Derek failed at finishing his top 100, but there are a lot of solid reviews in here! [Archive] - Page 4

Melville

08-28-2008, 09:36 PM

82. Stardust Memories (Allen, 1980)

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/stardust.jpg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qHLMaqASq0)

The climax of Stardust Memories is a perfection. A woman whom the hero loves looks toward him, into the camera, and smiles. Her expression evolves over the course of the shot, smiling almost in embarrassment at times, and we know that the hero is looking at her and that she is self-conscious because he loves her and this is why she smiles. The hero says in voiceover “I don't know, I guess it was a combination of everything, the sound of the music, and the breeze, and how beautiful Dorrie looked to me, and for one brief moment everything just seemed to come together perfectly, and I felt happy.” This is a perfect moment.

Though the film’s central narrative consists of Allen’s typical hero struggling with his neuroses in an 8 ½-inspired phantasmagoria, it returns perpetually to scenes of his doomed romance with the woman of that perfect moment. In the woman’s withdrawn expressions and the characters’ pointed conversations, these scenes suggest the history of a complex relationship. One scene, a sequence of close-ups fractured by rapid jump-cuts, shows the woman breaking down in a moment of anguish more brutally direct and painfully sympathetic than anything else in Allen’s filmography, undulled by his usual cynicism. These scenes possess an emotional weight that anchors Allen’s neuroses.

The wonder of the perfect moment is that it incorporates all of this within itself. It is perfect because the hero reflects upon it as it occurs but he is equally reflected into it. He is aware of himself and his happiness, and he is aware that he gladdens the one he loves—and under her gaze he realizes that he is this happy person who gladdens her. Distances are dissolved. But this reflectivity relies on the characters’ relationship; indeed, the entire history of that relationship is implicit in their mutual gaze, and its context provides the elation of the moment for both the characters and the audience. (And all of this is doubly reflected, since the woman looks at us and we recall similar scenes from our own lives even as we reflect on the hero.) Thus, the moment carries the past with it; and it is also carried into the future, as an emblem and enfolding of times past that defines Allen’s experiences ever afterward. It is not merely perfect: it makes perfect. It is a moment of stillness that draws time around itself.

Stardust Memories is a reverie for such moments. With its bubbling jazz, its glimmering cinematography, its comic hyperbole, and its exuberant dissolution of the bounds between film and life, it tells us of the beauty dancing in the cracks of our misery. In its most charming moment of delirium, a group of UFO-watchers are rewarded with hot-air balloons drifting through the sky with a sublime languor, and humanity’s search for meaning is transmuted into an appreciation of the beautiful things in life. Better than any of Allen's other films, it expresses the bittersweet philosophy that has run through all of them: existence is filled with suffering, and there is no grand meaning in the world to justify it; the world’s essence is its arbitrariness, and our principal trouble is being born into it—but there are moments of happiness to be found, and there are beautiful balloons in the sky.

Melville

08-28-2008, 09:40 PM

the incongruous chain of grief that concludes Schindler’s List.
Incongruous? Incongruous?!

If we manage to finish this thread sometime before I die, you'll eventually read my rebuttal.

D_Davis

08-28-2008, 10:03 PM

82. Catch Me If You Can (Spielberg, 2002)

Great film - nice write up.

Philosophe_rouge

08-28-2008, 10:08 PM

Qrazy

08-28-2008, 10:56 PM

Yeah I dunno I have little patience for Allen's aping of other masters... whether it's Fellini, Bergman or another. I find he's at his best when he's creating something unique and true to himself as an artist (Manhattan, Annie Hall).

Watashi

08-28-2008, 10:59 PM

Stardust Memories > All of Fellini's filmography*

*that I've seen

Melville

08-28-2008, 11:03 PM

I don't love Stardust Memories, but it certainly has some beautiful ideas and moments. The one you highlight, in effect, the film's climax is one of those moments. It's even one of my favourite scenes in an Allen film, and you capture it beautifully. I'm actually itching to revisit it now. Good work :)
Thanks. Both times I've seen it, that scene has totally amazed me. It (along with the balloons) pretty much makes the movie for me.

Yeah I dunno I have little patience for Allen's aping of other masters... whether it's Fellini, Bergman or another. I find he's at his best when he's creating something unique and true to himself as an artist (Manhattan, Annie Hall).
Quiet, you. I don't think anything in 8 1/2 compares with the emotional impact of Stardust Memories' climax, and other than some of the visual style and a few plot points, I don't think SM really apes 8 1/2. Though I agree that Manhattan is the better movie.

Melville

08-28-2008, 11:03 PM

Stardust Memories > All of Fellini's filmography*

*that I've seen
Agreed.

Qrazy

08-28-2008, 11:06 PM

Stardust Memories > All of Fellini's filmography*

*that I've seen

http://lizrevision.com/wp-content/uploads/royal-fail.jpg

ledfloyd

08-28-2008, 11:09 PM

Stardust Memories > All of Fellini's filmography*

*that I've seen
8 1/2 > Stardust Memories > The Rest of Fellini

Qrazy

08-28-2008, 11:11 PM

Thanks. Both times I've seen it, that scene has totally amazed me. It (along with the balloons) pretty much makes the movie for me.

Quiet, you. I don't think anything in 8 1/2 compares with the emotional impact of Stardust Memories' climax, and other than some of the visual style and a few plot points, I don't think SM really apes 8 1/2. Though I agree that Manhattan is the better movie.

The entire thrust of the film apes 8 1/2, not just incidental plot points.

Melville

08-28-2008, 11:11 PM

8 1/2 > Stardust Memories > The Rest of Fellini
This seems possible. I'll have to see 8 1/2 again (and most of Fellini's other films).

Melville

08-28-2008, 11:17 PM

The entire thrust of the film apes 8 1/2, not just incidental plot points.
I don't think so. The thrust of Stardust Memories is that life has beautiful moments that make it worth living, and that, by extension, comedies justify themselves. I don't remember that being the thrust of 8 1/2.

Qrazy

08-28-2008, 11:24 PM

I don't think so. The thrust of Stardust Memories is that life has beautiful moments that make it worth living, and that, by extension, comedies justify themselves. I don't remember that being the thrust of 8 1/2.

Ehh I'd say the running around in a group at the end of 8 1/2 supports the first thrust you mention, but yes it's less interested in justifying comedies... that's more of a Sullivan's Travels addendum.

But yeah, ideologically Allen does tend to slightly alter his source material and riffs his own sensibilities upon them (Crimes and Misdemeanors and Match Point re-imagining the psychological response of the killers or here using a filmmaker in creative stasis attempting to justify comedies or what have you). That being said I find the general thrust of the tone and structure remains largely the same. The dream sequences, the rapid fire exchanges with reporters, the filmmaker protagonist and his approach towards women, etc.

transmogrifier

08-29-2008, 12:33 AM

Stardust Memories is awesomely crafted. Allen can be really quite a stylized director if he wants to be.

Melville

08-29-2008, 01:11 AM

Ehh I'd say the running around in a group at the end of 8 1/2 supports the first thrust you mention
It's similar, but I don't think it's the same. The ending of 8 1/2 seems like a much more general parade-of-life, its-great-because-its-life kind of thing, whereas Stardust Memories is saying something more specific about what makes life worth living.

But yeah, ideologically Allen does tend to slightly alter his source material and riffs his own sensibilities upon them (Crimes and Misdemeanors and Match Point re-imagining the psychological response of the killers or here using a filmmaker in creative stasis attempting to justify comedies or what have you). That being said I find the general thrust of the tone and structure remains largely the same. The dream sequences, the rapid fire exchanges with reporters, the filmmaker protagonist and his approach towards women, etc.
I remember the tones being quite different, with Stardust being bittersweet and 8 1/2 being more blase and worldly, and I don't remember the protagonists' approaches towards women being similar. But I plan on rewatching 8 1/2 this weekend (I've only seen it once, five or six years ago), so I'll get back to you.

Qrazy

08-29-2008, 02:08 AM

It's similar, but I don't think it's the same. The ending of 8 1/2 seems like a much more general parade-of-life, its-great-because-its-life kind of thing, whereas Stardust Memories is saying something more specific about what makes life worth living.

I remember the tones being quite different, with Stardust being bittersweet and 8 1/2 being more blase and worldly, and I don't remember the protagonists' approaches towards women being similar. But I plan on rewatching 8 1/2 this weekend (I've only seen it once, five or six years ago), so I'll get back to you.

No it's not identical but it's approach is very similar.

Sven

08-29-2008, 03:47 AM

Killer review, 'ville, and possibly the first review in this thread (including my own!) that I agree with to the last word.

Duncan

08-29-2008, 01:03 PM

Stardust Memories annoyed the hell out of me. It seemed like an arrogant film that borrowed way too liberally to maintain any forgivable level of arrogance.

But your review makes it sound very good. I'll have to watch it again. I'm pretty sure I own it, since I vaguely remember blind buying it.

balmakboor

08-29-2008, 05:58 PM

NickGlass

08-29-2008, 06:15 PM

Sometimes it's fun to be old. Reading comments about Stardust Memories by people just now seeing it for the first time is interesting. It seems to be so much more appreciated nowadays like it has aged really well or was well ahead of its time. It was so hated upon back when it first came out. Woody Allen fans reacted like it was a stab in their backs. Interiors and A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy didn't fair much better. Everyone just wanted more Annie Halls and Manhattans -- or more early funny ones.

I'm still baffled when older generations tell me how maligned Interiors was upon its release in 1978. Not that I can't understand, but it scored 5 Oscar nominations (and two for Woody himself). At the very least, it must have been generally approved by the populace.

balmakboor

08-29-2008, 06:39 PM

I'm still baffled when older generations tell me how maligned Interiors was upon its release in 1978. Not that I can't understand, but it scored 5 Oscar nominations (and two for Woody himself). At the very least, it must have been generally approved by the populace.

The Oscar nominations seemed more out of respect for the guy who made Annie Hall trying something different than any actual love for the movie. Plus it is a well-crafted movie. But Allen fans felt let down and like the guy had turned on them.

It's probably my least favorite Allen film from the first half of his career. Allen doing serious drama has never really worked for me though.

You mention that it must've been approved by the populace. But in the late 70s things were so different. Very few screens -- it was before the mulitplex boom -- and virtually no bookings outside of major markets. No Internet so there was very little opportunity to read reviews outside of local press and major magazines. Interiors got very little ink outside of major market dailies. And no home video, so if you didn't live in a major market, you didn't see it. Most people watching the Oscar telecast had no idea what the movie was, much moreso than happens today. I lived in a market that did screen it. The newspaper panned it. I didn't care for it although my opinion has improved some over the years.

balmakboor

08-29-2008, 06:58 PM

Sometimes it's fun to be old. Reading comments about Stardust Memories by people just now seeing it for the first time is interesting. It seems to be so much more appreciated nowadays like it has aged really well or was well ahead of its time. It was so hated upon back when it first came out. Woody Allen fans reacted like it was a stab in their backs. Interiors and A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy didn't fair much better. Everyone just wanted more Annie Halls and Manhattans -- or more early funny ones.

I just noticed that I did have the order mixed up between Interiors and Manhattan. I wonder if Interiors would've seemed less a departure/letdown to fans if it had followed the more artful Manhattan. Or course Interiors was probably a necessary stepping stone toward Manhattan -- when viewed through hindsight -- but at the time movie fans in my circle (in 1978 that pretty much meant my town) just scratched their heads and wondered why he was committing career suicide after the very funny and very popular Annie Hall.

Melville

08-29-2008, 11:07 PM

Killer review, 'ville, and possibly the first review in this thread (including my own!) that I agree with to the last word.
Nice. I didn't know you were such a fan of Stardust Memories.

Stardust Memories annoyed the hell out of me. It seemed like an arrogant film that borrowed way too liberally to maintain any forgivable level of arrogance.
Yeah, I can see its style coming off as pretentious (in the proper sense of the word) or posturing. But it grows on me over its runtime. Definitely give it another shot.

Sometimes it's fun to be old. Reading comments about Stardust Memories by people just now seeing it for the first time is interesting. It seems to be so much more appreciated nowadays like it has aged really well or was well ahead of its time. It was so hated upon back when it first came out. Woody Allen fans reacted like it was a stab in their backs. Interiors and A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy didn't fair much better. Everyone just wanted more Annie Halls and Manhattans -- or more early funny ones.
That reminds me that I need to see Interiors. Maybe I'll rent it this weekend.

Qrazy

08-29-2008, 11:26 PM

Nice. I didn't know you were such a fan of Stardust Memories.

Yeah, I can see its style coming off as pretentious (in the proper sense of the word) or posturing. But it grows on me over its runtime. Definitely give it another shot.

That reminds me that I need to see Interiors. Maybe I'll rent it this weekend.

I don't particularly find it pretentious, just derivative, but I guess we've been over it already. As another example the opening scene for instance seemed to me to be basically a synthesis of 8 1/2's opening and the opening train sequence from Bergman's The Silence.

Melville

08-29-2008, 11:28 PM

I don't particularly find it pretentious, just derivative, but I guess we've been over it already. As another example the opening scene for instance seemed to me to be basically a synthesis of 8 1/2's opening and the opening train sequence from Bergman's The Silence.
But the opening scene is meant to be a parody.

origami_mustache

08-29-2008, 11:43 PM

The thrust of Stardust Memories is that life has beautiful moments that make it worth living, and that, by extension, comedies justify themselves. I don't remember that being the thrust of 8 1/2.

It is more or less the thrust of all of Fellini's films...well maybe not the comedy part, but yeaaah.

Qrazy

08-30-2008, 12:56 AM

But the opening scene is meant to be a parody.

Well I wouldn't say a parody but yeah it's meant to affectionately rib the other works, Allen does indeed inject his own brand of humor into his homages.

Duncan

08-30-2008, 01:44 AM

I read recently that Fellini taped a sign reading "Remember, this is a comedy," to his camera while filming 8 1/2. I think it's a very funny film.

Duncan

08-30-2008, 01:48 AM

It is more or less the thrust of all of Fellini's films...well maybe not the comedy part, but yeaaah.

I would include the comedy part. Especially in films like Roma and Amarcord. Those films are structured around moments. Some are tragic, some are comedic. All are self-justifying.

Melville

08-30-2008, 03:39 AM

That being said I find the general thrust of the tone and structure remains largely the same. The dream sequences, the rapid fire exchanges with reporters, the filmmaker protagonist and his approach towards women, etc.
After just re-watching 8 1/2, I still think the similarities are being greatly exaggerated. I don't think the tone is very similar: in 8 1/2 it's worldly and contemplative, it looks down at life with an almost Altman-esque bemusement, and it's generally amoral; in Stardust Memories it's almost naive, extremely sympathetic, and focused on ethics. Also, 8 1/2 has a rather melancholy mood for the majority of its runtime, and its pace is generally languorous, while Stardust Memories maintains an ethereal and consistently comedic mood and a jaunty pace. The protagonists are essentially exact opposites of one another, especially in their interactions with women: Guido is virtually uninterested in women, except in a purely sensual way, while Sandy desperately craves romantic connection. Even the themes are different: 8 1/2 deals with life in general and what forms a person, while Stardust Memories deals primarily with romance and deciding what to do in life. And the rapid fire exchanges with reporters are not a motif in 8 1/2.

Of course, Stardust Memories does borrow quite liberally from 8 1/2, what with the pans past faces rapidly talking at the protagonist, the filmmaker protagonists making movies that misunderstand life, and those movies eventually merging with the movie we're watching (which presumably does not misunderstand life). But I think Allen does a lot more than just put a slight spin on that structure.

It is more or less the thrust of all of Fellini's films...well maybe not the comedy part, but yeaaah.
I don't think so. The ending of 8 1/2 pretty well makes its thrust explicit: "Everything is true" and "This confusion is me". All the moments and all the people in life make life what it is; nothing can be rejected without rejecting life and oneself, and once that realization sets in, everything is embraced as a part of the whole. That's almost the opposite of Allen's conclusion, which is that there are perfect, reflective moments that justify all the shit around them. Sure, they both conclude that we should embrace life, but the underlying reasons are quite different.

I would include the comedy part. Especially in films like Roma and Amarcord. Those films are structured around moments. Some are tragic, some are comedic. All are self-justifying.
But do they justify life? I certainly didn't get that sense in 8 1/2. None of the moments in the film possess anything like a transcendent beauty or sudden, reflective stillness; none of them are pointed out as special; the whole point is that they are all equally justified.

I also don't think the tone of 8 1/2 is generally comedic, though it certainly has moments of exuberance or comedy.

Derek

09-02-2008, 06:50 AM

#82 - The Last Laugh (F.W. Murnau, 1924)

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j94/DSmith724/thelastlaugh.jpg

Murnau’s The Last Laugh is most famous for its complete lack of inter-titles and reliance on film as purely a visual medium to tell its story. For all that’s made of that already impressive fact, it’s an accomplishment which seems almost minute next to the film’s overwhelming sense of humanity, reflected in both its careful attention to expressions and gestures as well as its use of deep focus (in the first act) to convey a sense of reality within which Murnau presents an upper and lower class seemingly on the same footing. When Jannings’ doorman is fired, the camera is in tune with his sense of urgency, immediately taking on a more subjective and disillusioned perspective, amping up the melodrama and riding the back of Murnau’s expressive camera and Jannings’ equally expressive face.

The genius and chemistry of the Murnau-Jannings tandem is by no means reliant only on its well-known camera pyrotechnics. Every moment of sadness, revenge, tragedy, joy and compassion is right there on the surface, yet there is such subtlety and acuity in their delivery that what could easily become bombastic and overly dramatic is given levity through the pure artistry of the duo and a comic absurdity that accompanies the film’s more disheartening scenes. Consider the scene where the Jannings tries to prove to his employer that he’s still physically fit only to fall to the ground in exhaustion after failing to lift the bag over his head. When his boss calls the new doorman in to escort him outside, Murnau uses a series of stationary shots as his uniform is violently stripped from his body. This sequence of barbaric display of power with is followed by what is perhaps the most moving moment in the film – a zoom out to show the doorman in his tattered suit and a pan up to the shock on his face as he examines his current state. Murnau follows this with a cut to a shot behind him look of absolute terror and agony as he sees the outfit that gave him his only sense of pride for so many years hanging idly in the closet. It is a moment of profound compassion, enhanced by a perfect dose of cinematic flair and while no other scene quite matches this one, it embodies everything that makes The Last Laugh so brilliant.

What may be the film’s most valuable trait, however, is its ability to balance the truly tragic downfall of its protagonist with an almost gleeful sense of humor. And here the great paradox that Murnau somehow works to his favor – a man who loses everything, including the respect of everyone who supposedly cared about him, yet the resulting tragedy is often quite hilarious. Perhaps it is the film’s titular twist that allows the offbeat tone to not ultimately seem in bad taste and while the coda does indeed feel a bit out of place, it is at least in the spirit of the rest of the film. If Murnau’s avoidance of sub-titles shows a faith in cinema’s visually expressive qualities, the ending suggests a belief in its regenerative powers, both in the feelings it conveys to the audience and the power of the auteur to bend the characters and their fictional world to their own liking. Whether it is real, a dream or a fantasy is beside the point – it recreates its own reality simply because it can and although it doesn’t quite work, the very fact that Murnau even attempted it makes it something less than a fatal flaw in otherwise nearly perfect film.

Sven

09-02-2008, 01:04 PM

Total rep for a justification of the ending. One of my biggest pet peeves ever is the endless recitations of "the ending ruins The Last Laugh!" In most of those instances, it is clear that the speaker is considering only a very superficial impression of the film.

Sven

09-03-2008, 12:30 AM

81. Sid & Nancy

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/Gary-Oldman-Sid-And-Nancy_l.jpg

I don't like the Sex Pistols, I'm not very interested in their seminal placement in cultural history and punk culture, and I think that Gary Oldman is one of the more overrated character actors of this generation. The star of this film is Alex Cox's uncanny capability to capture (or rather, create) a time, a place, and a person. Some of the best camerawork I've ever seen, with powerful vignettes and die hard thespian recklessness from the two leads make this film completely invaluable. The finale with Sid in the junkyard dancing to disco is up there with Rosebuds ashes--a cosmic tragi-comic send-off of a person too self-absorbed to exist with anyone else.

Spinal

09-03-2008, 01:26 AM

Praising Sid and Nancy while dismissing Oldman ... that's quite a feat. Still, I like this choice a lot. Cool film.

Sven

09-03-2008, 01:38 AM

Praising Sid and Nancy while dismissing Oldman ... that's quite a feat. Still, I like this choice a lot. Cool film.

I meant to qualify that to include praise for Oldman in his more fewer, more daring performances. His role in this, Prick Up Your Ears, and Track 29, I think, are fabulous. And he's generally amusingly flamboyant. I just don't buy the hype.

Spinal

09-03-2008, 01:40 AM

I meant to qualify that to include praise for Oldman in his more fewer, more daring performances. His role in this, Prick Up Your Ears, and Track 29, I think, are fabulous. And he's generally amusingly flamboyant. I just don't buy the hype.

This may very well be his best performance.

Melville

09-03-2008, 02:28 AM

I've never understood the praise for Gary Oldman, who always seems a bit too goofy, but that ending of Sid and Nancy sounds plenty intriguing.

the ending suggests a belief in its regenerative powers, both in the feelings it conveys to the audience and the power of the auteur to bend the characters and their fictional world to their own liking. Whether it is real, a dream or a fantasy is beside the point – it recreates its own reality simply because it can and although it doesn’t quite work, the very fact that Murnau even attempted it makes it something less than a fatal flaw in otherwise nearly perfect film.
Good stuff. I'm not a huge fan of any Murnau films I've seen, but I still intend to check this one out.

Spinal

09-03-2008, 03:17 AM

I'm not a huge fan of any Murnau films I've seen ...

I don't think I've ever read this combination of words before.

Melville

09-03-2008, 01:14 PM

I don't think I've ever read this combination of words before.
I like everything I've seen from him, I'm just not a huge fan of it. Nothing really stands out for me in any of his films.

D_Davis

09-03-2008, 02:38 PM

I've never seen Sid & Nancy, I never liked the Sex Pistols beyond a few songs - they always seemed like manufactured pop-punk to me - and I don't have an opinion on Gary Oldman strong enough to be considered negative or positive.

Sven

09-03-2008, 03:01 PM

Milky Joe

09-03-2008, 09:01 PM

I never liked the Sex Pistols beyond a few songs - they always seemed like manufactured pop-punk to me

I don't see how you could think this... the Sex Pistols were 'pop-punk' before anybody had even thought about calling it that, let alone actually manufacturing it. Were the Ramones also manufactured? I mean come on, you have to draw lines somewhere.

Duncan

09-03-2008, 11:28 PM

Haven't seen either of the last two. Love both Murnau films I've seen though. The Last Laugh and, more pressingly, Faust are on the long list.

Duncan

09-08-2008, 01:04 AM

81. Apocalypse Now (Coppola, 1979)

http://jaguar.it.miami.edu/~chris/formal_methods_in_the_movies/ApocalypseNow.jpg

Charlie does not feel, Charlie don’t surf, Charlie doesn’t do much at all. No harm in killing him then. And while we’re at it, might as well play some Wagner. Nothing else sounds quite so righteous. The aerial assault on the Vietnamese village is one of the more impressive scenes in Apocalypse Now, a film that could perhaps be more accurately described as a series of short films with recurring characters. The only scenes crucial to the story are the initial assignment of the mission, and the mission’s completion. Everything else could be excised without diminishing the plot. Nevertheless, Apocalypse Now remains compelling throughout by shear force of sound and image.

Loosely based on Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now retains its source’s central themes. The blood that streams below the surface roses our skin and inspires sweetness in those we encounter, but if you follow those kind arteries up through their narrows and forks, and into their beating source, and then to a corner of the left ventricle hidden by plastic and literature and the adoration of puppies, you will find a savage place. Those afflicted with compassion or empathy need not enter, and, indeed, few do ever enter alone. However, what if that savagery permeated the normative? What if it became indistinguishable from goodness? What if a man discovered this and revealed his new found knowledge to others? Would he be destroyed?

Don’t paint “fuck” on your airplanes. Drop the napalm without obscenities was the message delivered and it was the message obeyed. I’m sure all those that had time to acknowledge the gel splattering on their shoulders before it ignited – and they with it – appreciated this gesture of civility. And if they didn’t then surely they are (were) the savages. People have the capacity to embrace these thoughts on a large scale. It only requires a little encouragement. A nudge in the right direction. Colonel Kurtz, the man declared insane by his commanders, is not guilty of crossing any boundary from good to evil. He is guilty of saying to his country “You’re right. You are absolutely right,” as citizens and soldiers alike stand upright as ever, convinced that they are utterly unlike this man.

If Kurtz is redeemed it is because his mind cannot ultimately accept the path he chose. He took society’s virtuous viciousness to its mad limit by removing what doesn’t truly belong; by removing the cancerous adjective disguising itself as benign. What’s left but the viciousness? And so he asks to be killed, because no person can indefinitely inhabit that hidden corner of the left ventricle surrounded by murals of horsemen, plague, and death all antiseptically curated by pale men and women with matted hair and smiling faces. Apocalypse Now is a film of the large, but it’s Dennis Hopper’s strung out photojournalist who reminds us of T.S. Eliot’s version of the Apocalypse. It’s the quiet one, the small one, the one that people may never notice has already happened, is happening now, since we’re so busy asking the wrong questions.

Melville

09-09-2008, 01:37 AM

81. Princess Mononoke (Miyazaki, 1997)

What I love about Miyazaki isn't his recurrent themes of nature or his depictions of children growing up in a fantasy world. What I love is how he creates images, moments, and scenes of wonder. He doesn't try to jazz them up with fancy editing or camera angles, distractingly trying to convince us of just how much wonderment they contain; he simply displays their essential features and movements and then lets us marvel at them. He often takes advantage of the unique capabilities of cinema by focusing on motion and change, on moments that unfold in time. For example, in Princess Mononoke, when a forest god walks, foliage grows and dies in his footsteps, and Miyazaki shows this in a single shot, emphasizing the continuity of the process. (Only a few minutes later, this moment is contrasted with an event of such rapidity that it collapses the flow of time to its limit, as a severed wolf's head springs through the air and bites off a woman's arm, all in a split second. Again, motion and change are emphasized (extending even to violent changes in the bodily forms of an iron monger and a wolf god), and the moment of lightning speed gains much of its impact from its contrast with the preceeding slowly unfolding moments.)

The point: Princess Mononoke is so filled with wonder that it's in danger of bursting. It follows the usual mythical journey of a hero into a land of the unknown, but it's not overly concerned with the hero. Instead, it's all about the unknown—in the proper fabular sense of folk tales, in which bizarre events seem to happen with no sense at all, or at least with a grand ambiguity, even an arbitrarity. In this world, everything is always in motion, always metamorphosing; there is nothing fixed, nothing certain...especially physical forms, which frequently transform and are dismembered with alarming frequency (reminding me of the utter lack of reverence for the human body displayed by English legends, particularly in their wondrous beheading contests). As soon as the hero begins his journey, his arm is transformed into a wriggling gargantua. Later, a god or two is killed as if such a thing were an everyday event. And all of this is marvelously evoked by Miyazaki's emphasis on the motion of wonder (or the other way around).

Anywho, I'll forgo any more rambling and just show some of my favorite moments:

An arm wriggles most mightily...
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_1.jpg

...and somebody's head pops off.
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_2.jpg

Forest spirits with rattling heads climb into the trees...
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_3.jpg

...and the forest is transformed.
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_4.jpg

Hunters metamorphose into slithering doppelgangers of their prey.
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_5.jpg

The flesh of a boar god writhes with tendrils of rage...
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_6.jpg

...which engage in engorgement of wolf gods.
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_7.jpg

The god of the forest walks on water...
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_8.jpg

...and then grows a head filled with stars.
http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/mononoke_9.jpg

Duncan

09-09-2008, 06:07 PM

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:wbiOEgIUsoD-PM:http://www.swarmsupplies.co.uk/images/Silent-crickets-6.jpg

dreamdead

09-09-2008, 06:36 PM

I think the approach to AN as a series of short films is indeed valid, since so much of the journey can be excised without any real narrative discontinuity. Nonetheless, the strength of its moments--specifically Coppola's cameo, and the absurdity of the Playboy girls dancing, and that finale--all exist as the strongest moments. It's a film of shadows, and without the many, usually unconnected narratives, we wouldn't get a full sense of how how history and psychosis have shadowed in both Sheen and Brando. The film's ironies are still applicable, as are the ideas of madness and megalomania, but the quiet desperation in Sheen remains the most powerful moment.

That said, the extended cut to me was interminable, so I'm thankful that I went back and visited the original cut last year, which has the appropriate depth without overindulging in the idiosyncracies.

Miyzaki's film is trickier, since I've still only seen a VHS of the American dubbing, which negated some of the film's authenticity. Thematically it was as rich as any of his best work, but I felt too apart from the experience to value it as his strongest. That likely means a revisit is in order, but more likely, that I'll continue to remain ambivalent to this one instead. Gorgeous animation, but I was seldom invested.

Melville

09-10-2008, 01:32 AM

I realized that my brief review was verging on gibberish. So I expanded it to make it less brief and more gibberish.

Melville

09-10-2008, 01:45 AM

I think the approach to AN as a series of short films is indeed valid, since so much of the journey can be excised without any real narrative discontinuity.
I think the narrative is a pretty traditional journey-down-a-river story. It follows Heart of Darkness, Huckleberry Finn, and others going back to The Odyssey. The series of short episodes serves to reveal a world with its various facets, and through the whole we see the nature of that world and what it means to live in it. I love every story about journeying down a river.

That said, the extended cut to me was interminable, so I'm thankful that I went back and visited the original cut last year, which has the appropriate depth without overindulging in the idiosyncracies.
I greatly prefer the extended cut (except the bit with the French plantation). The more idiosyncratic episodes, the better.

Miyzaki's film is trickier, since I've still only seen a VHS of the American dubbing, which negated some of the film's authenticity. Thematically it was as rich as any of his best work, but I felt too apart from the experience to value it as his strongest. That likely means a revisit is in order, but more likely, that I'll continue to remain ambivalent to this one instead. Gorgeous animation, but I was seldom invested.
Dude, didn't you see that forest god growing a blobous head full of stars? If you can't invest in that, what can you invest in?

Melville

09-10-2008, 02:02 AM

Loosely based on Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now retains its source’s central themes. The blood that streams below the surface roses our skin and inspires sweetness in those we encounter, but if you follow those kind arteries up through their narrows and forks, and into their beating source, and then to a corner of the left ventricle hidden by plastic and literature and the adoration of puppies, you will find a savage place. Those afflicted with compassion or empathy need not enter, and, indeed, few do ever enter alone. However, what if that savagery permeated the normative?
Although this is definitely a key idea in Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now, I have to admit that I've never focused on it. What I've always been interested in is the idea that going into a foreign land frees the imperial representative from his normative ideals, because he is not subject to those of the conquered land. The heart of darkness is the complete absence of normative ideals, and in it the conqueror creates his own, new ideals, and he then commands the locals by virtue of his ability to create ideals.

Anyway, great movie and interesting writeup.

B-side

09-10-2008, 10:09 AM

Rep for Melville for making me very eager to watch Princess Mononoke again.:P

Melville

09-10-2008, 09:17 PM

Rep for Melville for making me very eager to watch Princess Mononoke again.:P
Aw, you repped me just before you got your rep power. I's been robbed!

B-side

09-11-2008, 09:46 AM

Aw, you repped me just before you got your rep power. I's been robbed!

I'm not entirely sure I understand (forgive my lack of knowledge on the whole rep thing, I'm still a noob).:lol:

Othello (Welles) - 6.5
Gummo (Korine) - 2

I agree with these to a certain extent. While I found Othello beautiful to look at, especially the finale in the bedroom, it was a bit hollow and truthfully, I couldn't understand what was being said sometimes.:P

As for Gummo, I don't hate it, but it's incredibly easy to see why someone would. I personally found it mediocre. I guess if it was attempting to be profound, or to say something about dealing with loss, it didn't do so particularly well for me.

Derek

09-11-2008, 08:36 PM

#81 - Sweet Smell of Success (Alexander Mackendrick, 1957)

http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/ol-images/kitchen/uploads/7-17-07SweetSmellSuccess5.jpg

Has there ever been a sleezier character than Sidney Falco who you somehow end up rooting for in the end? A more intense, intimidating, forceful and downright menacing display of corrupted power than Burt Lancaster's J. J. Hunsecker? A more damning yet gleefully fun critique of capitalism? Perhaps even I would say yes to one of those questions, but if I did, I'm certain there would be only a handful of answers I could come up with. As gloriously seedy as Sweet Smell of Success is, it's acerbic wit, Elmer Bernstein's wonderful jazz score and clever dialogue keep things moving at such a rapid fire pace that we never quite sink into the muck inhabited by many of the characters. The use of framing is particularly clever in mirroring the deceit and dishonesty of everyone but the honorable straight man, Steve, as several discussions occur with characters never looking at one another, as if hiding their true nature in tacit agreement to never reveal the true motives behind their actions or statements. The story operates on a fairly small scale, remaining focused on Hunsecker and Falco's plan to destroy the relationship between Hunsecker's sister, Susan, and her musician boyfriend Steve. At first, Curtis's smooth-talking, pretty boy Falco appears to be the lowest of the low, a press agent willing to do anything to get a story, using tactics that cause even Hunsecker to blush a little.

As the plot thickens and Hunsecker has to dirty his own hands, it becomes apparent that while Falco makes a living in the slime, he's no match for J. J. (quite literally foreshadowed in their early exhange: "Match me, Sidney." "Not right this minute, J. J."), whose self-aggrandizement has reached such heights that he not only wants control of his sister's life but to destroy anyone who gets between them. There are hints of incestuous desire, but J. J.'s motives come more directly from a desire to possess and be in power. Mackendrick sets up this morality tale with various alliances, some stronger than others (Susan and Steve) but none unshakeable by the destructive, wanton abuse of power and the corrupt nature of the newspaper business and night club world. The transformation of Falco from first class sleazeball to a pitiable, almost loveable, loser is perhaps the film's most remarkable achievement and in revealing the human traits that still lurk within him, we are met also with the gross inhumanity of Hunsecker, whose callousness and greed not only lead to his own downfall, but everyone around him as well. Whether one sees J. J. as the embodiment of the self-destructive nature of unchecked capitalism, or just a power-corrupted, crazy newspaper tycoon, Hunsecker's viciousness is still as frightening as it is all-encompassing. That Falco is revealed to merely a patsy, the long arm of a much more powerful being involved a grander, more cruel and vile scheme, makes Hunsecker appear all the more beastly and the film's condemnation of business as usual in the Big Apple.

Duncan

09-11-2008, 08:43 PM

That's a great one. I considered it for my list. Love the score.

Derek

09-11-2008, 08:49 PM

That's a great one. I considered it for my list. Love the score.

Yeah, it's got one of my favorite scores. I always remember how great Curtis is here, but somehow forgot what a powerhouse performance Lancaster gives. Some of the looks he gives are downright deadly and I particularly love his delivery of [paraphrasing] "Step aside Suzie, this requires further investigation." after finding out Steve accused him of setting him up. Few films are so humorous and vicious at the same time.

Qrazy

09-11-2008, 08:51 PM

The Sweet Smell of Success is a great film for many reasons but for one reason in particular. James Wong Howe is the fucking man.

Raiders

09-12-2008, 12:25 AM

James Wong Howe is the fucking man.

I'm inclined to agree even if only for his awesome work on Seconds. I still haven't seen Sweet Smell of Success.

Melville

09-12-2008, 01:38 AM

I'm not entirely sure I understand (forgive my lack of knowledge on the whole rep thing, I'm still a noob).:lol:
Each time you rep someone, they get a number of rep points equal to your rep power. When you repped me, your rep power was zero, but by the time I responded to your post it had increased to one. Hence, I's been robbed.

I agree with these to a certain extent. While I found Othello beautiful to look at, especially the finale in the bedroom, it was a bit hollow and truthfully, I couldn't understand what was being said sometimes.:P
Yeah, I didn't think it really did justice to the characters' relationships, although that scene in the bedroom was certainly terrifically tragic. Generally, Welles' chaotic editing and dramatic framing didn't seem to serve much purpose; it just seemed kind of haphazard.

Sven

09-12-2008, 03:18 AM

I'm inclined to agree even if only for his awesome work on Seconds. I still haven't seen Sweet Smell of Success.

:eek:

1 of the best. Rep 4 U, Derek.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/matchcut%20misc/prince.jpg

B-side

09-12-2008, 03:30 AM

Each time you rep someone, they get a number of rep points equal to your rep power. When you repped me, your rep power was zero, but by the time I responded to your post it had increased to one. Hence, I's been robbed.

Ahh. Sorries.:confused:

Yeah, I didn't think it really did justice to the characters' relationships, although that scene in the bedroom was certainly terrifically tragic. Generally, Welles' chaotic editing and dramatic framing didn't seem to serve much purpose; it just seemed kind of haphazard.

I gotta agree. I did like it a tad more than you, but it felt like a missed opportunity. Iago in particular I didn't find very compelling or interesting. Not the character in general, but the way he was portrayed here.

Qrazy

09-12-2008, 03:54 AM

I'm inclined to agree even if only for his awesome work on Seconds. I still haven't seen Sweet Smell of Success.

It's even more impressive. He does these dolly backwards with a gradual 90 degree turn which completely reset the focus of the scene.

Sven

09-16-2008, 04:08 AM

80. Serial Mom

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/serial_mother_serial_mom_1993_ image.jpg

The title says it all. She's a mom... aaaaaaand a serial killer. Have to admit, I'm kind of a John Waters-aholic, and I love much of his stuff just as much (Female Trouble, in particular, is another favorite), but this is his ultimate accomplishment so far (maybe because it was my premiere foray into Waters: I was twelve, my older sister showed it to me, and it's been a part of me ever since). Sure it's not as gross or outrageous as his "signature" stuff, but by damn, it's gotta be his funniest. The straightfaced absurdity of it all could only be accomplished through Waters's impishness funneled through a conventional veneer. It's brutal, it's hilarious, I strongly urge those who haven't seen it to do so. Kathleen Turner is smokin' as the ultimate SKILF.

Idioteque Stalker

09-16-2008, 04:47 AM

the ultimate SKILF.

Just thought I'd poke in and say that there is little reason this shouldn't catch on.

dreamdead

09-16-2008, 01:42 PM

Sven

09-16-2008, 02:08 PM

Serial Mom was viewed by me back when I was an impressionable teen, and its viciousness scared the crap out of me. Today I remember little but the caustic coda and the whole L7 concert sequence, but both of those moments are burned into my brain.

This is one of those films that, in a perfect world, would be ready-made for a rewatch. Alas....

Yeah, like I said, I was twelve when I saw it and the impression it left was not insubstantial. I had never heard the vulgar slang for female genitals ("Why, are those pussywillows, Dotty?"), I had never seen such brutality (like the woman being bludgeoned with a leg of lamb) or such blatant antisocialism. I was in awe. It only gets better as you grow older, though, trust me. Watch it again.

D_Davis

09-16-2008, 09:42 PM

See, I'm right there with you. So you should check out the movie. It's really really good.

I should - and I will.

I don't see how you could think this... the Sex Pistols were 'pop-punk' before anybody had even thought about calling it that, let alone actually manufacturing it. Were the Ramones also manufactured? I mean come on, you have to draw lines somewhere.

I never felt as if the Ramones were trying. Their attitudes seemed effortless and natural. The Sex Pistols always seemed as if they were trying too damn hard to be "punk," and thus they never really were to me; it all seemed to be an act. Wearing shirts that say "Pink Floyd Sucks," that's just stupid, and Johnny Rotten always seemed like a major tool to me. But then again, as far as punk goes, I always preferred the straight edge and hard core scenes over the Sex Pistols and Ramones-sounding stuff.

81. Princess Mononoke (Miyazaki, 1997)

Super great movie. One that should probably be on my list. I love Hisaishi's score.

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:wbiOEgIUsoD-PM:http://www.swarmsupplies.co.uk/images/Silent-crickets-6.jpg

http://genrebusters.com/images/crickets.jpg

80. Serial Mom

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/serial_mother_serial_mom_1993_ image.jpg

Great film - the only Waters film I actively like and enjoy, although I do find him to be a fascinating person and I respect what he has done for cinema.

Duncan

09-21-2008, 10:29 PM

80. The Man with a Movie Camera (Vertov, 1929)

http://serialconsign.com/images/2007/10/vertov-camera.jpg

“This experimental work aims at creating a truly international language of cinema based on its absolute separation from the language of theatre and literature.”

Dziga Vertov is another member in my Cinema of Holy Fools, a founding member even. Like Stan Brakhage’s Dog Star Man, The Man with a Movie Camera is an attempt at universal communication. That’s, like, big, man. With his camera as Kino eye Vertov captures the impossible moments of a train rushing overhead and women slathering mud on their breasts (what?). Well, I guess The Man with a Movie Camera is a failure as international language, because I have no idea what that part is about. Nevertheless, Vertov’s film is an artefact of pure belief not in god(s) or ideology, but in the exalting power of cinema.

Vertov is on a short list of great Soviet directors associated with dialectical montage. The most basic insight these directors shared was that the cut has powers of its own, and that a shot affects those preceding and following it. This often results in rather destructive tendencies. That is, the cut is used to cripple the shot. The image becomes a martyr, sacrificed for the sake of an idea or emotion. Though destructive, this is not necessarily a negative process as many profound moments have been forged in that ol’ furnace of affliction. Vertov, however, distinguishes himself by choosing to follow a summative style of montage.

In one sense Vertov’s montage is highly socialist. He gathers together images of workers, children, and magicians then weaves a tapestry of Soviet life in which no one person is more important than another. It is life in motion allowed to exist as liquid, images morphing to fill the spaces in time. When Vertov presents a series of freeze frame images it is important to understand that he is not manipulating time. Time, in this case, is fixed. Vertov proves it by shooting an editor cutting together these very images. By repeating frames he is extending images, not extending time. To remove a frame, then, is to leave a space unfulfilled. The community does not function without each person, nor does the film function without each image.

This conception of montage requires that images not exist as martyrs, but as irreplaceable units of creation. This is why there is room in The Man with a Movie Camera for the image of a woman riding a merry-go-round unconcerned that the world is spinning beyond her control, and who can lean upon the wooden horse beside her to more comfortably admire that unfathomable motion. And it’s why I consider my club of Holy Fools so noble. They’re the people who believe the removal of one of these people would create a void, who understand that the image shape is constantly in flux but volume is constant. Perhaps we are incapable of perceiving their loss and the void will go unnoticed – too small, too young, too old, too anonymous. But there remains Vertov’s belief in cinema, in this Kino eye that sustains us, that sees what we cannot, and is our record of being.

dreamdead

09-22-2008, 02:33 AM

Duncan

09-22-2008, 01:57 PM

Love how fully you engage with montage theory here, Duncan. Naturally, people like Bazin (someone whose study of long-take shots I still find invaluable) run contrary to the filmic ontology that Vertov certifies here, but The Man with a Movie Camera is so powerful and exact in its philosophy of the communal party/Party that I always concede my appreciation to it. And actually, it's likely a film that should have made my Top 50, as I took it off for more narrative-based selections. Such a mistake because its power has lingered long after the viewing. Few films achieve a sense of the transcendent more so than this one with its celebration of the cinema. Marvelous write-up and selection. One of the things I didn't really get to in my review is how light-hearted it is, and how effortlessly its theory is incoporated. When I watched it again last night all those slow motion shots of athletes reminded me of the most recent Olympics. 80 years later we still think this stuff is neat. Despite not having a story or characters I still think it's one of the most accessible silent films I've seen short of Keaton and Chaplin.

Derek

09-28-2008, 10:28 PM

Anyone know what happened to Melville? He hasn't signed on in the last 4 days...

SirNewt

09-29-2008, 12:25 AM

I read recently that Fellini taped a sign reading "Remember, this is a comedy," to his camera while filming 8 1/2. I think it's a very funny film.

When I first saw the scene in which Guido dreams about his bordello in which all the women above a certain age, 28 I think, have to live apart from him, well, when I first saw this scene my brain made the incredible jump of recalling a conversation I had heard about the film some time before. In the conversation feminism had been brought up. Just recalling that while watching this scene caused me to laugh uncontrollably.

dreamdead

09-29-2008, 12:34 AM

Anyone know what happened to Melville? He hasn't signed on in the last 4 days...

Yeah, I was wondering about him. I miss this thread. I miss the insight and recommendations that all four of you offer. Persevere, despite the drop-off in comments.

Derek

09-29-2008, 06:07 PM

Melville will unfortunately be dropping out due to personal issues, so we'll continue on as trio.

Derek

09-29-2008, 06:11 PM

#80 - Airplane! (Jim Abrahams, David & Jerry Zucker, 1980)

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j94/DSmith724/airplane.jpg

I’ve always dreaded reviewing Airplane!, not for fear of inadequately defending why I think it’s a comic masterpiece, which I already accept as an unfortunate inevitability, but simply because it’s the kind of film that I can’t bring myself to analyze. To me, the film is like a great piece of improvisational jazz, loosely held together by an overarching structure – and those who attempt to take it down a notch by mentioning that it steals its “plot” from Airport might as well use the same flawed reasoning to take Coltrane’s “My Favorite Things” down a notch – but impresses through its ability to flow smoothly from one segment to the next. If one breaks the film down to its various parts, it ceases to function like smashing a clock before explaining what makes it tick. Ok, so maybe it’s not Coltrane, but Airplane! does achieve something so simple, yet so rare in modern comedies – a rapid delivery of jokes with very few misses. Obviously this is a completely subjective response to the film and one that during my viewings over the years has never once changed, but let’s not forget we’re talking about a film where a nun hangs herself, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar threatens a child, a pedophilic pilot harasses little Jimmy, Robert Stack beats up a Hare Krishnan and, for the love of God, Barbara Billingsley talks jive. It hardly seems fair to compare it to other like-minded films when it’s so clearly the Citizen Kane of lowbrow humor. It’s aims might not be high but sometimes it’s better to plant a single tree and make it grow than plant a forest only to have it die.

D_Davis

09-29-2008, 06:53 PM

Awesome. Airplane is.

I can watch this and Kentucky Fried Movie all the time.

soitgoes...

09-29-2008, 10:52 PM

Great choice. This was a favorite of mine back in the day. The worst part of the film is that because Peter Graves is so great in it, it literally sucks when he gets sick and is absent for the entire second half. That and it spawned an awful sequel.

Robby P

09-30-2008, 12:35 AM

Joey, have you ever been to a Turkish prison?

How Zucker has fallen since. Yeesh. (Naked Gun not included)

dreamdead

09-30-2008, 02:14 AM

Airplane rocks. Was there ever a "modern" comedy, save for maybe Tati, that packed as many jokes into the frame than this one? Even Airplane's plot is beautifully delirious. Awesome pick.

Boner M

09-30-2008, 02:24 AM

How Zucker has fallen since. Yeesh. (Naked Gun not included)
Hot Shots! and Top Secret are great as well.

Sven

10-02-2008, 03:19 AM

I feel so bad because I've obviously been on the board more frequently than i said I'd be, but believe me when I say that my priorities are intact and as much as I'd love to get down to writing the sprawlier reviews with which I began this thread, I'm simply booked with papers for school.

Anyway, Man With a Movie Camera: brilliant. Saw it in the theaters and it was a revelation. I've never been so intrigued and involved in something so plotless for such a prolonged duration. "Nevertheless, Vertov’s film is an artefact of pure belief not in god(s) or ideology, but in the exalting power of cinema." Couldn't say it better.

Airplane! I'm less ecstatic about. I love the gag where Stack removes his sunglasses and is still wearing sunglasses. "Where did you get that dress?! And those shoes!...they're awful." Funny stuff, wouldn't call it great. My favorite spoof is Loaded Weapon. I'll defend the art of that film to the death.

My entry coming soon.

Sven

10-02-2008, 03:35 AM

79. American Pop

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/americanpopos.jpg

I love Bakshi. I love the combination of rotoscoping and traditional freehand styles. There's something dreamlike in it. Heavy Traffic may be his most fascinating picture, Wizards his most ambitious, Fire and Ice his most beautifully drawn, but American Pop is his greatest on the virtues of his expert ability to tap into the nostalgia and atmosphere of an adolescent rock culture. I was not a part of the 60s or 70s, though in spirit I would say that I'm not too far away, and like other great masters of the cinematic recollection of a culture's history (including John Boorman, Tran Anh Hung, David Lean, and yes, D.W. Griffith), Bakshi manages to drench me in his unique recreations of the eras of Joplin (Scott AND Janis), Gershwin, Hendrix, Cooke, Dylan, and most movingly, Bob Seger, whose song "Night Moves" is the pivotal theme and ultimate emotion of the film. Fuck Cameron Crowe's slick manufactured sentimentality--this is how a pop life really moves.

Winston*

10-02-2008, 03:43 AM

That sounds pretty sweet. If I found Fire and Ice unwatchable, would there be any chance I'd enjoy this?

Sven

10-02-2008, 03:44 AM

That sounds pretty sweet. If I found Fire and Ice unwatchable, would there be any chance I'd enjoy this?

Fire and Ice is pretty unwatchable. I greatly admire the art, but it is easily Bakshi's worst film. American Pop is nothing like it. Friends who are ambivalent about Bakshi concede to this movie's greatness.

D_Davis

10-02-2008, 04:15 AM

American Pop is awesome - great choice.

Spinal

10-02-2008, 03:09 PM

My favorite spoof is Loaded Weapon. I'll defend the art of that film to the death.

Just when I thought you could no longer surprise me.

D_Davis

10-02-2008, 03:44 PM

My favorite spoof, just because it fits my tastes more, is Eagle Shooting Heroes. It's the Airplane! of wuxia cinema.

Sven

10-02-2008, 03:57 PM

Just when I thought you could no longer surprise me.

In my effort to redefine myself, I have failed. :sad:

Sven

10-03-2008, 09:33 PM

I just rewatched American Pop and if I were to restructure the list, it would land in my top 20 without hesitation. Strong, strong picture.

Sven

10-04-2008, 12:40 AM

PFKAI = took me a second but genius.

Derek

10-04-2008, 12:43 AM

PFKAI = took me a second but genius.

And like that other famous FKA artist, I fully expect a return to iosos after a couple failed outings. ;)

Raiders

10-04-2008, 12:56 AM

PFKAI = took me a second but genius.

Yeah, it would have been cooler if your name was a strange symbol, but I made do.

Duncan

10-07-2008, 06:19 PM

Will have something up tonight. Sorry for the delay.

Duncan

10-08-2008, 12:30 PM

MacGuffin

10-08-2008, 09:45 PM

79. Ordet (Dreyer, 1955)

http://vjmorton.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/ordet2.jpg

I got caught up in the debate and post-debate nonsense last night. I promise to go back and write something about this one though, because I think it's an interesting film.

Since Netflix finally seems to be carrying that Criterion boxset, it looks like I'll be finally seeing this in due time as well, under the presumption it is sufficent as an entry to Dreyer's oeuvre.

dreamdead

10-10-2008, 11:14 PM

I'm interested to see Ordet mainly because of the esteem that Melville and others have regarded it with. Dreyer's one of those directors who deal with matters of faith intelligently, yet they are questioning enough in those same matters to stave off blind reverence. That kind of dichotomy, in addition to the immaculate framing that I've always noticed in pictures of Ordet, are what will finally get this film into my hands if Netflix gets it off "very long wait" soon...

It's interesting that you and select Tarkovsky get along so well despite the differences of faith. Is this another example of that same kind of dialectic working between you and the film, or are the ideas more... cinematic?

Qrazy

10-10-2008, 11:24 PM

Derek

10-11-2008, 01:10 AM

#79 - Do the Right Thing (Spike Lee, 1989)

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080616/do-the-right-thing_l.jpg

Spike Lee has never been known for his subtlety and he's often been taken to task for his less than even-handed portrayals of whites. To the former, I say it's wrong in many cases and when it's not, his sledgehammer tactics still lead to interesting, if heavily flawed, films like Bamboozled. To the latter criticism, I would suggest that Lee is often exploring those feelings and preconceptions which lie dormant in even some of the more well-intentioned, socially aware white Americans and, more importantly, not doing so in terms of realism, but by bringing that which lies hidden within to the surface. It is Lee's ability to do this with nearly every one of Do the Right Thing's vast array of characters that, for me, make it his towering masterpiece and still yet unsurpassed in the 19 years following its release in terms of examining the intangible web of racism on a communal and individual level.

Do the Right Thing remains so durable because it doesn't deal with racism in terms of Us vs. Them or see it as a mentality that exists only in evil people as so many other films have and continue to do. Lee's more dialectical approach sees the problem as something far more complex, lying within each and every one of us to varying degrees and he sets up the film as a series of oppositions, each of which creates a tension that slowly builds towards the famously explosive finale. While at times these oppositions are clearly defined in black-and-white terms, most notably in the series of quick zooms towards various characters spouting various racial epithets that had until that point been mostly unspoken, the characters themselves and their relation to one another are incredibly rich and complex. Sal's Italian American pride and attitude towards Radio Raheem and Buggin' Out make him come off as rather buffoonish, yet when he tells Vito how proud he is that the children of this community were raised on his food or Mookie that he always has a place at his store, the emotion is genuine and it's clear he cares about most of the people who frequent his establishment. And while Mookie at first seems like the bastion of reason and level-headedness, he is shown as being thoughtless both in his desire to get paid at all cost and his treatment of his sister, which mirrors the same disrespect he rails against Vito for showing his younger brother. Even the cops, who certainly get the rawest deal of the bunch are somewhat balanced by the three older black men who stew in their rage against the Koreans for having their own business when they've do nothing but sit around and drink and talk. Aside from the cops murder of Radio Raheem, Lee never resorts to the blame game, setting one group or person as being any more culpable than other. The stronge sense of place and community, created by the wonderful photography and brilliant editing patterns, allows for a fully realized expression of the swirling winds of repressed hatred, prejudice and general dissatisfaction with their social status that have worked their way into the core of every character.

From the opening montage of Rosie Perez dancing angrily to Public Enemy's "Fight the Power", the frustration that fuels the film can be felt in every frame. Sam Jackson's cry over the radio for everyone to "Wake up!" embodies its message that people must look within themselves as well as outside to find solutions and, as Jade - the only character in the film presented in a wholly positive light - says, find ways to make positive changes in their community. The message is never sugar-coated or delivered with even a scent of self-righteousness, which, even as a huge fan of the director I will admit often tinges his films. In fact, the message comes across only as a warning as Lee is not interested in providing pat, easy answers, but in providing a catalyst for thoughtful discussion and meaningful change.

Sven

10-11-2008, 04:47 AM

To the latter criticism, I would suggest that Lee is often exploring those feelings and preconceptions which lie dormant in even some of the more well-intentioned, socially aware white Americans and, more importantly, not doing so in terms of realism, but by bringing that which lies hidden within to the surface.

Next to Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, this may be my favorite opening credit sequence of all time. Tough call. Maybe I'll do a list sometime! Anyway, great selection. Just barely missed mine (but you will see a different Lee film on my list!). I take minor issue with the quoted passage, mostly because I think so many people laughed off that same line of defense when I tried to apply it to Crash. Furthermore, while a good point and certainly something that Lee brings up frequently, I think it is more peripheral to the ultimate purpose behind Lee's intentions, which have less to do with racial suppression than they do with racial genesis. In other words, it doesn't matter THAT a person's racist, it matters WHY they're racist and HOW they're racist.

I see Do the Right Thing more as a film about property and proprietorship. Sal's Pizzeria as an establishment of material discontent. It's all interwoven with certain racial explorations, but ultimately the racial questions end in more questions, whereas I think Lee's "right thing" could be definitively about racially compartmentalized institutions. Where Lee manages to find common ground between the King and X quotes is in the righteous violence towards corrupt enterprise, not the individual. In this way, the climactic conflagration is a social movement, not a riot, instigated in what I think is the truest "right thing" in the movie, by Mookie's hurling the trashcan through the pizzeria window.

Difficult film, but wealthy are the rewards. There's a billion ways to see it.

Derek

10-11-2008, 05:36 AM

In other words, it doesn't matter THAT a person's racist, it matters WHY they're racist and HOW they're racist.

I agree completely, though I definitely did not make that clear when briefly mentioning the characters relationships to one another and his unwillingness to play the blame game. By that I meant it's never about branding a particular character as racist (and even though the cops are, it's only to the great service of showing the danger of institutionalized racism), but rather showing how that racism manifests itself. Probably should've headed in that direction...

Melville

10-11-2008, 02:35 PM

79. Ordet (Dreyer, 1955)
Best movie ever.

The strong sense of place and community
That was what I liked most about Do the Right Thing: the sense of community, and the way that the racism grows out of (or is, at least, realized through) the relationships and power structures (especially those of ownership/property/production, as iosos said) that form the community. Very interesting film.

Sven

10-14-2008, 03:04 PM

78. The Loss of Sexual Innocence

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/hv/photo/movie_pix/sony_pictures_classics/the_loss_of_sexual_innocence/_group_photos/femi_ogumbanjo3.jpg

A very haunting picture that showcases Figgis's jazzy approach to pacing and screenplay and cinematographer extraordinaire Benoit Delhomme's beautiful light paintings and compositions. Comprised of episodes relating to the title theme, each story holds a unique visual and thematic potency. Nothing in the film equals Cage's performance in Leaving Las Vegas (nothing is given the opportunity), but where that picture is slightly over-sentimental (no more pictures about hookers with golden hearts please!), this one is daring, formally experimental, graphically imposing, and ultimately resonates with a dripping sexual profundity that has lingered at least with me with frightening power.

Spinal

10-14-2008, 03:08 PM

78. The Loss of Sexual Innocence

Major rep! Great film and yes, much better than Leaving Las Vegas.

Duncan

10-14-2008, 03:28 PM

Ack, I'm up again? Alright. I wrote something on Ordet that has nothing to do with Ordet yesterday that I'll post tonight. And I'll try to have something new written by Wednesday. Playing catch up.

Do the Right Thing is definitely up there. I'm trying to think of a better film about black/white race relations. Can't come up with any.

Haven't seen The Loss of Sexual Influence.

Raiders

10-14-2008, 03:48 PM

I do know somebody who has seen that film, and his reaction (I'm paraphrasing):

Most inane piece of faux, 60s-styled art nonsense I have seen.

Consider me psyched!

Sven

10-14-2008, 03:56 PM

faux, 60s-styled art nonsense

That makes no sense at all.

Raiders

10-14-2008, 03:58 PM

That makes no sense at all.

Hey, those aren't my words. Plus, I'm paraphrasing. He mentioned retro-stuff when he told me about it and I thought he said it reminded him of 60s-styled European filmmaking.

Whatever. I really am psyched to see it.

Sven

10-14-2008, 10:29 PM

I thought he said it reminded him of 60s-styled European filmmaking.

I don't see it. Haven't seen the movie in a while, but I don't know... this statement implies that all of Europe's filmmaking in the 60s was a wash of a similar art style, which is obviously not the case. On top of it, I see a similarity only to the extent that the film is trying to break new ground. It's a bit jazzy (obv, Figgis is a jazz musician) like some of the New Wave and a bit explicit like some of the Eastern European stuff and very quiet and introspective like some of the Northern European stuff. But I can't think of a single film this one resembles.

Your friend's comment is a very reductive one. What does the "faux" even refer to?

[/clearly rubbed the wrong way]

dreamdead

10-18-2008, 02:26 AM

95. Bigger than Life (Nicholas Ray, 1956)

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/biggerthanlife.jpg

“There are some side-effects associated with cortisone use. Depression and peptic ulcers occasionally occur. Psychic derangements may appear when cortisone is used, ranging from euphoria, insomnia, mood swings and personality changes, to frank psychotic manifestations. At high dosage, moon face and buffalo hump can also occur.”
— A Winning Essay: Cortisone: The Wonder Drug

“Childhood is a congenital disease, and the purpose of education is to cure it.”
— Bigger than Life

Nicholas Ray explodes the 1950s American ideal nuclear family. From the beginning, he hints at its instability: the father works a second job at a cab company in order to maintain a façade of success; he lies to his wife and son, who are models of docility; and he notes to his wife that their friends, as well as they themselves, are bores. The landscape of fifties suburbia is shown dense with exaggerated shadows, as if the darkness of film Noir’s expressionistic lighting lies, malignant, within the American ideal.

When the father starts taking cortisone pills to treat a rare blood condition, he develops a megalomania that ruptures the ideal, allowing all the unspoken resentment, quelled ambition, and bitter disdain born of this ideal to spill forth. Believing himself to be “bigger than life”—free from social bonds and filled with a violent energy hovering on despair—he casts aside American institutions, criticising the modern education system in a bitterly hilarious speech, scorning his marriage to a wife who he chastises as intellectually inferior, and finally condemning Christianity and its soft-hearted God. Played with both restrained pathos and sprawling mania by James Mason, the father exemplifies the malignancy lingering in those Noir shadows: a frustration with oppressive social norms and a despondent denial of one’s own failings.

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff317/FaulknerFan/biggerthanlife2.jpg

To reaffirm Mason’s disunion from his former self and society, the camera separates him from the rest of the cast, emphasizing the space between him and them, shooting him from below as if to glorify the absurd freedom and the terror of his mania. But this separation is laced with a frequently humorous tone, maintaining an ironic distance that allows us to remember the placid past underlying Mason’s grandiosity, never allowing that grandiosity to become seductive in its self-destructiveness. The melodrama of the father’s breakdown is embedded in the world of Father Knows Best, and this dichotomy is utilized to comment on both the breakdown and the televised idealization. With both extremes thus destabilized, the film then leaves only the reality: a sad picture of a man broken by the weight of his expectations.

Yeah, so it's taken several months for me to be able to watch Ray's film. Nonetheless, it is mighty solid and frequently mesmerizing. What strikes me hours after the viewing are the ways in which Ray manipulates our emotions toward Mason despite his so-called "psychoses." He is physically elevated above the other characters, he is given the most interiority despite his manias, and Ray gets the most out of his melodramatic acting style.

Yet all of these same characteristics are parlayed in a manner that is never too transgressive or too rabblerousing precisely because they are contained, and constructed, within a medically-induced psychosis. As such, the same familial, social, and religious norms that are earlier railed against ultimately become reified by film's end, so that the disorder and freedoms that were located in Mason are now expunged and once more suppressed. In other words, the sense of superiority and Nietzschean overman that might come from dis-engaging from the systems of society, systems which frequently model themselves on passivity if not mediocrity, is still denied and the social systems are reinstated. It's an altogether false moment at the end when Mason is "healed" and none the worse for the wear, a way of renouncing the dialectics that had earlier been invoked when these systems were in flux. It is, to my eyes, the only weak moment of the film, but one which damages so many of the strengths that you found in the work.

Kurious Jorge v3.1

10-18-2008, 02:50 AM

Best movie ever.

Word, homie.....or should I say Ordet? :lol:

SirNewt

10-18-2008, 04:34 AM

I'm seriously lacking in Dreyer experience.

Melville

10-18-2008, 05:33 PM

Yet all of these same characteristics are parlayed in a manner that is never too transgressive or too rabblerousing precisely because they are contained, and constructed, within a medically-induced psychosis. As such, the same familial, social, and religious norms that are earlier railed against ultimately become reified by film's end, so that the disorder and freedoms that were located in Mason are now expunged and once more suppressed. In other words, the sense of superiority and Nietzschean overman that might come from dis-engaging from the systems of society, systems which frequently model themselves on passivity if not mediocrity, is still denied and the social systems are reinstated. It's an altogether false moment at the end when Mason is "healed" and none the worse for the wear, a way of renouncing the dialectics that had earlier been invoked when these systems were in flux. It is, to my eyes, the only weak moment of the film, but one which damages so many of the strengths that you found in the work.
Yeah, I wasn't a fan of the ending. However, I think you're over-simplifying it a bit. The ending reaffirms the social (particularly familial) connections underlying the social systems that Mason's mania rejects, but it doesn't necessarily reaffirm the systems themselves. Like in It's a Wonderful Life, Mason's journey outside of social norms ends with him seeing their foundations more clearly, rather than living blindly according to them. The ending does come off as a bit too pat, but its ambiguous enough to be read in a favorable light, given what preceded it.

I'm seriously lacking in Dreyer experience.
Ordet and Passion of Joan of Arc are must-see, Gertrud and Vampyr are pretty awesome as well, and Day of Wrath isn't too shabby.

Duncan

10-18-2008, 11:04 PM

78. El Topo (Jodorowsky, 1970)

http://bp1.blogger.com/_dUcmyzz8pAM/Rn2I0pVolgI/AAAAAAAAA7I/Pd5GZZHv9-Q/s320/EL_TOPO-2.bmp

El Topo is known as the original Midnight Movie. I was fortunate enough to see a midnight screening at the IFC Center in New York, and it remains one of my favourite theatre going experiences. Alejandro Jodorowsky’s film is a smattering of genre tropes and images culled from various religions, an experiment of vision and symbols. One of the dangers of symbolic filmmaking is that the audience can get too caught up in meaning. One can forget the immanence of the images. Personally, I find that Peter Greenaway’s films lean awfully close to that chasm of intellectual meaning, and consequently seem incomplete. They do not motivate on an unconscious level, but operate quite purely on a rational plane. Contrariwise, El Topo is an immediate film. It is experienced best instinctually, unconsciously. Its meaning rises up from our emotional reaction, rather than us stooping to constrain it with ideas.

The animal oceans within us move quicker than the neuron streams of our minds, but they also move without precision. Starting from a certain stimulus my head and your head may likely arrive at the same destination at approximately the same time. The destination reached our heads have nowhere else to go.

“Hello head.”
“Hello your head.”
“Interesting journey wasn’t it?”
“Yes and such a refined end.”
La Cravate is on YouTube, by the way.

This is what Andrei Tarkovsky referred to as an “idea ceiling.” Jodorowsky avoids this ceiling by moving the animal oceans. But an ocean’s floor is not even, nor are the currents of its depths, nor are the waves of its surface. Thus, what emotional wave peaks in response to a man’s castration is different for each person. The audience at that midnight screening I attended was quite broad. Some people (OK, a lot of people) were obviously stoned out of their minds. Generally, they seemed to think that whatever happened was hilarious. Fair enough. There was a group of people like me who knew the film’s reputation and were willing to enjoy the ride and so enjoyed the ride. Finally, there were people who had no idea what they were getting into; people who found the film repulsive and didn’t understand what was so damn funny. Also fair enough.

Unlike most film screenings where people sit in the dark and then go home without interacting, the audience at this screening struck up a dialogue of sorts. One person would laugh, one person would snort disapprovingly. The first person would respond by turning around and making a face. Look, I didn’t say it was an overly intelligent dialogue, just a dialogue. At one point in the film a bunch of religious / capitalist fanatics play Russian Roulette in a church. When the blank in the chamber is switched out for a live bullet a small boy shoots himself in the head. Uproarious laughter ensues from the audience, followed by a delayed “That’s not funny!” from two rows behind me. So was it funny or wasn’t it?

It was both, of course. Different peaks in different oceans. El Topo is capable of generating such an extreme version of this effect because of the way it uses its symbols. Jodorowsky takes images that have been ingrained in the public consciousness and smashes them together with other images to create some new instinctual substance for us to ingest. Our gunfighter Jesus, for example, fails utterly as redeemer. By stripping his symbols or archetypes of their traditional meanings, turning them around, and marrying them off to other symbols Jodorowsky elicits responses absolutely contrary to what they should be. For all its nudity and violence, it is this manipulation of symbols that makes El Topo a truly subversive film. Our soundly comprehensible foundations are eroded away to the point where a child committing suicide is (in?)comprehensibly hilarious. El Topo does not humanize its characters, but it does, for better or for worse, humanize its audience.

Sven

10-18-2008, 11:43 PM

Excellent review. I'm more of a Holy Mountain man myself, but dig 'em both, as well as your by now trademark writing excellence.

Duncan

10-19-2008, 12:46 AM

Excellent review. I'm more of a Holy Mountain man myself, but dig 'em both, as well as your by now trademark writing excellence.

I like The Holy Mountain as well, but think that it may run into that idea ceiling I referred to. Especially towards the end there seems to be only one way to interpret many of the symbols and so nowhere else to go. El Topo may be less fantastic or accomplished, but it's also more mysterious in my eyes. The frog/lizard scene is probably the best thing he's done though.

I've actually decided not to post my write-up on Ordet because it's embarrassingly silly and overly political in comparison to the film and I don't really want to rewrite something that engages the film more directly because that would be a lot of effort.

Melville

10-19-2008, 02:39 AM

Personally, I find that Peter Greenaway’s films lean awfully close to that chasm of intellectual meaning, and consequently seem incomplete. They do not motivate on an unconscious level, but operate quite purely on a rational plane.
Definitely. In The Draughtsman's Contract, the image is frequently seen through a draughtsman's viewing frame. Meanwhile, the narrative of the film revolves around somebody being "framed" for a crime. On the DVD commentary track, Greenaway repeatedly mentions this somewhat lame visual pun as an example of the harmony between form and content that films should strive for. I think that sums up what I dislike about Greenaway's films: they so carefully calculate things that are ultimately simplistic, and then make a point of emphasizing their own calculatedness.

Anyway, I couldn't stand El Topo, partly because I thought the conflation of symbols was irritatingly silly, but I did like this line from your review:

Unlike most film screenings where people sit in the dark and then go home without interacting, the audience at this screening struck up a dialogue of sorts. One person would laugh, one person would snort disapprovingly. The first person would respond by turning around and making a face. Look, I didn’t say it was an overly intelligent dialogue, just a dialogue.
:lol:

SirNewt

10-19-2008, 03:25 AM

Ordet and Passion of Joan of Arc are must-see, Gertrud and Vampyr are pretty awesome as well, and Day of Wrath isn't too shabby.

List no more SIR! I have not time!

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-2/653261/melodrama.jpg

dreamdead

10-19-2008, 03:52 AM

Yeah, I wasn't a fan of the ending. However, I think you're over-simplifying it a bit. The ending reaffirms the social (particularly familial) connections underlying the social systems that Mason's mania rejects, but it doesn't necessarily reaffirm the systems themselves. Like in It's a Wonderful Life, Mason's journey outside of social norms ends with him seeing their foundations more clearly, rather than living blindly according to them. The ending does come off as a bit too pat, but its ambiguous enough to be read in a favorable light, given what preceded it.

That's an interesting distinction that you identity in Bigger than Life. It's something that I'm not sure I entirely with, though I agree with the Capra analogy and that Ray's film would be bettered by such ambiguity. I read Mason's transformation as a projection of the unconscious, to be sure, yet at some point (either during the school talk with the parents or with his continual punishing of his son) I feel that the film identifies Mason as having fractured and split from his old self. There didn't feel with like there was a merging between the two selves; rather, the dominant self that patronized the systems felt like it had sublimated all of the old self. As such, I never got the sense that Mason's character proper was cognizant of what he was enacting with his newfound dominance, and therefore never perceived the ending as an understanding of the foundations of society's systems. Instead, it felt merely like a Code-mandated happy ending, one that did not have enough psychological foreshadowing to certify the logistics of it.

I think Johnny Guitar retains its title as Ray's best, but definitely did love when this film went all-out with its extension of noir lighting and themes of anti-authoritarianism.

Melville

10-19-2008, 02:07 PM

That's an interesting distinction that you identity in Bigger than Life. It's something that I'm not sure I entirely with, though I agree with the Capra analogy and that Ray's film would be bettered by such ambiguity. I read Mason's transformation as a projection of the unconscious, to be sure, yet at some point (either during the school talk with the parents or with his continual punishing of his son) I feel that the film identifies Mason as having fractured and split from his old self. There didn't feel with like there was a merging between the two selves; rather, the dominant self that patronized the systems felt like it had sublimated all of the old self. As such, I never got the sense that Mason's character proper was cognizant of what he was enacting with his newfound dominance, and therefore never perceived the ending as an understanding of the foundations of society's systems. Instead, it felt merely like a Code-mandated happy ending, one that did not have enough psychological foreshadowing to certify the logistics of it.

I think Johnny Guitar retains its title as Ray's best, but definitely did love when this film went all-out with its extension of noir lighting and themes of anti-authoritarianism.
I thought the buildup to Mason's more extreme behavior was gradual enough, the pre-medicated demonstrations of his frustrations and burdens clear enough, and the social milieu dominant enough, to make it relatively certain that Mason's actions were the result of feelings already latent in him (or at least closely related to them).

However, I think the film's social commentary remains basically the same even if Mason's post-medicated self is entirely split from his former self. We see the criticisms of his social system, even if he doesn't. And at the ending, because the film has shown us the breakdown of the foundations of the social system, we can hope that Mason does have a newfound appreciation of those foundations, and that he isn't simply returning to a struggle to live up to the system's demands for the sake of appearances; even if he doesn't complete that journey and learn the lesson, the film has led us on that journey.

Also, the disparity between pre-medicated and post-medicated Mason is important. Mason's character works to achieve a certain ideal family-man identity, and his breakdown doesn't just reveal the illusory nature of the ideal: it reveals the fragility of the whole notion of personal identity, which is probably the most fundamental of the foundations of society.

But certainly the ending would have been much better with more ambiguity, or with a more careful connection between medicated and non-medicated Mason.

Derek

10-20-2008, 04:01 AM

#78 - The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (John Huston, 1948)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3218/2521510201_f422e5396b.jpg

Often classified broadly as a film about greed and its grand thesis patly summed up with all the subtlety of a liberal Gordon Gecko or Ayn Rand, many critics and historians seem content with leaving The Treasure of Sierra Madre on the shelf until a clip is needed about the destructive nature of greed or the “badges” line is yet again drudged up for a greatest film quotes list. Isn’t it strange that its most famous line not only comes from a periphery character but also from, at least in my opinion, not even one of its ten best scenes? Isn’t it even stranger that this “immortal” line, “I don't have to show you any stinking badges” has been misquoted for the past 60 years and will most likely continue to be misquoted for another 60? Are these oversimplifications and small misunderstandings a sign of the most neglected of the unquestioned classics of Hollywood’s Golden Age? I certainly don’t mean neglected in terms of reverence since it’s rare to find the film absent from any consensus top 100 list, but its greatness is accepted as a given so much that what actually makes it a great film often goes unmentioned.

Now, I’m not going to jump in here and suggest anything radical like the film isn’t about greed, but I think Ebert was right to suggest it is a character study more than it’s about gold. The dehumanization of Fred C. Dobbs remains one of the most frightening turns of fate in cinema and while the narrative catalysts of gold and greed are crucial in this development, at least as much credit must be given to John Huston for his astounding use of close-ups. It’s not in the same league as The Passion of Joan of Arc, however Huston’s camera is nearly as attentive to the ticks and grooves of Bogart’s face as Dreyer to Falconetti’s. And while I can’t deny that Bogart didn’t have the overall range as some of the other greats from the time, the subtlety of the expressions he produces, both vocally and facially, as his character struggles with the increasingly burdenous task of balancing his humanity with a desire to forever escape his poverty shows a remarkable control and efficiency within that range. It was not merely a matter of growing a beard and throwing some grease on his face - Bogey's already odd-looking face is distorted in ways I've never seen before, expressing feelings of anguish, despair and pure rage to a degree he never again matched.

What also remains fascinating for me aside from the tandem of Huston and Bogart is the remarkably complex way the narrative tackles the subject of greed. So often in film and literature it is portrayed through a man corrupted by power or wealth, yet here the men are simple and stuck in the daily struggle to get a meal. Their impulse towards finding gold is initially based only on a desire to avoid suffering, to never again have to submit themselves to the humiliation of begging, to raise themselves to at least the minimum standard of a respectable human being. Thus, rather than showing greed as a symptom of corruption, Huston attaches it to need and makes it stick on a far more universal level than if he had simply showed it as an extension of having power and/or money. Through these three seemingly typical men, Treasure of the Sierra Madre intelligently explores the issues of greed, trust, honor and desire that none of us can escape. Delivered in the form of a thrilling adventure film, it embodies the finest attributes of Classical Hollywood, molding form, content and entertainment into one dense package.

SirNewt

10-20-2008, 07:14 AM

So often in film and literature it is portrayed through a man corrupted by power or wealth, yet here the men are simple and stuck in the daily struggle to get a meal. Their impulse towards finding gold is initially based only on a desire to avoid suffering, to never again have to submit themselves to the humiliation of begging, to raise themselves to at least to minimum standard of a respectable human being.

Always a favorite of mine.

I like this observation. This is a theme I noticed that similarly occurs in Clouzot's, "The Wages of Fear". The fear of irrelevance can drive us to the meat grinder just as easily as grasping at power can.

Sven

10-23-2008, 02:43 PM

77. Felicia's Journey

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/MV5BMTk5NzYxMjE5N15BMl5BanBnXk FtZTY.jpg

Definitely the most exhilarating and profound of the Egoyan films I've seen (roughly 6-ish), with a close contender in Exotica. I will be the first to admit that it could very well amount to my Hoskins fanboyishness, and seeing him stretch himself to such a horrific degree in this picture had an enormous impact on my involvement in the narrative (and Egoyan's trademark fracturing of the narrative, connecting things across temporal planes in resonant ways) and appreciation for Hoskins's thespiatic capabilities. The narrative echoes of mother-son in Hoskins's maternal and television obsessions and Felicia's pregnancy and flight impress the worldly horrors and limitations of the mind and body. A truly frightening picture.

dreamdead

10-23-2008, 02:59 PM

Huston's film has long been on my radar. I suppose it's time to shift back into classical cinema viewing here, so I'll get on that one soonish.

I remember Sven rhapsodizing over Felicia's Journey, but this placement is still interesting. I barely remember any of the camera shots, whereas Exotica or The Sweet Hereafter have images burned into my brain. While the film initially felt rather static, it did quietly gain in power and vitality throughout the film's length. Hoskins' character is the lynchpin to the film working, since everything is predicated on how his machinations impact Felicia. For their part, the return of the television images, while ostensibly allowing Egoyan to work with his pet themes, grew in import and shifted the film into a resonant character study. It's not my favorite of his, but I can see why it'd work for you.

Super excited to hear baby doll's praise for the new Egoyan that'll be here shortly, though...

Duncan

10-25-2008, 02:05 AM

77. Flaming Creatures (Smith, 1963)

NSFW:
http://www.prettysick.co.uk/images/Ali%20Baba%20Comes%20Today%20% 233.jpg

Jack Smith was an American director who rose to notorious prominence in the 60’s for his films and performance art. Flaming Creatures is the kind of fringe filmmaking that invites you out further and further until suddenly you’ve ended up back at some hilarious, nightmarish version of the centre. Here’s a place where men would be indistinguishable from women if only they would stop wagging their cocks in your face, and where lipstick is marketed on whether or not it rubs off during a blowjob. The film could have been a pornographic freak show. It could have been some numbing orgy filmed amateurishly and provocative in nudity only. But Flaming Creatures is filmed ecstatically, passionately, nostalgically, and skilfully. Despite the burning madness of its titular creatures, Smith’s film is actually one of calculation.

There is a close up of a woman’s breast in Flaming Creatures. She’s sort of jiggling it back ‘n forth and it’s moving like some small mountain suddenly scared to death - granite come alive, foundations turned to trembling jelly. One side of Jelly Mountain is bright, the other side is dark. As the camera gets closer and the jiggling gets faster the breast stops existing and is replaced only by its illumination or lacktherof …light/dark/nipple!/light/dark… Jack Smith turned a tit into strobe effect with nothing more than a hand held track and an agreeable actress. That’s talent.

This flickering breast shot occurs in the middle of a rape scene. The sound track is an unrelenting scream (out of sync with the actress’ gaping mouth) set against some vaguely threatening Western imitation of Asian music. Amid this aural dissonance the woman is overwhelmed, plasticized, and taken by the celluloid. She is utterly transfigured. Humanity is stripped bare (literally), torn apart, then converted to light. She is like a primordial precursor to the David Lynch heroine. From person to “tits & ass” to terrifying glitter sparkles to grey oblivion.

Our tit image (which you must think me a bit obsessed with at this point, no?) returns to conclude the film. This time the woman is alone, relaxed, playing with herself. What I love about this image is the ultra-low contrast. One almost has to strain to see her as one might strain to remember the details of an ex-lover’s face, and just how he or she felt during that time before calling that willing body ex-anything-at-all was unthinkable. And then, when the feeling that memories are just memories is at its strongest, Flaming Creatures reminds us exactly what sensory dials peaked during that experience. It gives the woman back to herself and hews off any bits of plastic remaining. The shot is similar to its earlier counterpart, but it strays from abstraction. The breast is a breast in all its naked fleshiness.

Duncan

10-25-2008, 02:18 AM

You can watch Flaming Creatures on UBUWEB (http://ubu.clc.wvu.edu/film/smith_jack.html). There's an essay there as well that's better than mine.

I should probably add that I'm only 95% sure that woman I speak of is a woman. Androgyny is such an integral part of this film I don't want to speak absolutely.

Boner M

10-25-2008, 02:20 AM

Have you seen Ron Rice's Chumlum, Dunc? Caught it at Anthology in July. Maybe my favorite piece of 60's NYC avant-garde cinema. Lots of shots of people swinging in hammocks with a dreary cityscape images superimposed over, as well as the usual amateur theatre shenanigans thrown in. Has a real morning-after quality that has had indelible resonance with me.

Still have yet to see FC, I know it's on ubuweb tho.

EDIT: There ya go.

Duncan

10-25-2008, 02:33 AM

Sven

10-25-2008, 04:08 AM

Qrazy

10-25-2008, 04:35 AM

Yeah I'm with Sven on this. I cannot stand Flaming Creatures.

Kurosawa Fan

10-25-2008, 12:54 PM

Yeah I'm with Sven on this.

:eek:

Duncan

10-26-2008, 12:57 AM

I find Flaming Creatures practically unwatchable, though I think it says more for my general disinterest in transparent avant-garde than any intellectual merit the experiment actually possesses. I mean "transparent" in the sense of a disinterest in stimulating the spirit, emotions, or achieving a lucidity of vision relevant to life beyond the celluloid. I can not see any meaning in Flaming Creatures beyond itself--I cannot use it.

And, it feels cheap. I guess I mean "transparent" also to describe its production value as well. The laughter and screaming and basic overall sound design feels canned and recorded (like something I made when I was in high school) and the imagery is, as far as I can tell, fairly non-composed, interested only in moments of moving sexual abstraction. I'm willing to chalk this one up to my not watching a decent print though.

Like I said: the ideas may be in the right place, but it's too ugly and too hermetic. Compare it to something like Brian De Palma's first film, Woton's Wake, which is explosive with experimental energy, humanistic import, and beautiful visual compositions which result in a highly resonant experience.

Well, in response to it being cheap, it is. Pretty sure he had to steal props and stuff. I've read that it's actually a send up of genre movies, specifically ones that starred a certain actress. Can't remember her name. Kind of like a trimming down of everything big budget studio movies show, and a comedic over-exaggeration of everything they only suggest.

In response to it being ugly, I don't think so at all. I think it's actually rather beautiful. Like I said, I like that parts of it are very low-contrast. Even if some of the imagery seems to be captured by accident, those accidents are set up and purposefully photographed. I don't consider it hermetic. I think the people making it are actually having a good time, and I can take part in that on an ironic level. There are certain musical cues that are very provocative, kind of like Anger's use of pop music. I think that its engagement with "Far East" adventure stories is actually meant to show (partially) how hermetic those films are. It's also meant just to have a little fun with them.

Basically, I think you might be taking the film a little too seriously if you can't use it.

Sven

10-26-2008, 01:16 AM

Basically, I think you might be taking the film a little too seriously if you can't use it.

Absolutely possible, as this is not the kind of crew with whom I would be comfortable having fun, I dare say. And remember, I did admit my bias. I'm still trying to wrangle a sense of what that bias is, precisely.

dreamdead

10-30-2008, 07:00 PM

*coughs* :)

Derek

10-30-2008, 07:05 PM

*coughs* :)

Yeah, I know. Netflix's Watch It Now feature decided not to work when I tried it a couple days ago, so I'm getting it, slowly, through Karagarga. I'm at AFI Fest this weekend, so a review may have to wait until next week.

Derek

11-03-2008, 07:55 PM

#77 - Pickup on South Street (Sam Fuller, 1953)

http://readingeagle.com/BlogUploads/68/pickup.jpg

Pickup on South Street, Sam Fuller’s brutal yet sensual masterpiece, begins on a speeding subway train, full of colliding bodies stuffed inside like canned sardines. No one speaks, but everyone glances; some at the floor or out the window, others at unsuspecting passengers, yet all attempting in one way or another to not betray what’s truly on their mind. Every initial glance is revealed to be misdirected until our anti-hero, Skip McCoy, bursts onto the scene to meet the sultry gaze of Candy, the delivery girl who’s carting around a film strip which, unknown to her, contains U.S. government secrets that she’s passing on to a Communist agent. Fuller cuts between angular close-ups of Candy’s lustful visage and Skip’s stoic response, eventually revealing, through another extreme close-up, that he is picking her pocket, willing her closer to him so he can make off with the dough. An on-looker sees him, but the sea of bodies prevents him from making it off the train in time. And in one short minute, Fuller brilliantly sets up a world of mistrust, deception and fierce individuality – a world where former absolutes like love and honor all have their price.

Post-war malaise tinged with Cold War paranoia and the struggles of the enlightened yet suffering “modern man” are all efficiently packaged in this rough-edged, no-nonsense noir where the area’s always grey. Fuller’s anti-hero always remains incomplete, never fully aligning himself with either side. He is a perpetual tweener, not taken in by the nationalistic platitudes spouted his way left and right, yet willing to rough Candy up when he takes her for a Commie. And still he stands on no side but his own, remaining content as a lonely thief, since in that, at the very least, he can be honest about his deception. Not only does Skip initially refuse to turn the film over to the authorities, instead seeing if he can squeeze the Commies for 25 Grand, but even when he does the right thing – giving the squirmy Communist agent Joey his comeuppance, accepting Candy’s love as a sign of his own personal redemption, and even giving the police everything they need – he leaves not with thanks but the stamp of a two-bit crook and a clean wrap sheet that comes with a snide guarantee that it won’t stay that way for long. In Fuller’s world, there’s always an angle and trust is a commodity in short supply. The Reds are the bad guys, but no one leaves untainted and in the end, Candy, in her angelic white dress, is perhaps the only sign of hope and even that comes about through an uneasy mix of naivety and guts.

Sven

11-03-2008, 08:13 PM

Derek

11-03-2008, 08:31 PM

Great review. That film is the weakest Fuller film I've seen (something about the rough and tumble climax leaves me wanting), which is more indicative of the high quality of his output. Still give it ***1/2. I loooooove Widmark. One of my very favorite actors.

Widmark is so amazing in both this and Night and the City. Love the dude. What exactly is it that bothers you about the climax? That it goes so quickly from Candy getting shot to her recovering and exiting the police station with Skip?

Sven

11-03-2008, 08:36 PM

Widmark is so amazing in both this and Night and the City. Love the dude. What exactly is it that bothers you about the climax? That it goes so quickly from Candy getting shot to her recovering and exiting the police station with Skip?

And of course, Ms. Ritter was unquestionably deserving of her statue.

It's too long since I've seen--I could not recall precise details. I remember thinking that the big fistfight was dramatically weak, particularly considering the rest of the film's expertly suggestive set-up. That's all I'd be able to say without seeing the film again, which I'd love to do.

Duncan

11-03-2008, 08:47 PM

I hated Pickup on South Street. That opening scene, which you describe very well, felt uncomfortably like an endorsement of rape. The way she smiles as he illicitly spreads her purse open, his fingers slip in, and then robs her. It's filmed as though she enjoys it. I just felt the whole scene was icky.

Then the rest of the film continues with ancient forms of gender politics. She falls in love when he hits her, for example. I mean, are you kidding me? Everything seemed terribly antiquated.

Watashi

11-03-2008, 10:09 PM

I hated Pickup on South Street. That opening scene, which you describe very well, felt uncomfortably like an endorsement of rape. The way she smiles as he illicitly spreads her purse open, his fingers slip in, and then robs her. It's filmed as though she enjoys it. I just felt the whole scene was icky.

Snuh? I'm pretty sure Fuller is not endorsing rape.

Raiders

11-03-2008, 10:21 PM

http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/61/61slapadame.html

A very interesting read on the history and nature of "slapping dames" in American cinema (and with more than a few tangents elsewhere) with a few paragraphs in the bottom half on Fuller's film.

Sven

11-07-2008, 11:39 PM

76. The Brave Little Toaster

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/BraveLittleToaster2.jpg

There is so much to say about this seemingly namby-pamby cartoon that I feel crippled at the task. This is a massive, brutal picture with a heart ten times larger than its premise would have you believe. I've never seen a more inspirational image of friendship than a vacuum throwing itself into a waterfall. Nary a more heartbreaking image exists than that of a wilting flower scorned by a toaster. I dare you to show me a more stirring image than a lamp in a lightning storm. People who have seen it know what I'm talking about. I can understand if those who have not seen it think it sounds trite--watch it. You'll be surprised.

Spinal

11-08-2008, 12:04 AM

That film is awesome. Really amazed me considering my expectations. The best thing Wats ever recommended to me.

dreamdead

11-08-2008, 07:00 PM

I remember loving this one from childhood.

Spaceman Spiff

11-09-2008, 01:37 AM

Hahahahaha.

Totally forgot about that movie. It is indeed pretty great. Phil Hartman as the radiator = Decidedly awesome.

Sven

11-09-2008, 05:53 AM

Totally forgot about that movie. It is indeed pretty great. Phil Hartman as the radiator = Decidedly awesome.

AND the Peter Lorre hanging lamp.

Spinal

11-09-2008, 06:00 AM

My rave review. (http://filmepidemic.blogspot.com/2005/08/brave-little-toaster-rees-1987.html)

Sven

11-09-2008, 06:08 AM

My rave review. (http://filmepidemic.blogspot.com/2005/08/brave-little-toaster-rees-1987.html)

Way to show me up, you son of a bitch.

Still love you!

Spinal

11-09-2008, 07:07 AM

Way to show me up, you son of a bitch.

Heh, your inclusion of the film reminded me how much fun I had writing about that one, so I decided to share.

transmogrifier

11-09-2008, 09:41 AM

I refuse to believe that a toaster is any braver than, say, a blender or a motorized whisk.

Entire premise of the film shattered right there.

Sven

11-09-2008, 03:22 PM

Way to show me up, you son of a bitch.

Still love you!

I really do not remember writing this. I was wasted, apparently.

Spinal

11-09-2008, 03:26 PM

I really do not remember writing this. I was wasted, apparently.

:lol:

Sven

11-09-2008, 03:44 PM

:lol:

Excellent review, by the way. I'd read it before, but I read it again and liked it again.

Spinal

11-09-2008, 05:45 PM

Excellent review, by the way. I'd read it before, but I read it again and liked it again.

Thanks, you son of a bitch.

Sven

11-09-2008, 06:28 PM

Thanks, you son of a bitch.

I'm normally such an amiable drunk.

Sycophant

11-09-2008, 06:47 PM

Sven and Spinal are so right, it hurts. I revisited this film a little over a year ago and was blown away by its refusal to hold the audience's hand or talk down to it. Easily one of the best family/children's films of the eighties. There are several levels on which it can be enjoyed: at the very surface level, it's an adorable story about doe-eyed household appliances; or, if you like, you can take in the moral and theological tale it tells.

Love it.

Duncan

11-21-2008, 12:42 AM

76. Blade Runner (Scott, 1984)

“The perception of beauty is a moral test”
- Henry Thoreau

http://bendyk.blog.polityka.pl/wp-content/uploads/BladeRunner.jpg

If there’s one director I have a love/hate relationship with it’s definitely Ridley Scott. I consider both Alien and Blade Runner to be exceptionally fine films. The rest of his output is commercial hackwork feigning importance (“What we do in life echoes in eternity!” – Pineapple Express), the worst offender being Kingdom of Heaven. It’s gotten to the point where I am unwilling to spend the money on a ticket for his latest releases. When I eventually get around to his newer work on DVD it inevitably makes me curious to revisit Alien and Blade Runner. Surely they can’t be as good as I remember them being. They’re adolescent filmmaking that I liked as a 15 year-old and would dismiss as a much, much wiser 22 year-old. And then I watch them. Alien and Blade Runner are two youthful masterpieces from a director who turned out to be definitively mediocre.

Blade Runner is based on Phillip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? However, it veers wide of a faithful adaptation. One of the unique touches in Scott’s film is the recurring motif of eyes. Eyes are engineered, they’re crushed by the fleshy thumbs of a robot, pupil dilation indicates humanity in android detection tests, and the eyes of replicants shine red in the right light. Most memorable is Roy Batty’s monologue in the rain, “I’ve seen things you people couldn’t imagine…” Dick’s book and Scott’s film both deal with the question of how to classify existence. What makes a humadda yadda real emotions yadda yadda just imitating yadda yadda you get the idea, right? These are questions asked and re-asked pretty frequently. Scott approaches them in a unique way by phrasing Blade Runner’s answers in terms of perception.

Batty’s speech about C-Beams sticks with people. It’s the kind of thing that gets on AFI lists. But why do we recognize this monologue as something exceptional? Why, for some, does it answer those half formed questions about machine identity and the worth of artificial life yet to be? Roy does not speak of love and hate. Nor does he speak of good and evil. He speaks of beauty – of events that he has perceived as beautiful and has, in the thing he calls his memory, marked particularly worthy of being remembered. I am troubled at how difficult I find it to prove Thoreau’s assertion that the perception of beauty is a moral test. However, I believe I have found proof by example in this scene. That’s my feeling, anyway. That Roy Batty is a good being remains up for debate, but the question of whether or not he is a moral creature is answered by the aesthetic processing and expression of sensory experience.

Still, the question of imitation remains. It is true that Roy’s morals are not identical to human morals. His brain is different from a person’s brain. Nevertheless, the supposition that Roy’s morals are not “real” because they are different from our own is incorrect. At some point, probably not too far in the future, people will invent an intelligence that is capable of replicating moral thought. The challenge is not to convince people that if something is a perfect imitation then it should be considered just as valuable as the original. People watch TV. They’ll swallow that concept in a second. The challenge is to convince people that a being who approaches morality from a different perspective than their own and, perhaps, arrives at different conclusions, is worth as much as themselves. At this point we have stepped outside of science fiction and into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, into Nine Eleven, and into countless other human failures of empathy.

Duncan

11-21-2008, 12:44 AM

Sorry it took me so long. Completely forgot that I was up. A lot of reality going on around me.

SirNewt

11-21-2008, 06:43 AM

If there’s one director I have a love/hate relationship with it’s definitely Ridley Scott. I consider both Alien and Blade Runner to be exceptionally fine films. The rest of his output is commercial hackwork feigning importance (“What we do in life echoes in eternity!” – Pineapple Express). . .

I recently revisited, 'Gladiator'. I found it pretty detestable. The continual speechmaking bored me. The characters prattle on, yet no one is ever really saying anything to each other. If editing frames a films time and spacial reality, dialogue frames it's consciousness. If everyone delivers their dialogue, looking forlornly over the other character's shoulder into the distance, the characters don't really exist at all. "Freedom this" and "Rome that", 'Braveheart' got away with it because they paired it with some character. Granted, it was all pretty unidimensional but never underestimate the power of schmaltzy charm.

I could go on but after I spent so much time on my negative review for 'Delicatessen' and it turned out so badly I don't want to write any more.

Tell me, which cut do you prefer. I originally saw the director's cut but I much prefer the new final cut. I've never actually seen the theatrical version but I've seen the Ford voice over stuff and nggghhaaaaa! It's terrible!

Duncan

11-21-2008, 12:39 PM

I recently revisited, 'Gladiator'. I found it pretty detestable. The continual speechmaking bored me. The characters prattle on, yet no one is ever really saying anything to each other. If editing frames a films time and spacial reality, dialogue frames it's consciousness. If everyone delivers their dialogue, looking forlornly over the other character's shoulder into the distance, the characters don't really exist at all. "Freedom this" and "Rome that", 'Braveheart' got away with it because they paired it with some character. Granted, it was all pretty unidimensional but never underestimate the power of schmaltzy charm.

I could go on but after I spent so much time on my negative review for 'Delicatessen' and it turned out so badly I don't want to write any more.

Tell me, which cut do you prefer. I originally saw the director's cut but I much prefer the new final cut. I've never actually seen the theatrical version but I've seen the Ford voice over stuff and nggghhaaaaa! It's terrible!
I've only seen the Director's Cut. I'm not overly interested in seeing the others.

dreamdead

11-21-2008, 12:47 PM

Duncan

11-21-2008, 02:20 PM

This review interests me in light of Walter Benjamin's ideas of mechanical reproduction and the aura that is displaced within that commodity culture. What fascinates me is that here Batty, as you note, articulates a vision of beauty that is ostensibly opposed to how humans perceive androids in the film. So within that moment Batty gains a modicum of humanity, of emotionality, and so generates a level of compassion within us. And Ford's character himself oscillates between these modes, and so he retains some level of that same aura, remaining outside the commodity culture that surrounds him.
I'm having a little trouble remembering exactly how Benjamin defines "aura," but I do remember having some disagreements with him on what generated that aura, and with the existence of that aura at all. I think it exists more in our perception of the object than in the object itself.

OK, so I've gone back and read bits of that essay.

Namely, the desire of contemporary masses to bring things "closer" spatially and humanly, which is just as ardent as their bent toward overcoming the uniqueness of every reality by accepting its reproduction.
Perhaps it's wrong to just yank this out of context, but who's going to stop me? I think where Bejamin goes wrong here is that he claims, by implication at least, that the reproduction of a reality does not also contain the uniqueness of an original reality. How can the "uniqueness of every reality" be overcome if the reproduction of that reality also falls into the set called every reality?

Phew. How convoluted was that? Anyway, it's an interesting essay and an interesting application of it.

monolith94

11-21-2008, 03:13 PM

I found Walter Benjamin's logic and argumentation so narrow and weak, that I've completely erased that ugly little essay from my databanks.

Duncan

11-21-2008, 03:25 PM

I found Walter Benjamin's logic and argumentation so narrow and weak, that I've completely erased that ugly little essay from my databanks.

It's pretty seminal stuff. You can recognize his ideas all over the place.

Duncan

11-21-2008, 07:33 PM

IBM just got funding from DARPA to try and mimic a cat's brain. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7740484.stm)

SirNewt

11-21-2008, 08:31 PM

I'm having a little trouble remembering exactly how Benjamin defines "aura," but I do remember having some disagreements with him on what generated that aura, and with the existence of that aura at all. I think it exists more in our perception of the object than in the object itself.

OK, so I've gone back and read bits of that essay.

Perhaps it's wrong to just yank this out of context, but who's going to stop me? I think where Bejamin goes wrong here is that he claims, by implication at least, that the reproduction of a reality does not also contain the uniqueness of an original reality. How can the "uniqueness of every reality" be overcome if the reproduction of that reality also falls into the set called every reality?

Phew. How convoluted was that? Anyway, it's an interesting essay and an interesting application of it.

hmmm. . . maybe you could phrase that a little differently? As it is, I don't really see a problem with what you dispute in your last paragraph there. When a painter creates an original painting we call that unique. But if another painter reproduces that painting, though, it will be slightly different in every way, we do not call this new painting unique. Physically at a visible level they will be different but what you might call the apriori paintings are the same. One is unique the other is not yet they are the same. Maybe, this is a bad metaphor. I haven't read the essay but just puzzling over your logic brought this thought.

Qrazy

11-21-2008, 08:58 PM

I've only seen the Director's Cut. I'm not overly interested in seeing the others.

I've actually heard The Final Cut is where it's at. Theatrical cut is in fact balls.

Duncan

11-24-2008, 05:04 PM

hmmm. . . maybe you could phrase that a little differently? As it is, I don't really see a problem with what you dispute in your last paragraph there. When a painter creates an original painting we call that unique. But if another painter reproduces that painting, though, it will be slightly different in every way, we do not call this new painting unique. Physically at a visible level they will be different but what you might call the apriori paintings are the same. One is unique the other is not yet they are the same. Maybe, this is a bad metaphor. I haven't read the essay but just puzzling over your logic brought this thought.

I'm saying that we should re-evaluate our definition of "unique," and that our conceptions of reality (including how we perceive paintings and films) cannot be rigid. I guess I'll cite Israfel's discussion over in the Objectivity in Film thread. It's not a polar thing, and defining a thing as unique/not-unique is a bit counterproductive. However, I think one can always define a phenomenological experience (ie. life) as unique, no matter how informed it is by previous context or experience. So, object: can never be unique. Perception of that object: always unique. This is why I do not like Benjamin's idea of an "aura" that "original" objects possess and reproductions don't. I am willing to say that people imbue objects with something I do not mind calling an aura, but that aura is never inherent to the object itself.

When I was in the van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam I saw this one painting that actually moved me to tears. I bought a diary in gift shop with that painting on the cover because I'm a sucker like that. Anyway, the diary has now been written in and when I see that cover it means entirely different things to me than the original painting did. It has become unique, in a sense, but is still just a cheaply printed reproduction. It can never be entirely one or the other.

Derek

11-28-2008, 10:50 PM

#76 - Goodfellas (Martin Scorsese, 1990)

http://images.teamsugar.com/files/users/1/15259/16_2007/goodfellas2.preview.jpg

Even after Thanksgiving, thinking about this film still makes me hungry as I remember that bitching meal the old guys prepare in prison. Unfortunately, I don't have much to say about this until I rewatch it, but I'll take a pass for now to keep things moving and hopefully add a review somewhere down the line.

dreamdead

11-29-2008, 01:44 PM

Haven't seen this one in about a decade. Since I own it, I feel the inclination to watch it occasionally and then remember that it's likely typically good but not the type of film I'd seek out to revisit. Scorsese seldom inspires me to revisit his work for whatever reason, save for Taxi Driver and Last Temptation of Christ.

Bracco was delicious in this, though, I recall.

Sven

11-29-2008, 08:13 PM

I still think Casino is better, and have had epic arguments centering around this film, that film, The Godfather, and Scarface and the ways each of them inherently glorify and condemn criminality. It's a good movie, but I have a hard time loving it.

Milky Joe

11-29-2008, 08:18 PM

My biggest problems with Goodfellas are Ray Liotta and the lack of anything visually interesting going on, save the few famous tracking shots and that scene at the diner. My favorite Scorsese films have cameras that are alive, dynamic, fluid. And they're colorful (like Casino). Goodfellas is just drab and unpleasant. Plus Ray Liotta.

Sven

11-30-2008, 05:27 PM

A quarter of the way done!

75. Dog Day Afternoon

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/dog-day-afternoon.jpg

A zesty, unpredictable, pulsating narrative executed with superb craft and righteous acting. One of most exciting of all films.

Qrazy

11-30-2008, 05:35 PM

Great pick.

dreamdead

12-01-2008, 01:26 PM

Wonderful pick. Love the energy and life that this film contains, as well as the transgressive quality that Lumet generates with the characters.

I heart everything that John Cazale was in.

Duncan

12-01-2008, 02:25 PM

I'm a little bit ambivalent about Goodfellas. Haven't seen it in a long time to really comment. It's got impressive drive for a film with such a loose plot. In many ways it's the film I identify most with Scorsese.

Dog Day Afternoon is a big blindspot for me.

Duncan

12-02-2008, 01:23 AM

75. The Goat (Keaton and St. Clair, 1921)

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/reviews/81/1117680139.jpg

Fact: Buster Keaton invented Looney Tunes.

I don’t actually know who invented Looney Tunes, but this statement seems true enough in spirit that I’m leading with it. I wish I knew more about early film history so I could say for sure, but that Buster Keaton was more cartoon than man seems self-evident. Therefore, I will not investigate the matter further. In The Goat’s twenty-two minutes Keaton leaps from buildings, speeds impossibly fast through streets, and wantonly injures his pursuers. That a policeman may be dead – crushed to death by rocks – doesn’t seem to bother him so much. Instead of worrying he piles a couple more rocks on and then sprinkles a handful of grass to cover up the car-sized pile of rubble. The Goat is essentially an extended chase scene through increasingly improbably situations. The stunts and irreverence are both worthy of the animated Road Runner shorts that are its clear descendents and have made me laugh at the ailments of an unfortunate canine since I was six.

Fact: Buster Keaton invented Parkour.

In 1910 Buster Keaton was just a lonely lad growing up in Paris. He contemplated Montaigne and drank wine while imagining the moon was close enough to reach with a particularly impressive leap from the Eiffel Tower. He longed to reach the top of the tower, but couldn’t afford the elevator ride up. Stairs not being invented yet, he decided he would have to climb. But how? He conspired with his friend L’Autre to steal a lemur from the Zoo de Paris. This plan was executed, but I’m not telling you how they did it. (Hint: think floral pattern drapes and other random objects that are lying about the room as I write this.) After six years of watching the lemur climb trees Keaton decided it was time to try his great leap for the moon. He walked along La Seine until he came to the park below the tower (the Seine leads to the Eiffel Tower, right? Been a while since I was in Paris). Keaton mounted fountains only to jump off them with style, the style of the lemur. He later incorporated meerkats into his style as well. It involves a lot of standing and looking and killing snakes. He reached the base of the Eiffel Tower and, with the deadpan face that would come to define him, he Parkoured his way to the top, only to fall when he made his jump for the moon. Luckily a local news van had arrived by this time to cover the event. An American producer saw the post-fall interview:

Reporter (not named Sally): Wasn’t it kind of stupid to jump for the moon?
Keaton: Yeah, Sally. I guess it was.

The producer, recognizing Keaton’s keen talent, had Keaton flown to America where he became one of the silver screen’s biggest stars only to make some bad career decisions, become an alcoholic, crash, and make a sad cameo in Sunset Blvd.

Fact: Buster Keaton, not Sir Isaac Newton, invented Newtonian physics. The name is confusing, I know. Historians should not be trusted. No talent for nomenclature.

The Goat, being an extended chase scene, is all about motion. Almost every gag involves the stillness or movement of vehicles and people. From the mannequins that impede Buster’s progress in the bread line to the train car that isn’t hooked up to the spare tire that isn’t attached to the car. Eventually Buster learns to control his environment instead of getting himself stuck to lampposts. In what is absolutely one of my favourite moments captured on film Keaton yanks the hand displaying what floor an elevator is on, and in doing so sends the elevator shuttling through the roof in aborted take-off. Having for the third time in this film very likely killed someone Buster doesn’t miss a beat: he skips hand in hand out the door with his new girlfriend. The art of movement.

Fact: Buster Keaton was brilliant.

Sometimes I go back and read the New York Time’s original reviews of Keaton’s films and am overcome by the urge to beat the Grey Lady black and blue. They seem so desperate to catch him in some villainy, but like the police in The Goat they’re always one step behind. It reminds me of the moment when Keaton’s huge antagonist, having cornered Keaton in a room, locks the door and rips the key in half. Cut to a reaction shot of Keaton puzzling his face at the ridiculousness of the man’s action and then swiftly parkouring over his would-be-captor and out a tiny window.

As I write more about film I realize that my favourite films are often associated with great theatre experiences. Such is the case with The Goat. The crowd was friendly and a pianist played live accompaniment. The Goat is an old film, but that screening wasn’t ironic or nostalgic. It was just people enjoying the absurdity of Buster Keaton jumping through tiny windows. I think as long as we are living we will enjoy things that don’t make sense, and will appreciate puzzled looks at people who rip keys in half. This is why Keaton’s films have always endured and will continue to do so.

dreamdead

12-03-2008, 03:45 AM

Sven

12-03-2008, 03:46 AM

It is one of my favorite shorts, and your review is fun, although I'm not sure of the point you were making in suggesting that Keaton invented Newtonian physics. Oh well. Chalk one up for whimsy, I suppose! :)

Spaceman Spiff

12-03-2008, 03:57 AM

Though I loved Keaton before I saw this short, this was the one that affirmed my appreciation for his craft. Artfully designed, and never less than thrilling. Though the film lacks the philosophical heft of your other choices, this one can work anytime, anywhere. Solid write-up, as usual.

Philosophical heft is overrated.

Keaton isn't. The Goat is fantastic, and I loved that caption you used Duncan. It's my favorite moment in the short.

Derek

12-08-2008, 02:45 AM

#75 - The Road Warrior (George Miller, 1981)

http://stuntrev.com/stuntawards/roadwarrior/warrior.jpg

Post-apocalyptic films have the unique ability to examine mankind’s most brutal instincts and basest desires. No film so fully embodies the potential of this sub-genre to shake its audience from their complacency and does so with such unflinching lucidity as George Miller’s The Road Warrior. From the brown desert clashing against a bright blue sky to the harsh black leather against the softness of white flesh, Miller paints, in unapologetically broad strokes, a frightening yet thrilling picture of a world devolved into a Darwinian nightmare. Dominated by two groups – one a tribe of leather-bound savages, the other a roughshod militia, clad in angelic white cloth, that hoards what remains of the oil supply in the infinitesimal hope of making the 2,000 mile trek to the coast – the film re-imagines the Australian outback as a desolate wasteland upon which it takes its central protagonist, Mad Max, and transforms him from vengeful cop to an almost mythical being who saves mankind from the depths of Hell before disappearing down the seemingly endless stretch of highway where the film’s drama unfolded.

Despite becoming something of a savior to the gas-guzzlers, Max is anything but a Christ figure. In fact, he isn’t much of anything now that he’s quenched his thirst for revenge. He merely wants enough gas so he can be on his way and the fact that the film makes it fairly explicit that Max has literally nowhere to go makes him, and the film, infinitely more interesting. In this post-apocalypse, he shares neither the hope for a bright future nor the hatred necessary to devolve into barbarism as exhibited by the Alice Springs chapter of Sadomasochists Anonymous, but rather embodies the purely instinctual desire for survival. Devoid of any need for human connection or communication, Max oddly enough represents the realist stuck between two opposing extremes.

Considering that while Humungus and his band of miscreants have been offed by film’s end, the “white militia” will surely face similar threats tenfold so the dream of actually reaching the coast is feeble at best and more than likely as delusional as Sam Lowry’s magnificent fantasies in Brazil, whose fate I wager they share. The explosion of their home near the end of the film can be interpreted as a hopeful beginning of a journey towards regeneration and a new and better place, but realistically, it represents the impossibility of achieving stability and the notion that home, in this new world of there’s, is now a transitory concept; one that can only exist peacefully when confined to the imagination. It is Max alone, the embodiment of objective, unemotional rationale who meets the brutality of this world head on, realizing that greed has destroyed the potential for anything more than fleeting happiness, so he is left like a hamster on a wheel to drive and survive since that is what his base instincts demand of him. The film doesn’t necessarily side with his worldview nor does it push it upon the viewer, but that it’s presented in such a way that takes nothing away from the sheer spectacle of the film and its mesmerizing set pieces speaks to the skill with which Miller mixes genre tropes with social commentary. Nihilism has never been so fun!

Winston*

12-08-2008, 03:04 AM

Awesome!

I have no time for people that don't appreciate Mad Max II: The Road Warrior.

Qrazy

12-08-2008, 03:12 AM

I should probably revisit that one since it's been so long.

D_Davis

12-08-2008, 05:06 AM

Great pick D. It's on my top 100 as well. A totally deserving film; it's a pure action-film reduction.

Sven

12-09-2008, 07:55 PM

Nihilism has never been so fun!

Nihilism, really? I think the narration eschews that reading.

My entry up in a bit.

Qrazy

12-09-2008, 07:56 PM

You guys need to pick up the pace.

Sven

12-09-2008, 08:07 PM

74. The Pledge

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v350/iosos/Top%20100%20movies/jack_nicholson4.jpg

Nicholson, playing a detective, tells a couple, amidst a barn full of turkeys as the blue and red lights of the trooper go round and round outside the barn's open doorway, that their child has been murdered. The gobbles fill the soundtrack, Jack looks sad, Clarkson becomes sad, and those lights just keep spinning. The movie opens with Nicholson muttering in a state of what looks like confusion or dementia as a flock of super-imposed crows fly over his face. Benicio del Toro plays an Indian and is unsurprisingly, unspeakably strange. Nicholson becomes obsessed with discovering the killer, laying to waste the sanity and sanctity that describe the transparency of a community's waking life. All that's left is a flock of birds and a ravaged brain. You want nihilism? I'll give you nihilism--watch The Pledge.

Duncan

12-09-2008, 08:11 PM

I think The Road Warrior is a little more hopeful than you, but I too consider it a great film.

Qrazy

12-09-2008, 08:12 PM

Derek

12-09-2008, 08:12 PM

Nihilism, really? I think the narration eschews that reading.

The word's a bit harsh I suppose, but I meant it in this sense: "complete denial of all established authority and institutions" in relation to Max's disengagement from those who wish to welcome him into the fold later in the film. His decision to drive off at the end was a rejection of a life with meaning and purpose and I think the film made it clear that even that life didn't stand much of a chance in the long run (unless you firmly believe that the Gyro Captain would get them to the promised land). Seems pretty nihilistic to me. I also haven't seen Beyond Thunderdome so I'm only viewing Max's actions in the context of the first two films.

Duncan

12-09-2008, 08:12 PM

Haven't seen The Pledge. Sounds good though. Nicholson, del Toro, nihilism...

Sven

12-09-2008, 08:14 PM

The word's a bit harsh I suppose, but I meant it in this sense: "complete denial of all established authority and institutions" in relation to Max's disengagement from those who wish to welcome him into the fold later in the film. His decision to drive off at the end was a rejection of a life with meaning and purpose and I think the film made it clear that even that life didn't stand much of a chance in the long run (unless you firmly believe that the Gyro Captain would get them to the promised land). Seems pretty nihilistic to me. I also haven't seen Beyond Thunderdome so I'm only viewing Max's actions in the context of the first two films.

I'd probably say "existential anarchy," but I see what you mean. I don't think, though, that he rejects "purpose." I think his purpose is clear, which is to survive with as little as possible. Hence, existential.

Sven

12-09-2008, 08:16 PM

I watched Rourke's bit in The Pledge on youtube the other day. It and this have inspired me to check out the film... and I guess if I like it Penn's other work as well. I also really like Nicholson so that's a deciding factor.

It's a beautifully photographed film (one of my favorites in terms of visuals alone), and it's a top-5 Jack performance. I wasn't too keen on the other Penn films I've seen (Crossing Guard, Indian Runner), but they're admirable for lots of reasons.

Sven

12-09-2008, 08:16 PM

Haven't seen The Pledge. Sounds good though. Nicholson, del Toro, nihilism...

I recommend the book as well, for the record.

Derek

12-09-2008, 08:21 PM

I'd probably say "existential anarchy," but I see what you mean. I don't think, though, that he rejects "purpose." I think his purpose is clear, which is to survive with as little as possible. Hence, existential.

Perhaps, though I don't think nihilism necessarily precludes survivalist instincts. I mean, one can be a nihilist and still want to survive himself, yet Max never tried to prevent anyone from doing their thing, so existential probably describes his mindset more clearly.

Been wanting to check out The Pledge for a while. Giving it the ole Netflix bump.

Melville

12-09-2008, 08:21 PM

Haven't seen The Pledge. Sounds good though. Nicholson, del Toro, nihilism...
Aren't you anti-nihilism?

Duncan

12-09-2008, 08:23 PM

Aren't you anti-nihilism?

Sure, but I like dipping my toes in the abyss from time to time.

Sven

12-09-2008, 08:29 PM

Perhaps, though I don't think nihilism necessarily precludes survivalist instincts. I mean, one can be a nihilist and still want to survive himself, yet Max never tried to prevent anyone from doing their thing, so existential probably describes his mindset more clearly.

The emphasis was on "little as possible," not survival. But I think we're on the same page.

Raiders

12-10-2008, 01:40 AM

Yeah, The Pledge is a damn good movie, and it makes me sad that Nicholson just hasn't attempted to do different kinds of performances such as this more often.

Duncan

12-14-2008, 10:43 PM

74. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Gondry, 2004)

When the world comes down to this one dark wood…
Before our four astonished eyes…
To a beach for two faithful children…
To a house of music, for our clear accord…

I will find you.
- Arthur Rimbaud

http://blog.afi.com/100movies/user-uploads/post1506.jpg

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is a film that I am wary of simply because it seems to play too often on my own fantasies. A tall, quiet, defensive man meets some rainbow-haired beauty who stirs his soupy life out of malaise. And then they fall in love. He associates certain things with her: dressed up potatoes, skeleton suits, Tom Waits albums. I have dated a girl who liked Tom Waits, but when I listen to Rain Dogs I do not think of her. I think of dwarfs on wharfs and how awesome Rain Dogs is. I’d love to have a relationship where Rain Dogs holds some shared meaning beyond the private ones concerning madness and loneliness that it does now. I imagine many such relationships exist. Doesn’t seem so far fetched. Aside from the narrative device of memory erasure there is nothing in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind to which I cannot say, “Could happen.” Worse, there is really nothing in Eternal Sunshine that I don’t want to happen to me – even the embarrassing bits, even the break up. Works of art that speak so narrowly and directly to me, or at least one part of me, are bound to fall under suspicion.

Hollywood is often accused of whitewashing life, of trimming nuance (or thought in general), and, most dangerously, of capping off stories that by every conceivable thread of logic should be tragic with the dreaded happy ending. Mostly I consider these types of films ridiculous and have a tendency to dismiss them. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is such a troubling film to me because it is my ultimate escapist cinema, and yet I love it dearly. It is, in a significant way, everything I don’t want a film to be. It’s an accidental affirmation of longings by strangers, it’s people who never thought about bringing art (such as Tom Waits albums) to life because they were so full of life themselves, and that’s all impossible to me. I’ve never seen it happen and don’t know of anyone who honestly has, though I’ve seen it in the future. It looks like leaking streetlights through tears and rain during an unassuming credits sequence and it never comes into focus. You don’t get to be a person like Joel unless you’re mistrustful and a bit paranoid. You know: the type of person who assumes your neighbour has crashed his unscratched car into your own. I dislike ending with someone else’s thoughts, but let me return to Rimbaud. Same poem, her perspective:

Let me penetrate all your memories…
Let me be that woman who can bind you hand and foot…

I will strangle you.
…

Then again, fuck Rimbaud. I prefer to nurture my celluloid fantasies. Like I said, no one is so full of life that they don’t imagine bringing art to life. That eternal sunshine is just on the other side of the horizon shouldn't matter.

Qrazy

12-14-2008, 11:07 PM

Well I saw and quite liked Turtles Can Fly and have now procured A Time for Drunken Horses and Marooned in Iraq. So thanks for the heads up there Melville. Has anyone seen Marooned in Iraq? If I like both I'll probably check out Half Moon also.

Qrazy

12-14-2008, 11:09 PM

Eternal Sunshine is quality and still the best thing Gondry has done. For Kaufman work I think I still prefer Adaptation. I need to rewatch Being John Malkovich to see how it holds up. I remember enjoying it but I don't think it's as accomplished as the other two films.

Robby P

12-15-2008, 03:09 AM

The Pledge is such a great movie. Nice pick there.

Melville

12-15-2008, 09:06 PM

Wonderful review of Eternal Sunshine. I feel similarly about Lost in Translation, though Eternal Sunshine seems more truthful and less aestheticized.

I should read some Rimbaud. Have you read Baudelaire? He rocks the house.

Sven

12-15-2008, 09:37 PM

Eternal Sunshine seems... less aestheticized.

It's one of the most aestheticized movies ever!

Melville

12-15-2008, 09:50 PM

It's one of the most aestheticized movies ever!
I just mean in terms of its treatment of romantic relationships and their dissolution. Lost in Translation presents an ideal version of fleeting love, while Eternal Sunshine comes off as a more honest portrayal of the highs and lows of a relationship. Not that it doesn't wrap a lot of quirky aesthetic around that, and not that Winslet's character isn't an obviously aestheticized version of an actual type of person, but...wait, what was my point?

Duncan

12-16-2008, 12:29 PM

Sven

12-16-2008, 03:48 PM

I frequently forget how good Eternal Sunshine is because I have so many minor beefs with it. The idealized Clementine I find borderline offensive (if the film wasn't playing so heavily with subjectivity I probably couldn't find room to maneuver away from that). The basic scenario of the film requires that we accept a model of associative memory with which I simply cannot agree. The Patrick subplot feels like filler in an otherwise tightly developed narrative, even if the Dunst-Wilkinson bit feels too easy.

Little things like that. Still, it's a very interesting and very entertaining movie.

SirNewt

12-18-2008, 09:56 PM

I just mean in terms of its treatment of romantic relationships and their dissolution. Lost in Translation presents an ideal version of fleeting love, while Eternal Sunshine comes off as a more honest portrayal of the highs and lows of a relationship. Not that it doesn't wrap a lot of quirky aesthetic around that, and not that Winslet's character isn't an obviously aestheticized version of an actual type of person, but...wait, what was my point?

I feel like that a lot around here.

Raiders

12-18-2008, 11:29 PM

I feel like that a lot around here.

That you keep forgetting your point? It's OK. We still love you.

Derek

12-27-2008, 10:28 PM

#74 - Aguirre, the Wrath of God (Werner Herzog, 1972)

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/images/NoelMegahey/aguirre3.jpg

There is a moment in Aguirre, the Wrath of God that symbolizes, for me, everything great about the film, from its shooting style and thematic content to Klaus Kinski’s body-driven performance and the way Herzog’s camera often seems to dance with his presence in and out of the frame. It is almost a throwaway moment; one I imagine came about only through dumb luck and Klaus Kinski’s barbaric intensity. In a perfect strike of fate, now forever captured and eternalized on celluloid, about halfway through the film, Kinski spins violently around in a fit of rage on the raft to meet a bothersome horse eye-to-eye. One might expect, at most, a push of the head to move him out of the way, but no, Kinski looks the great beast in the eye and screams with an intensity few other actors could ever match, “Get out of my way!” to which the horse not only quickly stutters aside, but slips and falls. I can think of no better way to sum up the madness of Don Aguirre’s quest for El Dorado than meeting something as impossibly huge and intimidating face-to-face and scaring the ever-living shit out of it.

Of course that is only one of many wondrous, confounding images within Aguirre that embody Herzog’s unique ability to find the real within the fictional – the “ecstatic truth” as he coined it – and blend the comical, tragic, heroic and revolting together into a combination that can only be deemed “Herzogian”. Aguirre’s lustful search for gold and power that drives its narrative is given complexity through his manipulations of everyone around him and the enigmatic way Herzog allows it to unfold via off-kilter compositions and jarring cuts. The trial scene in particular is interesting in conveying both the magisterial and animalistic nature of Aguirre as displayed in the power he holds over everyone around him. Kinski is framed to look as if he is hanging from a tree while Guzman and Aguirre’s puppet who is now “officially” in command of the group sits upon his throne in disinterested judgment while Ursua is lies at the bottom of the screen, as if his fate of death had already been announced. The scene is disorienting, hilarious and frightening all in one – something Herzog and Kinski’s collaborations often bring to the table.

What I ultimately find so remarkable about Aguirre, however, is the way it transforms its relatively low budget, a limitation for nearly any historical film, into a positive, using it to capture an historical time with intimacy while still creating a mystique that gives the film a unique, otherworldly quality. The initial climb down the mountainside has a documentary-like feel, not so much as a representation of history as putting you right there in the moment. This, coupled with the mesmeric Popol Vuh score, works not merely to hypnotize, but transport to a different time, making Aguirre’s mad journey down the river seem grounded in realism, yet a realism that is distinctly separate from a time or place I’ve known or could imagine existing. Then again, this is no surprise as there isn’t a single director with a better sense of combining the alien and the familiar than Werner Herzog.

dreamdead

12-27-2008, 10:47 PM

Nice thoughts, Derek. It's a film that I find myself neglecting far too often when in point of fact its power left me devastated after the first (and sadly only) viewing. The film's slow drawl of pacing is what allows the power of the images to become mythic in my eyes (the multitudes walking through the mountains in the film's opening), and Herzog knows how to depict the growing, unsettled sense of madness. Order cannot be restored among the trial scenes, despite the facsimile of it.

Melville

12-27-2008, 11:29 PM

Terrific choice. I like your discussion of the horse scene.

Ezee E

12-28-2008, 02:48 AM

Calculations have this finishing up in two years and three months or so. Give or take.

Derek

12-28-2008, 02:51 AM

The horse scene (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=6H2OWs8SPBk&feature=related) (start it around 55 seconds in)

There's a remarkably unsettling clash there too as Aguirre screams his brain out and immediately goes over to his daughter, tenderly asking her if she's alright.

Qrazy

12-28-2008, 03:27 AM

My favorite bit is wandering around the raft with the monkeys.

Derek

12-28-2008, 05:50 AM

Calculations have this finishing up in two years and three months or so. Give or take.

So, we're still on schedule to beat your top 100 with reviews then. ;)

Ezee E

12-28-2008, 06:29 AM

So, we're still on schedule to beat your top 100 with reviews then. ;)
Was it 100? I thought it was just 50.

Derek

12-28-2008, 02:43 PM

Was it 100? I thought it was just 50.

When you finish either, stop on by.

Sven

01-01-2009, 05:38 AM

I recently rewatched Aguirre and it was a billion times better than I remembered it being. I love it when that happens.

Anyway, peeps, my peeps, hear me, hear ye:

I know this could be construed as an uncool move, ducking out of a top 100 that I started without consulting or warning the other fellows doing the thread with me. For that I apologize. But this has been coming for some time now. Mods, feel free to edit the thread title (assuming Duncan and Derek decide to keep their lists going).

Unfortunately, tonite is January 1st and this move is undoubtedly going to be construed as a "New Years resolution"-type of move, which I can tell you, assuredly, it is not. It is a simple coincidence. Real life is happening to me at very rapid clips and the Internet is definitely not where I need to be prioritizing my time right now.

Consider this an explanation for those of you indignant about Rebort's departure (basically, MadMan... the rest of you I am confident are understanding if not sympathetic). I can't promise that I won't pop in to vote on a Consensus thread or read a few reviews every now and then, but my time here is at its practical end. I give you, for my last hurrah, the rest of my list and the fondest of fond farewells.

Watashi

01-01-2009, 05:42 AM

Fuck it.

I can't be a part of a Sven-less Match Cut.

Sven

01-01-2009, 05:52 AM

Quickly sketched mini-minithoughts accompanying. I cannot promise coherence.

73 Sanjuro – Probably not technically better than Yojimbo, but with an ending as memorable as this one, I give it the edge.
72 The Last Emperor – I’m a sucker for epic, so whenever I find even a tolerable one, I hold onto it dearly. Luckily, this is more than tolerable—it’s downright ecstatic.
71 A Perfect World – Love the structure, the protracted climax, the ever-deepening shades of moral grey.
70 The Thin Red Line – Languor has never been so riveting, the human beast never so adeptly contextualized.
69 Jamaica Inn – Laughton’s ham. The end.
68 Heaven's Gate – Fuck you, this is a good movie.
67 They Live – One of, if not the most gloriously unpretentious films ever made.
66 Broadway Danny Rose – Woody’s wandering through wheat with a padded Farrow stumbling upon a caped hero = magical realism at its most hilariously appropriated.
65 Phenomena – Its ambiguities thicken the creepiness, the razor monkey thoroughly blowing my mind.
64 Explorers – Television and aliens, B-movies and Robert Picardo in a rubber suit.
63 Gallipoli – Haunting imagery pervades the coming-of-age of two boys during WWI.
62 Strange Days – Techno-thrilling me into the new millennium. Frightening, kinetic, an action masterpiece.
61 Beyond Thunderdome – I dig mythology. Where The Road Warrior tells a mythic tale, Beyond Thunderdome considers the mythic Road Warrior institution.
60 Mona Lisa – Caine’s white rabbit avatar and Hoskins spangled sunglasses are two of the great film avatars of all time.
59 The Darjeeling Limited – Anderson’s most empathetic construction, though this space could also go to the equally funny and more ornate Royal Tenenbaums.
58 The Great Dictator – Slapstick is the best way to rock didacticism.
57 Oedipus Rex – The caravan slaughter is a great filmic tapestry.
56 Woodstock – It was like being at the concert only without the claustrophobia, the chaos, the aches, the discomfort, the waiting, the dirtiness, the hunger, the fear. In other words, better than real life.
55 Porco Rosso – Miyazaki needs to do more films where the magical frequencies express character plight. He got it so perfect here.
54 Bulworth – I dig the rapidity, the verve, the racial complication. It’s hilarious too.
53 Walkabout – Nightmarish meditation on man’s struggle within nature, Jenny Agutter’s naked body.
52 Lost Highway – Goddamn this movie is scary.
51 Soldier of Orange – Maybe the greatest WWII film ever made in terms of placing the drama within a national prism. Because this is Verhoeven, it’s also unabashedly entertaining.
50 Pulp Fiction – It’s easy to forget how great this movie is, but every time I see it, my admiration is rejuvenated anew.
49 The American Friend – Muller is the real hero of this picture, his photography transcending the grit associated with such pulp.
48 The Deer Hunter – Ethnosensitive? Probably not. Its strange, but the only defense I have of this film, years since seeing it last, is its construction of a palpable emotiveness borne of male camaraderie, something I never really thought I held in such merit.
47 Topsy Turvy – Loves me the G&S, loves me the Mike Leigh, this film more than any other replicates the backstage experience.
46 Monsters Inc – Easily Pixar’s most narratively and visually imaginative.
45 Fiddler on the Roof – Greatest movie musical, in the sense of it being a product of, re-establishing, and re-writing musical film conventions, ever made.
44 The Driver – Brings the existential minimalism of noir to the 70’s car chase genre. Real actor (McQueen surrogate) O’Neal resonates while the criminally awesome Dern destabilizes.
43 Kikujiro – Joie de vivre a la Kitano. Something very special.
42 Invasion of the Body Snatchers – Robert Duvall dressed as a priest on a swingset. And that’s just the first five minutes.
41 Runaway Train – Enter all ye who dare bask in the existential glory of the most criminally under(rated? seen?) movie of ever, welcome to the cult of Eric Roberts.
40 Straw Dogs – Try as I might, there is no resisting Sumner’s villainy, particularly when climaxed by a head in a bear trap.
39 The Big Heat - Much like Straw Dogs: a bland everyman is driven to sadistic extremes, exposing the bloodthirst within even the most timid human being.
38 Moonstruck – Greatest. Romantic. Comedy. Ever.
37 Dreams – I was surprised when I realized that this is probably my favorite Kurosawa film. Favorite segment – the hikers in the snow. That sequence has a sonic and visual power that no other film has ever even touched.
36 Cleo from 5 to 7 – Dividing the woman between looker and looked at, this film, my favorite from the French New Wave, dares to rupture comfortable modes of spectatorship (masculinity, hermetics, film convention) to tantalizing, beautiful, memorable effect.
35 Where the Heart Is – The good one. The one with Dabney Coleman and Crispin Glover. Whimsy.
34 Playtime – Epic, playful.
33 Some Like It Hot – Probably the funniest movie ever made. Also, sexiest.
32 Wages of Fear – Fingernails digging into furniture, skin, concrete, whatever, no pain provides adequate relief from Clouzot’s masterful execution of the purest tension.
31 Excalibur – Love the mud, blood, and sweat—a very tactile presentation of picture book fantasy. This is what they mean when they say they don’t make them like they used to.
30 Bamboozled – Complicated, and brilliant because of its imperfections, this is Spike’s remake of Birth of a Nation. It’s racial warzone, and when attrition gives, it’s an all-out slaughter.
29 Gimme Shelter – Scaaaaary depiction of an age gone by. Think of that scene in Boogie Nights where Little Bill explodes, only in Rolling Stones documentary format.
28 Barry Lyndon –Greatest theater experience of my life. Cosmic hysteria, channeled through the elegance of Thackeray’s wit and Kubrick’s impeccable symmetry.
27 Ravenous – Exciting and unpredictable in a way that no films dare to be anymore. This film makes cannibalism amusing and I’ve gotta give credit where it’s due.
26 Apocalypse Now – A masterpiece that has been spoken about to such extent that nothing I can write will be of any use to anyone.
25 Vernon, Florida – An hour of the oddest balls. Tight enough to fall into awe after teetering precariously on the precipice of ridicule.
24 Fargo – I know I’ve said that No Country for Old Men is the Coen’s best, but a rewatch of Fargo (and seriously, like, my 20th time seeing it) revalidated its greatness. Watch it again and think about the connection between cultural heritages embodied Paul Bunyan and Gaear Grimsrud. Add capitalism to that stew. You’ve got yourself a fascinating perspective.
23 Raising Cain – Rule #16: any movie where John Lithgow plays a bad guy is a great movie.
22 Eraserhead – When I saw this movie for the first time, the scene with the girl in the radiator somehow eked its way into the core of my brain and shattered everything that I thought I understood as right and sensible about the world.
21 Robocop – If I have to explain this one to you, you do not deserve it.
20 Buffalo '66 – A more creative expression of self-centeredness exists nowhere, cinematically. Ricci tap-dancing, Gazarra crooning, Gallo in murderous freeze-frames.
19 Episodes 3 & 4 of The Twilight Zone: The Movie – Forget the saccharine Spielberg and the pedestrian Landis. Dante’s psychedelica and Miller’s zeal are responsible for two of the greatest short films I’ve ever seen.
18 The Beaver Trilogy – Three films about Utah celebrity Glittering Gary: one, a documentary about Gary, two, a video art film with Sean Penn as Gary, three, a conventional Hollywood film with Crispin Glover as Gary. Excellent rumination on the art of adaptation and the conflicts of truth and reality.
17 The Truman Show – I like this movie for the way it tells me that I shouldn’t settle for what the world (and its denizens) offer me. Instead, it inspires me to try and offer something to the world.
16 Takeshis – Kitano is a mad, mad, mad, mad genius. You think the finale of Zatoichi is inspired? Try this entire film.
15 Harold & Maude – from a review I wrote once: “Ashby climaxes with a death-life model, as he does so often throughout the film (the cut from a field of white flowers to a field of white gravestones is particularly memorable), through the colliding forms of motion and stillness, inside and outside, present and future.”
14 Shock Corridor – The horrors of the social sphere are reproduced through representative ideological dementia. Trashy, but important.
13 Close Encounters of the Third Kind – It’s like one of those slow, meditative European art movies, but it’s about aliens and Richard Dreyfuss! Spielberg’s best, which, because I dig the guy most of the time, makes it an all-time best.
12 Punch-Drunk Love – Deepening Adam Sandler, punctuated by bands of pink and blue, occasioned by the ecstatic bump of Jon Brion (my favorite being the diesel truck hydraulics set to the harmonium theme). Also, greatest line from any film (from imdb): “SHUT UP! SHUT THE FUCK UP! Shut up; will you SHUTUP SHUTUP! SHUT SHUT SHUT SHUT SHUTUP... SHUTUP! NOW Are you threatening me, dick?”
11 [B]Dumbo – Where the monkeys in the Jungle Book represent racial representation at its most reductive, the Crows in Dumbo embody an elevating characterization. This is perfect, given the heart of Dumbo: that of the Semitic heroes (the big nosed Timothy and Dumbo) combating complacency within a fascist establishment (note the conductor’s speech style and the clowns’ cruelty).
10 The Vanishing – Easily the scariest movie I’ve ever seen—its depiction of the banality of pure evil still haunts me. It best exemplifies one of my pet themes: the capacity for normal, sane men to do unspeakably horrific things.
9 The Man Who Would Be King – Grand adventure of the classic variety. Exciting, rousing, etc. Love the epic tones and the illustrative execution (from all involved, director, actors, and on).
8 2001: A Space Odyssey – Big, bold, and beautiful. Ponderous, yes, but never less than exhilaratingly so.
7 Black Orpheus – A celebration of life, color, music, and narrative. Cinematic ecstasy.
6 Popeye – It’s breezy, it’s droll, Nilsson’s songs have a purity unencumbered by pomp. Community economy is explored (everything is food) and Popeye’s moral imperative, his “sens’ka humili’gration,” fuels my appreciation beyond amusing cartoonish antics.
5 Yellow Submarine – Eye-popping, great music, terrifying scope. Who doesn’t love Jeremy?
4 Nashville – Follow Henry Gibson’s paranoid eyes as he sings his patriotic song in the opening credits and you have much more than a ripple through the flag or Barbara Jean’s delirium.
3 Children of Paradise – Basically the most perfect example of traditional film storytelling that I’ve ever seen. It boldly exemplifies “MOVIE” and does so with wit and zest.
2 Sans Soleil – It feels like it contains the secret of life's meaning. I love associative picture essays like this. I’d love to see more of them.
1 Fata Morgana/Lessons of Darkness/Wild Blue Yonder – This is cheating, I know, but together, these three films add up to more than each film stands on its own. Each unit explores an element of fascination (earth, fire, and water) and each is presented as a piece of science-fiction. Combined, Werner Herzog offers a vision of earth and its aptitude, physically and spiritually, to host its peoples (and plants and animals and resources). His blending and bending of fiction into fact (and vice versa) is, if I were to come up with just one reason, why I watch movies. To be given a perspective of the world that is new and fantastic and utterly plausible.

A few HMs:
Alfie
Lorenzo's Oil
Joy Ride
Used Cars
An American Werewolf in London
May
Garden of the Finzi Continis
Topkapi
Heist
The Band Wagon
The Good Thief
Affliction
The Taste of Cherry
The Wizard of Oz
Dr. Strangelove
Seven Samurai
Life is Sweet

Should've made the list:
Night and the City
Frankenstein (Whale)
A Thousand Clowns

A slew more that I know I'm forgetting. If anything, this exercise has hit home the futility of compiling such a list.

Spaceman Spiff

01-01-2009, 06:06 AM

Ezee E

01-01-2009, 06:07 AM

Tear.

Boner M

01-01-2009, 06:51 AM

Great list, man. Lots of bewildering choices, though. I'll never get the Ravenous love. It seems as if every film from 1999 is an underrated gem by default. Takeshis is a film I'm certain will be a masterpiece once I give it another viewing; there's just so much going on in it, so many ideas, so much life. I'm so glad to see The Vanishing on your top ten, sometimes it seems that Spinal and I are the only people who find it more than 'just okay'. I've only seen Lessons of Darkness of the Herzog trilogy, but I'm more than content with that one in the #1 spot. And I loooooooove you for including Buffalo '66, which was the most revelatory repeat viewing I saw this entire year. It seems your taste runs toward films with extremely imaginative, intensely subjective formal embodiments of certain states of mind; exaggerated mirror images of our own flaws or ecstatic, exuberant expressions of joy. Also, I need to check out Popeye this holidays (too bad it's only on VHS here).

So there's a few choices I'd love to read an entire review of, but who cares. A great New Year's present, sir iososven.

Melville

01-01-2009, 05:04 PM

Matchcut will never be the same.

Real life is happening to me at very rapid clips and the Internet is definitely not where I need to be prioritizing my time right now.
Stupid real life. I hate it so much.

Russ

01-01-2009, 05:35 PM

Best of luck, Sven. You'll be missed.

Philosophe_rouge

01-01-2009, 06:18 PM

We'll miss you Sven, great list :D I'm very happy to see Walkabout there, even though I'm pretty sure Helen Mirren isn't in it, the point is, there is nudity... wonderful, wonderful nudity. I really need to see Sans Soleil and Fata Morgana.

Kurosawa Fan

01-02-2009, 12:25 AM

Duncan

01-02-2009, 01:57 AM

:sad:

Melville

01-02-2009, 02:29 AM

I assume that iososven won't be able to resist returning to this thread to see responses to his list.

100. Monty Python and the Holy Grail - saw it too long ago (sitla)
99. Tron - sitla
98. The Harder They Come - N/A
97. Allegro Non Troppo - N/A
96. Last Orders - 5.5
95. Crossroads - N/A
94. The Wild Child - N/A
93. The Full Monty - N/A
92. The Great Muppet Caper - N/A
91. The Stunt Man - N/A
90. The Stranger - N/A
89. Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind - 5
88. The Cars That Ate Paris - N/A
87. Gremlins 2: The New Batch - sitla
86. Bridge on the River Kwai - 8.5
85. Batman Returns - 4
84. The Hobbit - sitla
83. Q&A - N/A
82. The Lower Depths - N/A
81. Sid & Nancy - N/A
80. Serial Mom - N/A
79. American Pop - N/A
78. The Loss of Sexual Innocence - N/A
77. Felicia's Journey - 8
76. The Brave Little Toaster - N/A
75. Dog Day Afternoon - 6
74. The Pledge - 5.5
73. Sanjuro – N/A
72 The Last Emperor – 8
71 A Perfect World – N/A
70 The Thin Red Line – 9
69 Jamaica Inn – N/A
68 Heaven's Gate – N/A
67 They Live – sitla
66 Broadway Danny Rose – 8
65 Phenomena – N/A
64 Explorers – sitla
63 Gallipoli – 5.5
62 Strange Days – 4.5
61 Beyond Thunderdome – sitla
60 Mona Lisa – N/A
59 The Darjeeling Limited – 8
58 The Great Dictator – 7.5
57 Oedipus Rex – N/A
56 Woodstock – N/A
55 Porco Rosso – 4.5
54 Bulworth – 4.5
53 Walkabout – 8.5
52 Lost Highway – 10
51 Soldier of Orange – N/A
50 Pulp Fiction – 8
49 The American Friend – N/A
48 The Deer Hunter – 8.5
47 Topsy Turvy – 8
46 Monsters Inc – N/A
45 Fiddler on the Roof – N/A
44 The Driver – N/A
43 Kikujiro – N/A
42 Invasion of the Body Snatchers – N/A
41 Runaway Train – N/A
40 Straw Dogs – 7.5
39 The Big Heat - N/A
38 Moonstruck – N/A
37 Dreams – N/A
36 Cleo from 5 to 7 – N/A
35 Where the Heart Is – N/A
34 Playtime – 8.5
33 Some Like It Hot – 8
32 Wages of Fear – 6
31 Excalibur – 4
30 Bamboozled – 6
29 Gimme Shelter – N/A
28 Barry Lyndon – 8.5
27 Ravenous – N/A
26 Apocalypse Now – 10
25 Vernon, Florida – N/A
24 Fargo – 10
23 Raising Cain – N/A
22 Eraserhead – 10
21 Robocop – 8.5
20 Buffalo '66 – 9.5
19 Episodes 3 & 4 of The Twilight Zone: The Movie – N/A
18 The Beaver Trilogy – N/A
17 The Truman Show – 5
16 Takeshis – N/A
15 Harold & Maude – 7.5
14 Shock Corridor – 8
13 Close Encounters of the Third Kind – 6.5
12 Punch-Drunk Love – 10
11 Dumbo – sitla
10 The Vanishing – 6
9 The Man Who Would Be King – 5.5
8 2001: A Space Odyssey – 10
7 Black Orpheus – 7.5
6 Popeye – sitla
5 Yellow Submarine – N/A
4 Nashville – 7.5
3 Children of Paradise – 9
2 Sans Soleil – 6
1 Fata Morgana/Lessons of Darkness/Wild Blue Yonder – N/A/7.5/7

Overall: thanks for all the bizarro opinions and debates over the years. You will be missed.

transmogrifier

01-02-2009, 04:38 AM

I'll play

100. Monty Python and the Holy Grail - :pritch:
99. Tron - :crazy:
93. The Full Monty - :confused:
91. The Stunt Man - :cool:
89. Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind - :pritch:
87. Gremlins 2: The New Batch - :pritch:
86. Bridge on the River Kwai - :P
85. Batman Returns - :P
75. Dog Day Afternoon - :pritch:
74. The Pledge - :cool:
72 The Last Emperor – :)
71 A Perfect World – :P
70 The Thin Red Line – :cool:
66 Broadway Danny Rose – :cool:
62 Strange Days – :cool:
59 The Darjeeling Limited – :P
55 Porco Rosso – :P
54 Bulworth – :confused:
52 Lost Highway – :pritch:
50 Pulp Fiction – :P
48 The Deer Hunter – :P
46 Monsters Inc – N/:P
42 Invasion of the Body Snatchers – :P
40 Straw Dogs – :P
33 Some Like It Hot – :pritch:
30 Bamboozled – :confused:
27 Ravenous – :rolleyes:
26 Apocalypse Now – :pritch:
24 Fargo – :P
23 Raising Cain – :crazy:
21 Robocop – :|
20 Buffalo '66 – 9:cool:
17 The Truman Show – :)
15 Harold & Maude – :cool:
14 Shock Corridor – :)
13 Close Encounters of the Third Kind – :)
12 Punch-Drunk Love – :)
10 The Vanishing – :P
8 2001: A Space Odyssey – :|
4 Nashville – :pritch:

Not nearly iososian enough. One could say, almost conventional.

It was the name change that did it.

Spinal

01-02-2009, 04:54 AM

Real life is happening to me at very rapid clips and the Internet is definitely not where I need to be prioritizing my time right now.

Best wishes. Your contributions will be sorely missed.

62 Strange Days – Techno-thrilling me into the new millennium. Frightening, kinetic, an action masterpiece.

This one made a huge, huge impression on me when I saw it in the initial run. And it has Juliette Lewis singing PJ Harvey songs, so that's awesome.

61 Beyond Thunderdome – I dig mythology. Where The Road Warrior tells a mythic tale, Beyond Thunderdome considers the mythic Road Warrior institution.
Yeah, this is a really memorable movie. I still think they under-use the actual Thunderdome setting, but such great dialogue and atmosphere.

53 Walkabout – Nightmarish meditation on man’s struggle within nature, Jenny Agutter’s naked body.
Brilliant, unique film. Top 5 for me.

37 Dreams – I was surprised when I realized that this is probably my favorite Kurosawa film. Favorite segment – the hikers in the snow. That sequence has a sonic and visual power that no other film has ever even touched.
Definitely a film that is greater than its reputation would suggest. I think it's pretty extraordinary, although I do not care for the Scorsese segment.

10 The Vanishing – Easily the scariest movie I’ve ever seen—its depiction of the banality of pure evil still haunts me. It best exemplifies one of my pet themes: the capacity for normal, sane men to do unspeakably horrific things.

Another top fiver for me. Surprisingly, it holds up very well even after you know where it is heading. The book is great too.

Ezee E

01-02-2009, 05:08 AM

If having Bamboozled, Gremlins 2, Monsters INc, and Popeye on your top movies of all time is conventional, then I don't know. Call me Sally I guess.

Spinal

01-02-2009, 05:36 AM

Now that I think of it, Helen Mirren nudity is the only thing that could have improved Walkabout.

Qrazy

01-02-2009, 06:39 AM

This is entirely understandable, yet totally unacceptable. You've bummed me out man. I hope that life works out well enough that you can still find time to grace us with your presence on a semi-regular basis.

If in the last few years I've learned a single thing about internet movie message boards, it's that no one ever leaves for good. This shit is worse and/or better than heroin.

Ezee E

01-02-2009, 01:37 PM

Iosos even said he'd be back every now and then. It's like he went to rehab, and is just doing it recreationally now.

I nearly left RT and message boards for good though. Then Axis Archives came along and suddenly talking about movies was fun again, instead of pondering over Lindsay Lohan's boobs, the battle of the hotties, and whatever it is that we talked about in that Off Topic board. Yeesh.

Bosco B Thug

01-03-2009, 02:18 AM

Anyway, peeps, my peeps, hear me, hear ye:

I know this could be construed as an

I give you, for my last hurrah, the rest of my list and the fondest of fond farewells. :( You often are the life of the party, Sven. Quite a few of your Top 100 choices would definitely get it hot up here, I think. Good luck with your stuff.

69 Jamaica Inn – ooh
65 Phenomena – :confused:
59 The Darjeeling Limited – :) ; TDJ >> Royal Tenenbaums, you made the right decision.
53 Walkabout – Nightmarish meditation on man’s struggle within nature, Jenny Agutter’s naked body. - :pritch: Mmhmm.
50 Pulp Fiction – It’s easy to forget how great this movie is, but every time I see it, my admiration is rejuvenated anew. I hope to copy exactly these sentiments whenever I revisit it.
47 Topsy Turvy – I must see this.
46 Monsters Inc – :confused:
45 Fiddler on the Roof – Greatest movie musical, in the sense of it being a product of, re-establishing, and re-writing musical film conventions, ever made. Ooh. lots of childhood nostalgia attached to this one, but just nostalgia.
42 Invasion of the Body Snatchers – Robert Duvall dressed as a priest on a swingset. And that’s just the first five minutes. Maybe. Re-watch.
41 Runaway Train – the cult of Eric Roberts. I want in, so I'll eventually see this.
40 Straw Dogs – Try as I might, there is no resisting Sumner’s villainy, particularly when climaxed by a head in a bear trap. :)
38 Moonstruck – Greatest. Romantic. Comedy. Ever. Norman Jewison a director to get into?
36 Cleo from 5 to 7 – :)
35 Where the Heart Is – Ooh, Boorman.
32 Wages of Fear – :pritch:
31 Excalibur – Love the mud, blood, and sweat—a very tactile presentation of picture book fantasy. This is what they mean when they say they don’t make them like they used to. I like your reasons for liking it. Boorman, too, didn't know.
30 Bamboozled – :confused:
28 Barry Lyndon – :pritch:
27 Ravenous – Happened to catch the first 20 or so minute on TV. Awesome Nyman opening credits, but I wasn't impressed with what I saw. Been putting it off now.
23 Raising Cain – Haven't seen it, but an "Are you sure?" :confused:
22 Eraserhead – Blasphemous, but I'm really "Meh" on this one.
21 Robocop – :)
19 Episodes 3 & 4 of The Twilight Zone: The Movie – :crazy: in a cool way
15 Harold & Maude – See Eraserhead
14 Shock Corridor – :)
13 Close Encounters of the Third Kind – It’s like one of those slow, meditative European art movies, but it’s about aliens and Richard Dreyfuss! Hmm, need to see this one again then, probably. I figured my childhood memories sufficed, but I guess not.
12 Punch-Drunk Love – A bit high on the list, but cool.
10 The Vanishing – :) More horror!
8 2001: A Space Odyssey – :pritch:
7 Black Orpheus – :)
6 Popeye – Three cheers for RA's Popeye!
4 Nashville – :pritch:
2 Sans Soleil – :pritch:

Joy Ride Rusty Nail? Cool... but :crazy:
An American Werewolf in London :)
May Cool, I'd have been interested in reasons why you like this one so much.

Needless to say, neat, novelty-heavy list!

Duncan

01-03-2009, 02:25 AM

Anyway, I plan to continue with this, but don't expect anything for another week as I am travelling at the moment.

Sycophant

01-06-2009, 03:40 AM

Consider this an explanation for those of you indignant about Rebort's departure (basically, MadMan... the rest of you I am confident are understanding if not sympathetic). I can't promise that I won't pop in to vote on a Consensus thread or read a few reviews every now and then, but my time here is at its practical end. I give you, for my last hurrah, the rest of my list and the fondest of fond farewells.

My god, I missed this. Shows how much attention I've been paying lately. Life's working its madness on me. Happy trails. (And talk to you soon.)

Will be consulting your list frequently for recs. I've seen an embarrassingly small number of your tops.

jesse

01-06-2009, 01:19 PM

36 Cleo from 5 to 7 – Dividing the woman between looker and looked at, this film, my favorite from the French New Wave, dares to rupture comfortable modes of spectatorship (masculinity, hermetics, film convention) to tantalizing, beautiful, memorable effect. That's a neat little summation of a film that grows ever-dearer to my heart. Also like the inclusion of Oedipus Rex, though in my mind Garden of the Finzi Continis merits much more than an HM.

Stepping away from the internet (as much as is possible, anyway) can be a very valuable thing. Best of luck in whatever you are now shifting your focus to.

-jesse

Duncan

01-12-2009, 12:01 AM

73. The Silence Before Bach (Pere Portabella, 2007)

http://bookofjoe.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/31/cvjygkgtyu.jpg

Pere Portabella is somewhat of an unknown in the film scene. He was heavily involved with the Spanish film industry under Franco’s rule, producing a number of Bunuel’s films. Since then he has quietly been making films exclusively for theatre screenings. Aside from bootlegs - I’m sure they exist somewhere - his films are unavailable for home viewing. I regretted missing a retrospective of his work at the MoMA a few months ago, so I was glad to see that his new film was playing here.

The Silence Before Bach is a non-narrative film concerned mainly with how one experiences music, and therefore with how one experiences life. It begins with a long tracking shot through an empty, white washed space. The quietude of this scene is interrupted by an automated piano that not only plays without a pianist, but travels over the floor following the now retreating camera. It twirls and dances and casts Portabella’s spell like a pretty girl in an opium parlour. Portabella himself is a 78 year old man. Anyway, this spell will not be effective against some level 17 Mages of Mainstream, but if you’ve got the patience for a unique and experimental film experience (or just happen to be a fan of Bach) then I predict you will enjoy The Silence Before Bach.

The film is structured as a layering of anecdotes and vignettes. Some of them may be true, some of them lay claims to veracity but are clearly apocryphal, and some of them are purely fictional. What they all have in common, however, is a different way of representing musical form. In one scene a truck driver listens to his partner play Bach on a mouth organ as they travel across Germany. You can’t even see the instrument under the man’s hands. In the next scene Bach himself plays the same music on a magnificent organ at the St. Thomas Church. Here, hundreds of pipes roughly six inches in diameter shudder with the force of air rushing through them.

This begins to get truly interesting when Portabella starts representing the music in visual form such as in the roughly five minute shot of a perforated scroll making its way through the automated piano. Or, if this does not sound to your liking, the scene in which a horse dances to Bach’s music. As I watched this steed so precisely mark up the ground with his hooves, I suddenly realized that I had lost my own footing. For some brief moments I was disturbed by thought that I did not know the source of the music. Was it the hands nimbly manipulating the piano keys? Was it the piano itself? Was it the horse (I’m not kidding)? Was it the speakers in the theatre? Was it Bach? Was it the glory of God as Bach himself might have suggested? I’ve been thinking about it ever since then. I have tried applying Baudrillard’s simulacrum, but I find it inevitably leads me in the wrong direction. That is, to a place further removed from the reality of the experience. All these images may be part of the hyperreal, the music as I listen to it may be part of the hyperreal, but at the very least the idea of the music is real. Its conception, its beauty and its expression – all these are real. I am certain of it. And if that is the case then the horse is not some dastardly illusion, but a practical prosthetic. It is an extension of myself, and a bridge to the consciousness and inspiration of a great composer long dead.

Duncan

01-12-2009, 12:05 AM

To be honest, I was actually going to put Bonnie and Clyde in that spot, but everyone's seen that movie and written about it and stuff. So...this frees me from having to write a new review and highlights a lesser known film. I also haven't seen Bonnie and Clyde in years.

Derek

01-22-2009, 06:26 AM

#73 - The Wrong Man (Alfred Hitchcock, 1956)

http://www.cas.sc.edu/socy/faculty/deflem/hitchcockxxx.jpg

The Wrong Man is in many ways a modest film. It is one of Alfred Hitchcock’s most deliberately paced films and its spare black-and-white cinematography and ascetic vision make it also one of his bleakest. Based on the real-life story of Manny Balestrero, Hitchcock uses the tabula rasa that is Henry Fonda’s face to project every feeling of guilt, frustration, terror, sadness and anger directly onto the viewer. The deliberateness of Fonda’s movement coupled with his almost complete lack of emoting allows Manny to function as a surrogate for the audience, our own fears of implication being toyed with by Hitchcock’s constant tightening of the screws. It is a performance notable for its lack performing, like a Bressonian model allowing the external factors to channel through him, yet not to the degree that Manny loses a sense of determination and vigor towards life.

Like Psycho’s sudden transference of identification with Marion to Norman (ironically Vera Miles appears in both films), The Wrong Man shifts the weight of guilt from one character to another - Manny to his wife. This psychic split occurs as certain innocence is beaten down by equally assured false accusations. Her sudden psychosis is an embodiment of the damage caused by the wrongful accusation – an inability to cope with the sense that social institutions they’ve been raised to believe exist solely for their protection have now turned against them, acting in collusion to take her husband down.

Adding to the frightening nature of Manny’s suffering is the care Hitchcock takes in detailing the dehumanized, institutionalized nature of his misidentification and the ways the pursuit of absolute truth on all sides is transformed into a pursuit of a guilty verdict. The first trial sequence is brilliant for how it captures Manny’s subjectivity, providing glances into mind as he looks around the courtroom to find disinterested jurors, lawyers and members in the audience as he sees his life slipping away from him.

Hitchcock uses a wonderful combination of claustrophobic framing, leaving Manny cluttered between men, handcuffed to a police officer or trapped behind bars, and minimal set designs to make the tension palpable by leaving little on-screen aside from Manny and his ever-increasing accusers. The films pacing too is remarkable, playing like a reverie, lingering on every last note – a technique that not only builds the tension to an almost unbearable level, but also to allow every tinge of emotion to register. The great tragedy of the film is not so much the failure of the police and court system to protect the innocent (the true thief was caught by a store owner) as Rose’s breakdown and the couples issues that came as a result. Although the text scroll at the end softens the blow and undercuts its effectiveness, there are few moments as powerful in Hitchcock’s cinema as when, in response to Manny telling her everything’s okay and they can go home now, Rose lifelessly responds, “That’s okay for you. You can go now.” It’s chilling, heart-wrenching moment that sticks with you far longer than the subsequent revelation.