stairs."

[MacGuffin]

But why would you or anyone think this:

Because they're both directed by Mikio Naruse and generally considered to be among his best movies? If I like a, there's a good chance I like b?

[Derek]

Because they're both directed by Mikio Naruse and generally considered to be among his best movies? If I like a, there's a good chance I like b?

Ahhh, without the comma, I read it as "based on Woman..." as if you meant FC was based on (ie, modeled after) Woman. Makes sense now. :)

[soitgoes...]

Floating Clouds (Naruse, 1955) [recommended by soitgoes...]

http://www.slantmagazine.com/images/film/floatingclouds.jpg

Floating Clouds strikes me as something most will rather like. I don't really have much to say about the content. It's a fairly standard post-war melodrama. It's didactic and not entirely interesting, but it works. I can't think of anything particularly excellent about it, nor can I think of anything particularly bad. It's perfectly adequate.
Since this has started, I've been keeping closer tabs on what you've been watching and how you rate them. Now that I'm becoming more attuned to what you like or dislike, I fear for what I have in store for you. The Akerman I feel is your best bet, which would normally surprise me to say that to someone, because it is so very different.

[Qrazy]

A Real Young Girl (Breillat)
Recommended by Brightside

http://www.wetinred.com/generalcapslg3/charlottealexandra_arealyoungg irl001.jpg

I'll begin with what I enjoyed about the film. It initially presents a well rendered sense of those tedious, isolated summer months (school holidays) in the countryside. A young girl in the midst of puberty returns from boarding school for her summer holidays coming home with new found sexual frustration and desire. This budding sexuality, and her general selfishness and cruelty isolate Alice from her surroundings. For much of the film she wanders around lost in her own masturbatory fantasies either strolling by the beach or bare ass bicycling. In relation to the girl's isolation, Breillat demonstrates the severe lack of communication between the parents and their child. The family relies primarily on television (news and highly sexualized pop icons) as a means of filling the silent void between them. As they sit around idling the days away the father provides bumbling comic relief while the mother expresses her general weariness, helplessness and frustration with her life and her daughter. Their attitudes all hint at later plot developments which will further stress the egoistic nature of the vraie jeune fille.

Now for what I dislike about the film. Breillat clearly believes in Freud and shock cinema, neither of which I have any patience or interest in. While on the one hand I often admire taboo pushing art I think it is an approach which has to justify itself more than any other. If the artist is going to show full frontal nudity, explicit sex and animal cruelty I feel they ought to have a very good reason for doing so. The artist must have something significant to say about these things in order to avoid pornographic content. Breillat does have a reason for the explicit content, but I'm not convinced it is a very good reason. Alice has an obsession with the disgusting. She vomits on herself, feels comforted by the vomit and does not clean it off. She traces with her toe in another girl's urine and drops her panties on rotting dead dogs. She fantasizes about having sea gull feathers stuck up her ass and worms ripped apart and placed against her vagina. Etc.

Presumably this Alice (down the vaginal rabbit hole and up through the clitoral looking glass) is fascinated by the disgusting because she finds her own budding sexuality itself disgusting. Personally I find the uglification of sexuality an artistically tedious and tired goal. I"m not at all on board with the film's general thesis concerning sexuality, the disgusting and the feminine psyche. And if we're not extrapolating past this one girl's psyche I'm still not convinced that Breillat has communicate anything of complexity about this girl's specific psyche.

There also doesn't seem to be any clarity of vision when it comes to presentations of explicit sexuality. Sometimes we see the girl's vagina, other times characters hump each other or fool around and the sexuality is obscured by clothing. This sexual artificiality contrasts bizarrely with the explicit material. If Breillat's goal is honesty in the presentation of sexual acts (showing everything because it would be artificial to obscure it) than she has failed. If her goal is primarily to shock, disgust and titillate then she has succeeded and thus also failed. Another Breillat-ism that pisses me off is when her young female protagonists glance slyly at the camera. It's one of the most obnoxious ways I can think of to break the fourth wall.

Grade: C-

[B-side]

Since this has started, I've been keeping closer tabs on what you've been watching and how you rate them. Now that I'm becoming more attuned to what you like or dislike, I fear for what I have in store for you. The Akerman I feel is your best bet, which would normally surprise me to say that to someone, because it is so very different.

I don't know what to say, really. I mean, like I said in that best of the decade thread, I'm in a major funk right now. I'm excessively critical and not easily impressed. I feel like I need something huge to shake me out of it. I don't know what it says about me, but there seems to be a gap between the consensus and me regarding some of the alleged classics. Namely, the more "subtle" films that benefit from contextual knowledge and such. Renoir, Mizoguchi, Ozu, Melville and Naruse now. I don't dislike anything I've seen from these directors save for Good Morning. I just fail to see what makes them great. Admittedly, and embarrassingly, I seem to struggle a bit with picking up on stylistic intent. I find myself reading numerous articles and essays on directors I don't "get" just so I can find myself a filter that will help me better appreciate their work. The whole thing is rather depressing.

[Qrazy]

I don't dislike anything I've seen from these directors save for Good Morning.

Wanker.

[B-side]

Wanker.

Thanks for the help, buddy.:frustrated:

[Qrazy]

Since this has started, I've been keeping closer tabs on what you've been watching and how you rate them. Now that I'm becoming more attuned to what you like or dislike, I fear for what I have in store for you. The Akerman I feel is your best bet, which would normally surprise me to say that to someone, because it is so very different.

I'm fairly confident he will like Cyclo.

[soitgoes...]

I'm fairly confident he will like Cyclo.
I thought perhaps, but I'm not so certain.

[soitgoes...]

I just fail to see what makes them great. Admittedly, and embarrassingly, I seem to struggle a bit with picking up on stylistic intent. I find myself reading numerous articles and essays on directors I don't "get" just so I can find myself a filter that will help me better appreciate their work. The whole thing is rather depressing.
Perhaps audio commentaries? Obviously listening to a critic's opinions is just that, his opinions, but it does give you something akin to book annotations.

[B-side]

Perhaps audio commentaries? Obviously listening to a critic's opinions is just that, his opinions, but it does give you something akin to book annotations.

Well, I watch films largely on my computer now, so commentaries are a rarity.

[Qrazy]

I could see someone just not being into the cinema of Mizoguchi, Ozu and Naruse. Renoir I think is quite different. I'm mixed on him but his two major films are undeniable to me. Melville I really like as well. I think of him as the Leone of the crime genre.

[soitgoes...]

Well, I watch films largely on my computer now, so commentaries are a rarity.Most of KG's Criterion rips have the commentaries included as a second audio stream. Obviously there won't be commentaries for all films, but there are enough out there. Like I said in the message, just like what you like, don't feel as if you need to kid yourself into liking what you feel you should like. 4 of the filmmakers you listed have something in common. Japanese film isn't for everyone.

[B-side]

Most of KG's Criterion rips have the commentaries included as a second audio stream. Obviously there won't be commentaries for all films, but there are enough out there. Like I said in the message, just like what you like, don't feel as if you need to kid yourself into liking what you feel you should like. 4 of the filmmakers you listed have something in common. Japanese film isn't for everyone.

I just feel like I'm approaching them wrong or something.

[soitgoes...]

For what it's worth, I have L'ange ready to go for later tonight, tomorrow at the latest.

[B-side]

For what it's worth, I have L'ange ready to go for later tonight, tomorrow at the latest.

Cool. At the very least, it should be unlike anything you've seen before.:P

[Qrazy]

I guess I'll keep my write ups shorter since clearly no one GIVES A SHIT when I write more. :P

[B-side]

I guess I'll keep my write ups shorter since clearly no one GIVES A SHIT when I write more. :P

I read it. Not much I can say in response. It's not exactly an easy film to love. It's fearless and often disgusting, but that's part of why it's so great. It pulls no punches. It's uncomfortable to watch, but it all carries this sort of oneiric atmosphere.

[MacGuffin]

I read it. Not much I can say in response. It's not exactly an easy film to love. It's fearless and often disgusting, but that's part of why it's so great. It pulls no punches. It's uncomfortable to watch, but it all carries this sort of oneiric atmosphere.

So, umm, what is the point of this whole thing? You give short write-ups with little to no insight (no offense, I mean, you admitted it yourself). Qrazy gives a long detailed borderline essay (which I glanced through; I myself hate Breillat's movies for the most part and this seems to be no different) and nobody responds. I think this has potential to be a worthwhile thread and I appreciate the undertaking, but I'm a bit disappointed by the turnout so far. It seems to me watching movies in quantities rather than attempting to spark discussion.

[B-side]

So, umm, what is the point of this whole thing? You give short write-ups with little to no insight (no offense, I mean, you admitted it yourself). Qrazy gives a long detailed borderline essay (which I glanced through; I myself hate Breillat's movies for the most part and this seems to be no different) and nobody responds. I think this has potential to be a worthwhile thread and I appreciate the undertaking, but I'm a bit disappointed by the turnout so far. It seems to me watching movies in quantities rather than attempting to spark discussion.

My first write-up was rather detailed. I just didn't have much to say about Floating Clouds. What do you want from me? If I had something to say, I'd say it.

[MacGuffin]

My first write-up was rather detailed. I just didn't have much to say about Floating Clouds. What do you want from me? If I had something to say, I'd say it.

I'm just hoping for a little more discussion, I guess.

[B-side]

I'm just hoping for a little more discussion, I guess.

OK, well, not every film viewing is going to lend itself to endless discussion. I haven't seen most of the films I recommended in quite a while. It'd be a bit difficult to discuss details when you don't remember them, wouldn't it?

[MacGuffin]

OK, well, not every film viewing is going to lend itself to endless discussion. I haven't seen most of the films I recommended in quite a while. It'd be a bit difficult to discuss details when you don't remember them, wouldn't it?

If this thread isn't going to have discussion, then what's the point? Why would you pick movies for others that you weren't going to be able to discuss. Excuse me if I'm missing the idea, but I thought that was the whole point of a "film swap".

[Qrazy]

I read it. Not much I can say in response. It's not exactly an easy film to love. It's fearless and often disgusting, but that's part of why it's so great. It pulls no punches. It's uncomfortable to watch, but it all carries this sort of oneiric atmosphere.

OK so it's dreamlike but what is the supreme relevance of the disgusting imagery? Is it sufficiently important to merit it's inclusion? Could it not be suggested? Is it that important that we see worm entrails on vagina? Should the girl's psyche by analyzed from this angle at all? What does it ultimately tell us?

[soitgoes...]

OK so it's dreamlike but what is the supreme relevance of the disgusting imagery? Is it sufficiently important to merit it's inclusion? Could it not be suggested? Is it that important that we see worm entrails on vagina? Should the girl's psyche by analyzed from this angle at all? What does it ultimately tell us?
Well to answer one of your questions, I think the worm scene is simple symbolism. Worm representing penis obviously. A small penis compared to the full screen shot of her crotch (she even tears it to even smaller pieces), which I think is a twist on the big cock/tight vagina of what we'd come to expect.

[B-side]

If this thread isn't going to have discussion, then what's the point? Why would you pick movies for others that you weren't going to be able to discuss. Excuse me if I'm missing the idea, but I thought that was the whole point of a "film swap".

I'm sure I'm not alone in having picked films I haven't seen in a while. I never said it won't have discussion. I just said not every film will necessarily lend itself to a ton of discussion for one reason or another. The purpose was to expose others to films they may not have checked out otherwise, at least for a while anyway. If it doesn't live up to your expectations, feel free to leave.

[B-side]

OK so it's dreamlike but what is the supreme relevance of the disgusting imagery? Is it sufficiently important to merit it's inclusion? Could it not be suggested? Is it that important that we see worm entrails on vagina? Should the girl's psyche by analyzed from this angle at all? What does it ultimately tell us?

The relevance is likely Freudian in certain parts and simply a matter of exposing inner desire in others. It is important for a film that seeks to dive so deep into the female psyche. The depths of our innermost thoughts aren't terribly subtle and not always capable of being expressed via suggestive imagery, but rather needs to evoke a feeling. I don't think it needs to really tell anyone anything outside of simply visualizing a turbulent state of mind.

[MacGuffin]

I'm sure I'm not alone in having picked films I haven't seen in a while. I never said it won't have discussion. I just said not every film will necessarily lend itself to a ton of discussion for one reason or another. The purpose was to expose others to films they may not have checked out otherwise, at least for a while anyway. If it doesn't live up to your expectations, feel free to leave.

Well, seeing as this isn't Rotten Tomatoes where people threaten to leave, I don't think I'll go to any formal length to not look at this thread, but mostly because I'm curious as to what kind of reaction a few movies will get.

[B-side]

Well, seeing as this isn't Rotten Tomatoes where people threaten to leave, I don't think I'll go to any formal length to not look at this thread, but mostly because I'm curious as to what kind of reaction a few movies will get.

That's fine. I'm not trying to get you to not check it out. I just find it odd that you'd feel it appropriate to come in and critique me for not typing a detailed analysis of a film I quite clearly was somewhat indifferent to. Shouldn't be hard to sympathize with not having much to say about a film.

[Qrazy]

Well to answer one of your questions, I think the worm scene is simple symbolism. Worm representing penis obviously. A small penis compared to the full screen shot of her crotch (she even tears it to even smaller pieces), which I think is a twist on the big cock/tight vagina of what we'd come to expect.

While I appreciate the thoughts I did not mean what does the scene represent so much as why is the explicit nature of the shot necessary. But in response to your appraisal I just don't see the depth or greater meaning there. It's like the juxtaposition of the death of the chicken, it's entrails, feeding the entrails to the other chickens and the seagull feathers up the ass. Did we really need to see the chicken get it's throat slit? Was it necessary for what Breillat was trying to communicate? In Andrei Rublev and Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and Spring the animal deaths felt more resonant and significant to me. If we really need to witness a sexual fantasy about becoming a chicken (and I'm not convinced it's a great comparison) are seagull feathers up the ass really the best way to go about this? Personally I have my doubts.

[B-side]

Personally I have my doubts.

:lol:

You'd despise Anatomy of Hell.:P

[Qrazy]

The relevance is likely Freudian in certain parts and simply a matter of exposing inner desire in others. It is important for a film that seeks to dive so deep into the female psyche. The depths of our innermost thoughts aren't terribly subtle and not always capable of being expressed via suggestive imagery, but rather needs to evoke a feeling. I don't think it needs to really tell anyone anything outside of simply visualizing a turbulent state of mind.

It doesn't need to tell. It needs to communicate. I don't feel that it does really. So she's exposing this characters fascination with disgust and the disgusting... OK? It doesn't feel like an accurate examination of the female psyche to me... but I feel that way largely because I find Freud to be outdated nonsense (interesting primarily as formative theory in the history of psychology). As a psychology student it consistently pisses me off how stuck on Freud the arts seem to be.

[Qrazy]

:lol:

You'd despise Anatomy of Hell.:P

Lots of things shoved up asses?

[B-side]

Lots of things shoved up asses?

A rake in one scene. Other than that, it's all about breaking down the fantasy wall between the genders. It's just as, if not more, disgusting than A Real Young Girl.

[Qrazy]

The Last Mistress, Brief Crossing and Bluebeard seem interesting.

[MacGuffin]

The Last Mistress, Brief Crossing and Bluebeard seem interesting.

The Last Mistress is probably her best movie, even if that's not saying much. It's more technically interesting than all of her other movies, even if it still feels pretty shallow thematically.

[B-side]

The Last Mistress, Brief Crossing and Bluebeard seem interesting.

I've only seen Brief Crossing of those. You might like that. Nothing in the way of grossness. It's a dialogue film. I consider it lesser Breillat, but it's still decent.

[Rowland]

The Last Mistress is available for free on demand with my cable service at the moment, I'll try to watch it before they replace it with something else.

[Qrazy]

I'm jealous of your L'ange viewing. I might have to procure it myself, strikes me as something I'd like.

[soitgoes...]

I'm jealous of your L'ange viewing. I might have to procure it myself, strikes me as something I'd like.

Ha. L'ange is to me as Floating Clouds is to Brightside. Experimental film generally isn't my cup of tea, but there have definitely been exceptions. I will go forward with some trepidation, and hopefully will be pleasantly surprised.

There is a new copy that sprang up on KG just this past week.

[Qrazy]

Ha. L'ange is to me as Floating Clouds is to Brightside. Experimental film generally isn't my cup of tea, but there have definitely been exceptions. I will go forward with some trepidation, and hopefully will be pleasantly surprised.

There is a new copy that sprang up on KG just this past week.

For me it really depends on the work. Some of it I think is great, other stuff I find to be pretentious drivel. I have high hopes for L'ange though.

[Bosco B Thug]

I've only seen Brief Crossing of those. You might like that. Nothing in the way of grossness. It's a dialogue film. I consider it lesser Breillat, but it's still decent. Yeah, I recently gave my viewing of Brief Crossing a 7. Solid, but it seemed a bit conservative and repetitive. If Breillat revolved slowly around her female lead in alternately progressing/retrogressing concentricc circles just one more time during that night club scene, argh, I would have somewhat visibly rolled my eyes in semi-annoyance.

[B-side]

Yeah, I recently gave my viewing of Brief Crossing a 7. Solid, but it seemed a bit conservative and repetitive. If Breillat revolved slowly around her female lead in alternately progressing/retrogressing concentricc circles just one more time during that night club scene, argh, I would have somewhat visibly rolled my eyes in semi-annoyance.

:lol:

I definitely agree with it being repetitive. My biggest complaint.

[soitgoes...]

L'ange (Bokanowski) - Recommended to me by Brightside

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/vlcsnap-2009-07-14-17h50m51s81.png

So two films in a row that are basically plotless films using their onscreen imagery to invoke feelings, really guys? I guess I set up the order so I'm partly to blame. Unlike Khrustalyov, My Car! this film has no progression other than those of the images chosen for us by Bokanowski. He is a descendent of Man Ray, and other avant-garders of his ilk.

The repetition of patterns, coupled with some eerie music provided by his wife sometimes give off an ominous feel. A man plays sword fight with a doll hanging by a string for a good ten minutes. I should clarify that a bit: A man plays sword-fight with a hanging doll for about a minute, but Bokanowski cuts and chops the scene from varying angles, and rewinds and slows down the action so it lasts for about ten minutes. Then there's a old lady who sets a pitcher on a table. It falls. Again this lasts for a nice chunk of time. There are 5 or 6 of these scenes always interspersed with staircases bathed in an orange light.

Honestly, I have no idea what to make of this film. Is it supposed to be art? Isn't art supposed to waken something inside us, not bore us to tears? Bokanowski is obviously skilled at splicing together images to make pattern appear, but do I want to see an hours worth of these? No, I'm afraid not. This film was tedious. There are some interesting effects when seen in pieces (parts of the sword-fighting scene pictured above are edited together at such a frenetic pace you can't help but be drawn in), but as a whole it becomes bogged down in its repetition. As I said in a prior post, some films like this one just aren't my cup of tea. This all will probably sound incredibly appealing to some out there, but it's definitely not for everyone, including yours truly. 3.5/10

[soitgoes...]

Oh, and Brightside, you are about to watch one of the best films ever. Qrazy chose you a doozy. No pressure or nothing. ;)

Personally I don't see how you won't like it. It seems right up your alley.

[B-side]

Such a reaction doesn't surprise me at all. I got bored a bit here and there myself, but the sheer brilliance and tumultuousness of the imagery was a sight to behold. Bokanowski is a film-maker of images, moods and feelings. There is a narrative there, but it's scarce and hardly important. There is something lurking beneath the surface thematically, but I've only cursory notions. You may have been bored, but I doubt you'll forget it.:P

[B-side]

Oh, and Brightside, you are about to watch one of the best films ever. Qrazy chose you a doozy. No pressure or nothing. ;)

Personally I don't see how you won't like it. It seems right up your alley.

I've got it waiting. Anxious to check it out.

[soitgoes...]

Such a reaction doesn't surprise me at all. I got bored a bit here and there myself, but the sheer brilliance and tumultuousness of the imagery was a sight to behold. Bokanowski is a film-maker of images, moods and feelings. There is a narrative there, but it's scarce and hardly important. There is something lurking beneath the surface thematically, but I've only cursory notions. You may have been bored, but I doubt you'll forget it.:PI won't forget it anytime soon, that's for sure. Repetition has a way of making things stick in the brain. I think this film would work better for me, and conversely worse for others, if it were half its length. I'd actually consider giving one of his shorts a go, which means there is enough there in L'ange to get me to forgive him.

[soitgoes...]

There is something lurking beneath the surface...
I know you meant this in a different context, but you definitely get a creepy vibe right at the beginning. There is a figure that briefly flashes as a silhouette during the opening stairway segment. Brief glimpses lit up in a bright orange.

[B-side]

I won't forget it anytime soon, that's for sure. Repetition has a way of making things stick in the brain. I think this film would work better for me, and conversely worse for others, if it were half its length. I'd actually consider giving one of his shorts a go, which means there is enough there in L'ange to get me to forgive him.

Heh. Well, in terms of his shorts I'd recommend The Woman Who Powders Herself and Le déjeuner du matin. They're both under 20 mins.

[B-side]

http://oihayaku.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mind-game.gif

What follows is a failed attempt to describe in words the details of, and my reaction to, Mind Game:

I guess you can add me to the catalog of fans on this one. Mind Game is above and beyond the absurdity of typical anime convention. For something so completely abstract, it's remarkable that Yuasa was able to craft palpable personalities for his characters. This is likely also due in part to Robin Nishi's source material, though I hadn't even heard of it until now. I was expecting something crazy, but this was the best kind of insane. Book-ended by what appear to be unrelated fragments of memory, Mind Game is a life-affirming exercise is imagination gone wild. I feel confident in saying it's the strangest film I've ever seen, and for me, that's saying a lot.

This film is hilarious. From the highly exaggerated facial expressions, to the jarring focus on finding something sexual in so many scenes, it's all so deliciously imaginative. Contrasting those bits of humor are almost equally poignant moments of self-discovery, love and heartache. Sure, the "moral of the story" is ridiculously elementary, but not an ounce of it feels disingenuous. It's from the heart. In the end, I can see myself watching this movie over and over. It's just so damn enjoyable.

[B-side]

2 nights with no Qrazy or soitgoes? I is sad panda.

[Qrazy]

I don't have the internet so it will be a few days before I can get another film let alone watch it. In theory I should have it by Monday but at this point with these fuckers (ISPs), it's anybody's guess.

[B-side]

I don't have the internet so it will be a few days before I can get another film let alone watch it. In theory I should have it by Monday but at this point with these fuckers (ISPs), it's anybody's guess.

Damn. That sucks.

[soitgoes...]

The internet gods have shit upon me the last few days, well, actually it was Comcast. All is well again.

[Qrazy]

I have the internet now as well as some of the films I'm supposed to watch. Enamorada downloaded first and I've already started it so that will be next up.

[B-side]

I have the internet now as well as some of the films I'm supposed to watch. Enamorada downloaded first and I've already started it so that will be next up.

Cool. Have you seen anything by Jakubisko? I just watched my first short from him. Pretty damn great. I've got a full-length of his ready. If I'm judging from the short alone, I have a feeling he'll become a favorite. I think you'd love the short I saw. Grab it off KG and let me know what you think. It's only 13 mins.

[Qrazy]

Cool. Have you seen anything by Jakubisko? I just watched my first short from him. Pretty damn great. I've got a full-length of his ready. If I'm judging from the short alone, I have a feeling he'll become a favorite. I think you'd love the short I saw. Grab it off KG and let me know what you think. It's only 13 mins.

Sounds good, will do... although clearly this is just you trying to pimp your ratio. :P Hehe, jk.

[B-side]

Sounds good, will do... although clearly this is just you trying to pimp your ratio. :P Hehe, jk.

Honestly, I hadn't even thought of that, but now that you mention it... ;)

[origami_mustache]

L'ange

plotless films using their onscreen imagery to invoke feelings

sounds amazing.

[soitgoes...]

sounds amazing.

To some, apparently.

[Qrazy]

Holy fuck Maria Felix is awful.

[soitgoes...]

Holy fuck Maria Felix is awful.I didn't mind her at all, but she and Armendáriz are hardly the main reason for me liking it. The direction and especially Figueroa's camerawork are the stars. Fernández's Ave Maria is absolutely beautiful.

[Qrazy]

I didn't mind her at all, but she and Armendáriz are hardly the main reason for me liking it. The direction and especially Figueroa's camerawork are the stars. Fernández's Ave Maria is absolutely beautiful.

I"m not finished yet but I do not share your reaction. :)

[B-side]

I already have My Friend Ivan Lapshin, so I'll watch that as my next film.

[Qrazy]

Enamorada (Fernandez)

http://cinemexicano.mty.itesm.mx/imagenes/enamorada4.jpg

Some SPOILERS

Sorry, SiG but I wasn't a fan of this one. First off as I mentioned above, I found Felix to be truly awful. Her wide eyed glares and faux-intensity brought on the rage. Then there's the fact that this is a love at first sight yarn, and in general I am not a fan of those types of narratives (with some exceptions). To me this isn't love, it's infatuation and I don't care that much whether or not the characters will be able to get together.

Another element that bothered me about the film was it's tonal irregularity. A character inadvertently blows up a man's fireworks shop and there are no consequences. It's played off as a courting gag. Then we're back in high melodrama mode discussing the ideals of the revolution, the pitfalls of love, and etc. In terms of the acting it wasn't only Felix that bothered me. The entire experience is steeped in melodramatic excess and while that works with the aesthetic expressivity of Sirk or Fassbinder, it doesn't work for me here. Perhaps you watched a better print than I (this actually seems quite likely from stills I've seen on google) but I was not remotely taken with the cinematography.

Still, it's not a terrible film. It's competently made and there are a few stand out scenes... Ave Maria, the old man in the bar... tangentially I found it funny that at the end of the film there's this seemingly proud image of the general on the horse and the girl walking beside him. Come on guy, if you're that in love get the fuck off the horse and let the girl ride for a bit.

C-

[soitgoes...]

Well I obviously disagree on a number of points, namely the ones I already addressed, but I do have to ask is the love-at first-sight thing always bothersome to you or just in this film? It seems to run rampant through cinema (especially old-timey cinema) in general. I've always overlooked it as some sort of cinema cheat ("we only have 90 minutes to relate a story so to rush things along..."). I just watched Murnau's City Girl, and it is seen there too. The couple actually get married and run off together after only spending maybe a total of a half an hour together!

As for Figueroa's cinematography not being striking, I can only muster this :crazy:. We saw the same print if you got it off KG. I'm tempted to re-download it just to freshen my memory of it. Oh well, I'm positive you'll like the next one I've got lined up for you.

Seriously though guys, I'm throwing you the underseen national nuggets of Japanese and Mexican cinema here.

[Qrazy]

Well I obviously disagree on a number of points, namely the ones I already addressed, but I do have to ask is the love-at first-sight thing always bothersome to you or just in this film? It seems to run rampant through cinema (especially old-timey cinema) in general. I've always overlooked it as some sort of cinema cheat ("we only have 90 minutes to relate a story so to rush things along..."). I just watched Murnau's City Girl, and it is seen there too. The couple actually get married and run off together after only spending maybe a total of a half an hour together!

As for Figueroa's cinematography not being striking, I can only muster this :crazy:. We saw the same print if you got it off KG. I'm tempted to re-download it just to freshen my memory of it. Oh well, I'm positive you'll like the next one I've got lined up for you.

Seriously though guys, I'm throwing you the underseen national nuggets of Japanese and Mexican cinema here.

Yeah well I'll check out Floating Clouds at some point and I'm guessing I'll be a fan. Love at First Sight is bothersome to me when the film rests much of it's weight against it. It's not bothersome to me in say Punch Drunk Love (because the film explores character psychology, the nature of the characters love and has an interesting aesthetic) nor is it bothersome to me in Screwball comedies or film noirs, etc.

As to the next one you have lined up for me I think you're right that I'm going to like it. :)

[soitgoes...]

I'll try and get my film watched in the next day or so. I'm going to give it a preemptive 8.5/10.

[Qrazy]

Moar.

[B-side]

Moar.

http://healthhabits.files.wordpress.c om/2008/08/julianne-moore-picture-2.jpg

[B-side]

So...

[Qrazy]

*cough*

[soitgoes...]

I have watched my film. I'll post a response tomorrow. Sorry, I was up in Portland for a few days for my birthday, and haven't had access to the internets.

[B-side]

I have watched my film. I'll post a response tomorrow. Sorry, I was up in Portland for a few days for my birthday, and haven't had access to the internets.

Happy birthday.:)

My birthday's on the 9th, actually.

[Qrazy]

I have watched my film. I'll post a response tomorrow. Sorry, I was up in Portland for a few days for my birthday, and haven't had access to the internets.

No sweat, Happy Belated!

[soitgoes...]

My Friends - Mario Monicelli (Recommended to me by Qrazy)

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/mariomonicelliamicimiei1975yh7 .jpg

I love his poster for some reason.

My Friends is a film I should love. Written with the intention of directing it himself by Pietro Germi, Mario Monicelli stepped in when Germi died. The two directors were pretty much the pinnacle of Italian comedy through the late-50s up to the 70s. I'm pretty sure this film falls victim to what mars a number of foreign comedies for me, the "lost in translation" syndrome (not alluding to the Coppola film). Either the subtitles don't accurately translate the humor being said, or more likely, subtitles can't translate the nuances of another language well enough to get the humor across. Let it be said there are a number of times I chuckled, but that didn't happen nearly enough for my liking.

The direction is tight, and the actors playing the "friends" were great. A group of older guys who laugh in the face of life, because after all if you can't find humor in what life throws at you, what's the point? The scenario is great, which makes it all the more disappointing to me. Monicelli's own The Great War is in the same boat.

I appreciate the recommendation, as it is something I would have sought out eventually for myself. I'll continue to seek out the works of Germi and Monicelli, as they obviously have lots to offer. My review is more negative, which is a reflection more on my disappointment with it not meeting my expectations than with the films actual merits. 7/10

[soitgoes...]

Happy birthday.:)

My birthday's on the 9th, actually.


No sweat, Happy Belated!
Thanks guys.

Happy early birthday to you Brightside. I know so many people who are having birthdays over the next couple weeks. It's always a crazy time for me and my group of friends.

[Qrazy]

My Friends - Mario Monicelli (Recommended to me by Qrazy)

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/mariomonicelliamicimiei1975yh7 .jpg

I love his poster for some reason.

My Friends is a film I should love. Written with the intention of directing it himself by Pietro Germi, Mario Monicelli stepped in when Germi died. The two directors were pretty much the pinnacle of Italian comedy through the late-50s up to the 70s. I'm pretty sure this film falls victim to what mars a number of foreign comedies for me, the "lost in translation" syndrome (not alluding to the Coppola film). Either the subtitles don't accurately translate the humor being said, or more likely, subtitles can't translate the nuances of another language well enough to get the humor across. Let it be said there are a number of times I chuckled, but that didn't happen nearly enough for my liking.

The direction is tight, and the actors playing the "friends" were great. A group of older guys who laugh in the face of life, because after all if you can't find humor in what life throws at you, what's the point? The scenario is great, which makes it all the more disappointing to me. Monicelli's own The Great War is in the same boat.

I appreciate the recommendation, as it is something I would have sought out eventually for myself. I'll continue to seek out the works of Germi and Monicelli, as they obviously have lots to offer. My review is more negative, which is a reflection more on my disappointment with it not meeting my expectations than with the films actual merits. 7/10

Aw shucks, well at least you sorta liked it. What I liked about it is that it superbly intertwines it's humor and pathos. I didn't ever feel like any of the emotion was forced or manipulative. The friendships occur very naturally as do the personal problems of each friend. When Perozzi is ranting to the priest about the supercazzola at the end it's both heartbreaking and hilarious as is the scene just after when the pensioneer returns from abroad. And nothing beats slapping people on a passing train in the face.

[soitgoes...]

Aw shucks, well at least you sorta liked it. What I liked about it is that it superbly intertwines it's humor and pathos. I didn't ever feel like any of the emotion was forced or manipulative. The friendships occur very naturally as do the personal problems of each friend. When Perozzi is ranting to the priest about the supercazzola at the end it's both heartbreaking and hilarious as is the scene just after when the pensioneer returns from abroad. And nothing beats slapping people on a passing train in the face.
I liked it, just not as much as expected.

I agree to an extent. The friends, and how they respond to life are great. There just isn't enough humor there for me, or rather not enough of the humor translated to me, so many times the film felt flat.

[B-side]

Happy early birthday to you Brightside.

:)

[B-side]

I suppose I'm up next. I'll have My Friend Ivan Lapshin watched in the next day or so.

[Qrazy]

Impatience is not a virtue, which I have.

[B-side]

My Friend Ivan Lapshin (German, 1984) [Recommended by Qrazy]

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e299/jack_ert1/lapshin/vlcsnap-757629.png

My Friend Ivan Lapshin is a sort of documentation of fragmented bits of memory following a man named Ivan Lapshin. It's occasionally narrated by the man holding these memories largely only tangentially related to him. It's kind of odd considering he didn't even see most of the events we see. There didn't seem to be any sort of exaggeration occurring, so I got the feeling it was a realistic depiction, albeit one told in fragments. I might be losing it, but I still can't form any sort of narrative in my head, only bits and pieces of mentioning a stage play that bombed, a hooker that was needed for the play, Ivan pursuing a gang and mini-sequences showing the town folk going about their business.

I suppose the best compliment I can give this movie is that it was incredibly tangible. This is likely due to the utilization of hand-held camera work and a focus on life simply as it was, rather than how cinema normally handles it. There's little in the way of true drama or action, but the action that does exist is pretty intense. Highlighting a good portion of the film is some great black and white photography. The switches to color are less impressive, and I can't for the life of me conjure up a reason why they exist, though I know there certainly is supposed to be a contrast present. The acting was good on all fronts, which was nice. All in all, I liked it. I did. It's a successful transportation to a different time and place.

[Qrazy]

Well I'm glad you liked it, but in my opinion it's one of the greatest Russian films ever made. Here's an interesting article about the overall approach and level of detail in the film.

"'This is my declaration of love for the people I grew up with as a child’, says a voice at the beginning of Aleksei German’s Moi drug Ivan Lapshin (My Friend Ivan Lapshin). There is a pause as the narrator struggles for the right words to express his feelings for the Soviet Union of the thirties; when they come—ob”iasnenie v liubvi—it is with a strained emphasis on ‘love’. The film, released in 1984, is set in 1935 in the fictional provincial town of Unchansk, where a young boy and his father share a communal flat with criminal police investigator Ivan Lapshin and half a dozen others. It weaves together elements from the director’s father Iurii German’s detective stories and novellas of the same period: a troupe of actors arrive to play at the town’s theatre; Lapshin tracks down a gang of criminals trading in human meat; a friend of Lapshin’s, Khanin, becomes unhinged after his wife dies of typhus; the spirited actress Adashova falls in love with Khanin, and Lapshin with Adashova. The authorities are largely absent: it is a film about people ‘building socialism’ on a bleak frozen plain, their town’s one street a long straggle of low wooden buildings beneath a huge white sky, leading from the elegant stucco square by the river’s quayside out into wilderness. There is a single tram, a military band, a plywood ‘victory arch’ of which they are all proud—‘My father’, the narrator recounts, ‘would never take a short cut across the town’: he always went the long way round, under the victory arch.

The film holds hope and suffering in the balance. Adashova proudly boasts about what the 1942 production quotas for champagne will be; Lapshin declares, ‘We shall clean up the earth and plant a garden, and we ourselves will live to walk in it’—just as the hacked-up corpses hidden by the meat-traders are loaded onto a truck. The film is full of such alarming details and ill omens: dubious meat, which retains the headline offprint of the newspaper it was wrapped in (‘WE REJOICE’) even after it’s been cooked; febrile explosions of rage over spilled paraffin; flocks of crows cawing across the sky. There is a mismatch between the optimism of the characters and what we know of subsequent events. ‘I’m going on a course’, Lapshin says towards the end of the film, and his words are left hanging in the air. These are people whose faith in the future remains intact, but whose betrayal is imminent. German has said that his main aim was to convey a sense of the period, to depict as faithfully as possible the material conditions and human preoccupations of SovietRussia on the eve of the Great Purge. It is for this world, for these people that the narrator struggles to declare his love—unconditional, knowing how flawed that world was, and how tainted the future would be. German compared the film to the work of Chekhov, and one can see in it a similar tenderness for the suffering and absurdity of its characters.

Loosely episodic, the film is remarkable in its resistance to linear narrative: dialogue is often drowned out by senseless chatter or the clanging of buckets; our view of important characters is frequently blocked by figures crossing the screen. In its cinematography, Ivan Lapshin consistently refuses to accept established priorities: as though every element of each shot must be allowed its meaning. The camera often enters the room behind characters’ backs, like a guest, or at elbow-level, like a curious child. There is no sense that the scenes are choreographed or pre-arranged, but rather a feeling that the camera, wide-eyed, is capturing what it can of a bewildering world.

All German’s films focus on moments in which history and myth have become entangled, if not dangerously indistinguishable. He has described his films as ‘antipotochnye’, ‘against the current’: disrupting certainties and undermining convenient truths. [1] The Stalin era, his principal subject, is the period of his own childhood and youth."

-Tony Wood

[Qrazy]

I'll be watching That Most Important Thing: Love (Zulawski) in place of Whity (Fassbinder) either late tonight or more likely tomorrow.

[B-side]

That's a good essay. It's kind of a jarring film, but it really is pretty special. It's one of those films where it's almost difficult to really express why it's so good, you just kinda have to see it. But yeah, I'll definitely be seeing more German.

[Qrazy]

That's a good essay. It's kind of a jarring film, but it really is pretty special. It's one of those films where it's almost difficult to really express why it's so good, you just kinda have to see it. But yeah, I'll definitely be seeing more German.

Nice. Checkpoint is much more accessible as is 20 Days Without War, but Khrustalyov My Car! has a broader scope and is even more fragmented and packed full of everything than Lapshin. I'm still upping Khrustalyov, feel free to grab it off KG if you feel so inclined. You have to register on the forum to get the subs or I can send them to you via email.

[B-side]

Nice. Checkpoint is much more accessible as is 20 Days Without War, but Khrustalyov My Car! has a broader scope and is even more fragmented and packed full of everything than Lapshin. I'm still upping Khrustalyov, feel free to grab it off KG if you feel so inclined. You have to register on the forum to get the subs or I can send them to you via email.

I'm on the forum already. I'll probably check out Checkpoint or 20 Days next. My reaction to either of those will decide how soon I get Khrustalyov.

[Qrazy]

I'm on the forum already. I'll probably check out Checkpoint or 20 Days next. My reaction to either of those will decide how soon I get Khrustalyov.

I would suggest Checkpoint.

[B-side]

I would suggest Checkpoint.

Cool. That'll be next, then.

[B-side]

soooo...

[Qrazy]

The Most Important Thing: Love (Zulawski)

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/9248/vlcsnap2624982se3.jpg

Hrm I'm finding it difficult to write about this one so I'll just give some general impressions. Zulawski's focus here is much tighter than in On the Silver Globe. He knows what he's trying to say about love, sex and relationships and he says it clearly, with nuance and frequently with genuine emotion. During the first third of the film I found it difficult to get involved. I didn't like the lead one bit. He came off as an asshole but not a very charismatic one. As the film progressed and he became more sympathetic I began to care a great deal more. Kinski also comes onto the scene about a third of the way through which breathes life into the picture. The film itself revolves primarily around a love triangle between the main character (photographer) an actress and her husband.

The love triangle is the heart of the film and concerning the expression of this love triangle the film is largely successful. Everyone in the film appears to be dying of a broken heart. Characters eyes become dark and sunken, their skin pallid. They're surrounded by the creation of pornography, empty sex and ugliness. The character of the husband, Jacques strikes the most pitiful pose. His insecurities and anxieties gnaw away at him. He paints himself as the clown, the joker, and finally the fool. He doubts himself and the other members of the love triangle suffer as he suffers. They all feed off of each others suffering. There's no solution. No escape. Even the possibility of the final solution will simply create greater pain. Is this suffering generated by antiquated cultural systems (marriage)? Or is it unavoidable? Is love the solution, or the problem? Perhaps it's both. It's all we have to share with one another but it's also that which pushes us asunder. Now is the spring, summer, fall and winter of our discontent.

B-/B

[B-side]

Great film is great.

[Melville]

This Zulawski fellow sounds pretty interesting.

[Qrazy]

This Zulawski fellow sounds pretty interesting.

He's pretty interesting. I haven't really been wow'd yet (only two films in) but I've definitely taken something away from both films.

[Melville]

He's pretty interesting. I haven't really been wow'd yet (only two films in) but I've definitely taken something away from both films.
I just realized that he also directed Possession, which I've wanted to see since Philosophe Rouge raved about it a while back.

[Qrazy]

Is La Cienaga next?

[soitgoes...]

Is La Cienaga next?

Yes.

[Qrazy]

Yes.

Cool.

[B-side]

.

[Qrazy]

Unacceptable.

[B-side]

Unacceptable.

Indeed.

[Qrazy]

Let's go Slow Ass Mcgee.

[B-side]

Let's go Slow Ass Mcgee.

You can go ahead and watch one if you want.:P

[Qrazy]

Alright I'll do Landscape in the Mist within the next few days.

[B-side]

Alright I'll do Landscape in the Mist within the next few days.

Cool. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

[soitgoes...]

Onibaba - Recommended to me by Qrazy

I will start my post with:


Alright, I know I'm still getting over my cold and perhaps a little "under the weather," but damn was Onibaba a tedious affair. Gorgeous and evocative, but the repetition was almost unbearable. I can easily appreciate the way Shindo creates a godless terrain and an interesting bit of feudal folklore, but how many recycled shots of blowing grass, a girl running through said grass, characters screaming and flailing, tribal chants and every other pet motif Shindo has up his sleeve do I really need to see? The sensuality, especially for 1964, as a product of the rather codeless and immoral landscape was rather striking and unexpected; the shots of the demonic mask creepy and unnerving (though I think I would have preferred it if it had not been so desensationalized with the lengthy samurai sequence); and the opening moments that set-up the milieu are wonderful (I actually really wish the film had kept the opening music with its jazz-infused style).

I think the film pales in comparison to the equally sensuous and wilderness film from 1964, Woman in the Dunes. Teshigahara's film made the landscape extremely organic and consuming. Every sinking and shifting of the sand felt like a revelation and Teshigahara made the sameness and isolation remarkably tangible, oftening zoning in to the point of madness. Here the landscape is key, but Shindo seems content to keep giving us the same perspective and the film never matures into anything more than what we could see from the first few moments.

I suppose perhaps Shindo was concerned more with using the grass and landscape as an extension of the mother's dominant will and thus utilized the repetition as a kind of oppression/release dichotomy (lending itself to the way the mother-as-demon materializes directly from the grass), and in that respect the film is moderately successful. Ultimately though, I found my appreciation at arm's length, taken by the evocative chiaroscuro lighting and sensuality and yet unmoved by the film's repetitious form.

I agree with a lot Raiders has to say here. The repetition didn't bother me as much. The blowing grass and isolation somehow lent a bit more wildness to the film. War has left the main characters with only violence, and when it is available sex, to survive. My main agreement with Raiders is his comparisons to Teshigahara's film. I would think Shindo would have seen Woman in the Dunes either just before or during filming this.

[Qrazy]

Personally I think Raiders is overexaggerating the amount of screentime devoted to repetitious footage. But yes I also agree that the film is similar to Woman in the Dunes. Or rather I said it first a long time ago and you guys are both cribbing from me... and I'm probably cribbing from some other reviewer... so nuts. Although personally I'm not sure which I prefer. I prefer Shindo's aesthetic I think but Teshigahara's narrative.

Glad you liked it though. Any score?

[soitgoes...]

Personally I think Raiders is overexaggerating the amount of screentime devoted to repetitious footage. But yes I also agree that the film is similar to Woman in the Dunes. Or rather I said it first a long time ago and you guys are both cribbing from me... and I'm probably cribbing from some other reviewer... so nuts. Although personally I'm not sure which I prefer. I prefer Shindo's aesthetic I think but Teshigahara's narrative.

Glad you liked it though. Any score?
I prefer Teshigahara's film pretty much across the board. The one thing Shindo's film does exceptionally well, is in its lighting. And the mask. That was an extremely well-crafted prop. So spooky. I would give the film a 7/10. I prefer Shindo's Children of Hiroshima, but I'll definitely be seeing more of his work.

[Qrazy]

I prefer Teshigahara's film pretty much across the board. The one thing Shindo's film does exceptionally well, is in its lighting. And the mask. That was an extremely well-crafted prop. So spooky. I would give the film a 7/10. I prefer Shindo's Children of Hiroshima, but I'll definitely be seeing more of his work.

Naked Island and Kuroneko are the only other two I've seen and I like them both a lot and also prefer them to Children of Hiroshima. However, I think Onibaba is his best. He has a few late period films that I've been interested in seeing for a while.

[B-side]

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/9450/22tvyg3.jpg

Liebelei (Ophüls, 1933)

I prefer my other 3 Ophuls' to this one, but Liebelei is far from bad. I gotta admit, I was a tad lost for a good 20 mins or so in the beginning. They just kinda threw you in there, so I didn't really know what was going on. I eventually gleaned the info I needed, but that first half hour or so spent trying to cobble it together in a satisfying fashion didn't help. The characters weren't as compelling as I'd have liked them to be, but the 2nd half sees them more developed and interesting to follow. The ending is another great one.

[Qrazy]

Yay! Film swap is back up and running, nice guys. As you know I've watched My Night at Maud's so I'll try to post something about it tomorrow.

[B-side]

Yay! Film swap is back up and running, nice guys. As you know I've watched My Night at Maud's so I'll try to post something about it tomorrow.

Yeah, I'll finish this off even if it hurts.:lol:

[Qrazy]

My Night at Maud's (Rohmer)

http://auteurs_production.s3.amazonaw s.com/stills/5927/Film_345w_MyNightMauds.jpg

I think I like Rohmer well enough but so far I've only seen this one, Chloe in the Afternoon and Suzanne's Career. The first two were quite solid, Suzanne's career was a bit of a bore. Still I enjoy his work much more as a writer than as a director. There's nothing about his formal approach or scene construction that really piques my interest. However, his explorations of morality and characters psychologies are revealing. I have to say that while I love philosophy I find Pascal's wager to be a rather uninteresting proposition but not for the reasons discussed in the film. So on an intellectual level I didn't find the script's musings about the wager particularly interesting, although on the level of character they do effectively communicate a great deal about who these people are. So once the film got these concerns out of the way (about the half hour mark) it did a compelling job of examining the nuances, contradictions and hypocrisies of it's protagonist(s). The protagonist is in a nutshell, the type of man who inadvertently does what his religion considers proper (not to have casual sex) and then later lies about his inaction in order to appear to be what his perception of secular society deems proper (or at least to seem like more of a 'man').

B-

[Qrazy]

What's next? In a Year with 13 Moons?

[soitgoes...]

Probably. Though I have Partner, so I might end up watching that one first.

[B-side]

I hope you enjoy them.:sad:

[soitgoes...]

I hope you enjoy them.:sad:Hey, so do I. I have faith in the Fassbinder. :)

[B-side]

Hey, so do I. I have faith in the Fassbinder. :)

The Bertolucci is based on a Dostoevsky story. Does that help you get excited at all?:P

[B-side]

soitgoes...

[soitgoes...]

I finally watched Partner. Comments to come!?!?

[B-side]

I finally watched Partner. Comments to come!?!?

Yay!

[soitgoes...]

Gate of Flesh (Suzuki 64) (Recommended to me by Qrazy)

*A re-post from the FDT

My biggest knock against Seijun Suzuki is that his films tend to be incoherent, style trumps all. That style is undeniably great, but man, his films just seem like set piece followed by set piece with no rhyme or reason why they are there. Gate of Flesh gets it right. Oh the film isn't saying anything great, but it doesn't get lost saying what it needs to say. And boy that style! Suzuki and art designer Takeo Kimura nailed it. With a limited budget, Kimura's sets shun realism and take on a world of their own. Suzuki dresses his leads, a team of prostitutes, in bright colored dresses that they wear throughout the film. I'm not sure Suzuki could've made a film that could compete with Kurosawa, Ozu or Naruse, only because he was never given a script from his studio worth a damn. Props need to be given though for creating something so original with such a bare bone script.

[B-side]

And where is this write-up on Partner you promised!?

[soitgoes...]

Partner (Bertolucci 68) (Recommended to me by Brightside)

I've voiced my indifference to Bertolucci before. I generally don't get the love that is showered on him. Since viewing this film, I have since seen The Conformist which has helped give me perspective on his "greatness." I'm not sure one film sheds the indifference, but hey, it's a start. Partner is a film unlike any film I've seen, if I had never seen a Godard film. When I saw this, I was actually surprised I didn't hate it. Honestly I went into the film with dread. Here's the kicker though, I have since seen Two or Three Things I Know About Her, and man did Bertolucci rip off Godard. Seeing it on its own you can see the Godardian touches, but seeing it after Two or Three Things I noticed more than just touches. The color palettes used in both films are the same. Reds and blues dominate in both films. The editing style and general feel are close to the same. Still, it should be said, that all filmmakers borrow from one another. It's just seeing these two films days apart, the similarities are even more apparent. Pleasant surprise, but in the end this film still left me wanting more from Bernardo.


There you go, I'm two up on you bitches.

[B-side]

Ha. Well, at least you didn't hate it.

I should note that I saw it before I was familiar with Godard, but I can sort of see it in retrospect. Would help if it hadn't been so long since I've seen it.

[soitgoes...]

The Maggie (Mackendrick 54) as recommended to me by Qrazy

Late 40's to early 50's Ealing comedies tend to be some of the best comedies of the era. Couple that with the solid directing skills of Alexander Mackendrick (Sweet Smell of Success, The Ladykillers), and I was feeling pretty confident that this film was going to work for me. For the most part it delivered. Some good laughs were found throughout, but I'm afraid that by the second half the film crossed over into being mean-spirited at times (the dock scene being the stand out). It worked its way back to endearing, but there was a bad taste left when the film ended. The kid, Dougie (Tommy Kearins), was the definite highlight of the film, but the entire cast did a good job as a whole.

[soitgoes...]

I have the Fassbinder film, and I'll try and watch it tomorrow or the day after.

[B-side]

I have the Fassbinder film, and I'll try and watch it tomorrow or the day after.

Be delicate. That one's a favorite.

[soitgoes...]

Be delicate. That one's a favorite.

:evil:

[B-side]

:evil:

Fassbinder edited, shot, wrote, produced, did the art direction for and directed that beast.

[soitgoes...]

Fassbinder edited, shot, wrote, produced, did the art direction for and directed that beast.
I'm sure I'll like it. I've liked everything I've seen from him outside a couple early films. I just don't get blown away by him, like most others. Maybe this one will be different?!?

[B-side]

I'm sure I'll like it. I've liked everything I've seen from him outside a couple early films. I just don't get blown away by him, like most others. Maybe this one will be different?!?

I certainly hope so! Melville gave it a 10 when he was reviewing stuff.

[Qrazy]

The Maggie (Mackendrick 54) as recommended to me by Qrazy

Late 40's to early 50's Ealing comedies tend to be some of the best comedies of the era. Couple that with the solid directing skills of Alexander Mackendrick (Sweet Smell of Success, The Ladykillers), and I was feeling pretty confident that this film was going to work for me. For the most part it delivered. Some good laughs were found throughout, but I'm afraid that by the second half the film crossed over into being mean-spirited at times (the dock scene being the stand out). It worked its way back to endearing, but there was a bad taste left when the film ended. The kid, Dougie (Tommy Kearins), was the definite highlight of the film, but the entire cast did a good job as a whole.

I didn't think that scene was mean spirited, but it was more dramatic than purely comedic.

[soitgoes...]

I didn't think that scene was mean spirited, but it was more dramatic than purely comedic.Dougie told the captain to keep the boat tied up knowing full well what was going to happen. The whole crew goes off snickering, then when the inevitable happens they acts like a bunch of idiots making the problem worse. It came off as mean-spirited to me. Still, I enjoyed the film.

[Qrazy]

Dougie told the captain to keep the boat tied up knowing full well what was going to happen. The whole crew goes off snickering, then when the inevitable happens they acts like a bunch of idiots making the problem worse. It came off as mean-spirited to me. Still, I enjoyed the film.

Well yes their actions are in their own best interest, but I don't feel the film supports those actions per se. In the scene I feel that equal emotional weight is given to the business man which is why you sympathize with him and feel their actions were cruel.

That being said I should have responded more generally and favorably to your entire review rather than merely nitpicking my one quibble with what you were stating. :) Nice comments and glad you liked it. I was actually slightly less enthusiastic about the film on a second viewing although I still liked it quite a bit. I'd be interested to know what you'd think of Mackendrick's Don't Make Waves. It's like his equivalent to Hawks Man's Favorite Sport (in tone at least). I like both of those films a fair bit also. They're very light but well crafted and highly enjoyable.

[soitgoes...]

Well yes their actions are in their own best interest, but I don't feel the film supports those actions per se. In the scene I feel that equal emotional weight is given to the business man which is why you sympathize with him and feel their actions were cruel.

That being said I should have responded more generally and favorably to your entire review rather than merely nitpicking my one quibble with what you were stating. :) Nice comments and glad you liked it. I was actually slightly less enthusiastic about the film on a second viewing although I still liked it quite a bit. I'd be interested to know what you'd think of Mackendrick's Don't Make Waves. It's like his equivalent to Hawks Man's Favorite Sport (in tone at least). I like both of those films a fair bit also. They're very light but well crafted and highly enjoyable.I'll definitely will be checking out more of his work. I can't believe he had such a short career, only 9 credited films!

Even with what I see as a flaw, it needs to be said again that the performances were all very good.

[Qrazy]

I'll definitely will be checking out more of his work. I can't believe he had such a short career, only 9 credited films!

Even with what I see as a flaw, it needs to be said again that the performances were all very good.

Definitely. Here are my rankings.

1. Sweet Smell of Success

2. The Ladykillers
3. The Maggie
4. The Man in the White Suit

5. Whisky Galore!
6. Don't Make Waves
7. A High Wind in Jamaica

8. Sammy Going South
9. Mandy

[soitgoes...]

Definitely. Here are my rankings.

1. Sweet Smell of Success

2. The Ladykillers
3. The Maggie
4. The Man in the White Suit

5. Whisky Galore!
6. Don't Make Waves
7. A High Wind in Jamaica

8. Sammy Going South
9. MandyDoesn't bode well for me since I've already seen the 5 best according to you. ;)

[RoadtoPerdition]

Are there still board-wide film swaps? In searching the posts, it doesn't look like there's been one since, like, 2008.

[soitgoes...]

In a Year with 13 Moons (Fassbinder 78) as recommended to me by Brightside

Surprise! Fuck Cassavetes! I went with Fassbinder tonight. Another film by the Fassbinder which strikes me as being good, but nothing exceptional. I guess everyone has their quirks, with me I don't get the love for Fassbinder (Bertolucci and more recently Tarkovsky have shed themselves of this problem, so there's still a chance for Fassbinder). Right off the bat Fassbinder pushed my interest aside with his corny narration about how depression devastates some people when there are 13 new moons in a year. A shame because the opening scene without it was wonderful. He kept it up with the strange slaughterhouse scene. Oh the symbolism isn't lost on me, but it just felt like a weird scene. I did love how he frames Elvira through doorways. Life closing in on her and all that. I'm a sucker for that framing devise, and Fassbinder proves he's a master at it. Elvira weeping in the arcade is also extremely powerful. I've got him on tap for two more films (The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant and Fox and His Friends for the 1001 Films race) so we'll see...

[soitgoes...]

And one more to go.

[B-side]

Well, at least you liked it. If it's any consolation, my recs would be a lot different if we were doing this now. :P

[soitgoes...]

Well, at least you liked it. If it's any consolation, my recs would be a lot different if we were doing this now. :POh no doubt. I have a much better understanding of your tastes now. I do feel pretty certain that you're going to like News from Home and possibly Cyclo. This film and the Bergman would've been films I'd eventually have seen, so now worries there. The other three, probably not, but whatever, you gave me new experiences. We'll see how Martel treats me. I'm guessing not too good.

[B-side]

Oh no doubt. I have a much better understanding of your tastes now. I do feel pretty certain that you're going to like News from Home and possibly Cyclo. This film and the Bergman would've been films I'd eventually have seen, so now worries there. The other three, probably not, but whatever, you gave me new experiences. We'll see how Martel treats me. I'm guessing not too good.

I can safely say the Martel is nothing like I've recommended you so far.

[Melville]

He kept it up with the strange slaughterhouse scene.
One of my favorite scenes in cinema. The tragedy of facticity made palpable.

[soitgoes...]

Finished this thing. It only took 20 months to watch 10 films!

La Ciénaga best moment was its opening scene. For recent Argentinian films, Liverpool kicks its ass. I could write something more, but since it seems like I'm the only one doing this thread I'll leave it with that.

[Qrazy]

Pffft I"m doing it... just... one film a year.