28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[B-side]

I'm most interested in his late-period (most alienating?) work. He's making rounds with his Strauss-Kahn flick and I'm reading his very recent interviews, and he's clearly a crazy MF.

He's pretty abrasive, but he's honest and has no pretensions about his work. He's very much the antithesis of a Hollywood filmmaker, even if his work owes much to Scorsese and Coppola. Of his most recent work, Mary stands out. It's my favorite of his, and a top 50 of all time candidate. Others have been less enthused. I thought Go Go Tales was decent. It's very well regarded in the auteur community. And I dug 4:44. 'R Xmas is OK.

[MadMan]

The only movie of his that I have seen (and that I own thanks to finding a copy of it at my pawn shop) is The Driller Killer. My thoughts on it reposted from my old blog:

Aimlessly wandering the New York City streets during the year 1979, he selects his victims at random, slaughtering with them a ferocity unmatched by many. His weapon of choice: a cordless power drill that he jams into his victims, causing a spray of blood to fly as he baptizes himself in the gore and horror of his actions. He is The Driller Killer and he has decided to create new art out of human suffering, crafting new masterpieces of carriage unseen before and worthy of serial killers such as The Son of Sam and The Night Stalker.

This is a gritty and ugly vision of New York, less stylish than the similarly bleak urban landscape of Taxi Driver, fueled by rock and roll, desperate people, and one man who goes over the edge and into the realm of insanity. No matter what, there is no escape from this nightmare, yet the film's anti-hero never comes to an actualization of why he's doing this or what goal he hopes to accomplish. There is only blood and more blood, death and dying, the eye of the buffalo through which he peers through and envisions the tragic fact that many of his victims were already walking ghouls before he penetrated them graphically with cold steel. Hope for humanity does not exist, only a world haunted by a person capable of stabbing through your flesh at will. Now it it is dark. 81

PS: 16k. Wahoo.

[Rock]

The Driller Killer is probably my favourite Ferrara that I've seen. It's this weird mix of elements that shouldn't go together but do so surprisingly well. Bad Lieutenant I probably admire more than I enjoy - I actually prefer the Herzog picture by a wide margin. King of New York I thought was pretty good, if a bit undermined by its undercooked script. It's mix of B and A movie elements and its depiction of the racial elements of the drug trade were my favourite aspects. Here's a little something I wrote elsewhere on the Internet about it.

At its core, King of New York seems to be a B-picture aspiring to A status, and I think that’s essential to what it’s trying to say. The story follows a drug lord who finishes serving a prison sentence and begins steadily taking over the drug trade with aims to fund an inner city hospital. It’s easy to read a Robin Hood parallel into the story, and that’s likely how the protagonist views himself, but actions on both sides of the law are carried out with unconvincing justifications, and it’s hard to ignore that the drug profits with which he intends to fund the hospital likely contribute to the health problems that create a need for a hospital in the first place. There’s a sense that the characters are stuck in and devoured by the systems they perpetuate, something that becomes quite explicit in the finale.

I find the film’s depiction of the drug trade quite interesting, especially how it plays up the race and class dimensions. All the black characters in the film are shown in subservient roles, and while the protagonist is distinguished among other drug lords as not being a racist, it seems that he contributes as much to their economic subjugation as his peers. The protagonist seems to be caught at once between two worlds and uneasily tries to fit into both (hence my B-movie dressed as A-movie metaphor). The scene where he is reunited with his crew plays like a geeky white guy awkwardly trying to fit in with the cool black guys, and he can be seen squirming uneasily while attending a play in an upper class milieu. That he doesn’t comfortably rest in either speaks to their enormous divisions.

This dynamic extends to the film’s style. I was unable to appreciate the film’s visuals to the fullest extent as I saw a pan-and-scan copy (why Netflix uploaded such a copy in this day and age is beyond me), but there’s some very striking lighting and undeniable sense of style in the images. However, the stylishness seems at odds with the film’s moodiness and grit (which may have been a result of budgetary constraints). The result is a low rent slickness that’s far too pretty to be a B-movie and not pretty enough for A-status, and nowhere is it more effectively employed than a shootout sequence bathed in blue that plays as a culmination of the film’s themes, with Schoolly D’s “Am I Black Enough For You” blaring on the soundtrack. The overall style lends the story an operatic feeling.

It’s hard to deny that the film both influenced and was influenced by gangsta rap aesthetics, but I don’t think it can be accused of glorifying violence and drugs. The violence in the film, while stylishly staged, is abrupt, explosive and uncomfortable (as evident in the aforementioned shootout and subsequent car chase). Again, the conflict between B-movie thrills and A-movie consequences is used to exhilarating effect.

What keeps the film from greatness is its script. Beyond the implications of its premise, the screenplay feels underwritten. The characters feel roughly sketched out and are mostly carried by the strength of the performances. Christopher Walken commands the screen effortlessly as the protagonist, Laurence Fishburne turns in a wonderfully volatile performance as one of his henchmen, and Victor Argo brings a quiet confidence to his role as the film’s moral centre. The plot also seems neglected, consisting a series of events that don’t have that strong a momentum. Arguably the conflict between the A-list cast and sense of style with the B-movie script feed into that dynamic, but I think the film would have been more compelling and its operatic dimensions much stronger had it better fleshed out its characters and plot. Still, I do think this is a good film and it’s definitely worth seeing.

[Bosco B Thug]

It's funny, I was rooting for Frank all the way. His utopia seemed to be Ferrara's volatile own, especially when he made the cops suck so much. I agree it's not exactly a tight script, though, and the gangster rap aesthetics and "musical sequences" wore thin, the "opera" not paying off quite until the great ending.

[B-side]

She's Gotta Have It is the best Spike Lee film I've seen thus far. Not only that, but as a piece of feminist filmmaking by a male, it's second to none. Nola Darling (and yes, all of their names are this artificial) is a sexually active and confident woman. Throughout the film, she juggles three separate men carrying their own unique appeal. Jamie is the tender and mature one. Greer is wealthy and intellectual. Mars (played wonderfully by Lee himself) is charming and funny. Though Greer's characterization veers toward satirical caricature quite often, his appeal to Nola is clear if and when he's considered as part of a larger whole. Greer, along with Jamie and Mars, seem to amount to one idealistic man bearing each of their best traits, and Nola is free to vacillate between them as her needs see fit. Nola doesn't conceal the fact that she's seeing three different men, but each of them are compelled nonetheless to possess her, as one would expect of most individuals, not just men. And this is made clear when Nola is informed that Jamie has begun seeing another woman and she responds jealously as if she feels she could possess him, but he couldn't possess her. If it is possible to make a distinction between what a director is saying from behind the camera, and what a character diegetically invites, it must be said that Nola herself begs flippantly for the oft-bandied about and abused label of "slut" or "whore" -- whatever term you prefer, but Spike Lee skirts it deftly as filmmaker. She invites it because it's easy. She invites it because she knows it's an almost instinctive male response that she can't control. Lee never stoops to judging her, or imposing unnecessary burden that would give one the impression that he has a very firm and patriarchal stance on her behavior and life. Lee sympathizes with Jamie most of the men, and for good reason, but ultimately his heart lies with Nola; a young black woman getting by of her own volition and firmly in control of her body and those who may or may not grace it. For a film from the mid-80s, and from a black man, it's startlingly progressive. Homosexuality is very much "normal", and Nola's lesbian friend is seen as yet another opportunistic seducer. Not a predatory and promiscuous gay, but another "friend" with an interest in her. Against all odds, it's as good a portrait of natural femininity and female agency as I've seen. It tiptoes the line between masculine and feminine portraits without swaying too far to either side. It's got noirish verve, and Ernest Dickerson works magic with those 16mm black and white images.

[Izzy Black]

I'd place Ms. 45, The Driller Killer, Mary, Body Snatchers and The Addiction all well above King of New York.

Indeed. Hell, I even put Go Go Tales, New Rose Hotel, and The Funeral above it. I'm a huge Ferrara fan, but King of New York is one of his only films I don't particularly like. Ironically, it's perhaps his most well-known outside of Bad Lieutenant.

[B-side]

Indeed. Hell, I even put Go Go Tales, New Rose Hotel, and The Funeral above it. I'm a huge Ferrara fan, but King of New York is one of his only films I don't particularly like. Ironically, it's perhaps his most well-known outside of Bad Lieutenant.

I neglected to mention it, but I, too, would put New Rose Hotel above it. You can add China Girl and Dangerous Game to that list as well.

[Izzy Black]

Not a lot of people like New Rose Hotel, but it's one of my favorite movies.

[B-side]

Not a lot of people like New Rose Hotel, but it's one of my favorite movies.

Not a lot of people have good taste.

[Raiders]

'R Xmas is OK.

Actually one of my favorites. But that's the great thing about Ferrara. He's got a lot of fans but rarely do people agree on his best (and some outright dislike him). A case can be made for almost every one of his films, even separate from the auteurist apologist. It's quite fascinating.

[Izzy Black]

Actually one of my favorites. But that's the great thing about Ferrara. He's got a lot of fans but rarely do people agree on his best (and some outright dislike him). A case can be made for almost every one of his films, even separate from the auteurist apologist. It's quite fascinating.

[Qrazy]

I Saw the Devil - What an unrelentingly ugly, terrible film.

[Morris Schæffer]

My GF wants to know: A movie where people have tubes into their brains that release a toxin or drug whenever they cause each other pain or have sex?

[Dukefrukem]

Aguirre: The Wrath of God.. Hmmmm. I don't think I am going to enjoy Werner Herzog very much....

[Dukefrukem]

I Saw the Devil - What an unrelentingly ugly, terrible film.

Said no one ever.

[Ezee E]

Aguirre: The Wrath of God.. Hmmmm. I don't think I am going to enjoy Werner Herzog very much....

Watch Bad Lieutenant.

His filmography is so varied, you'll find something you like from him.

[Dukefrukem]

Already watched and already loved it. You're right about it being varied although I am seeing a common theme in the three movies I've seen so far.

[Rock]

As far as Herzog goes, Invincible doesn't get talked about a lot, but I found it pretty powerful. I need to get through more of his work, though.

[Qrazy]

Said no one ever.

Tell me thematically one redeeming quality this film possesses (note: the pursuit for revenge can lead to increased unhappiness doesn't cut it) because from where I'm sitting it's just ugliness after ugliness and I have no desire to watch that kind of shit.

[Dukefrukem]

Tell me thematically one redeeming quality this film possesses (note: the pursuit for revenge can lead to increased unhappiness doesn't cut it) because from where I'm sitting it's just ugliness after ugliness and I have no desire to watch that kind of shit.

Different tastes then. I love revenge films. Oldboy, Breakdown, the Godfather, Count of Monte Cristo... I Saw the Devil..

But man. Dat Taxi Scene? Just spectacular camera work. One could even describe it as jaw-dropping.

[Dukefrukem]

I also love some of the tracking shots that are present in most of Kim Jee-Woon's work. In I Saw the Devil there's a similar action scene involving a hallway and window. IN the Last Stand there are similar instances during some of the car chances. The Good, the Bad, the Weird, similar tracking shots during the action scenes. It feels like a way for him to pull back the audience during the lulls and it's a great technique to catch viewers off guard. He's easily one of my favorite directors right now.

[Qrazy]

Different tastes then. I love revenge films. Oldboy, Breakdown, the Godfather, Count of Monte Cristo... I Saw the Devil..

But man. Dat Taxi Scene? Just spectacular camera work. One could even describe it as jaw-dropping.

The Godfather punctuates it's drama with moments of extreme violence that serve a purpose. Oldboy also has a more potent dramatic through-line. The Count of Monte Cristo I don't think is a very good film but at least it's not needlessly ugly. I haven't seen Breakdown. This film on the other hand exists almost solely for the ugliness of it's violence. I was with it for a while, maybe the first hour or so and then as the story revealed where it was going I just became disgusted with the experience. It's not as if the film actually has anything interesting to say about the psychology of it's villain(s).

Sure, the aesthetic of I Saw the Devil is fine, but it just doesn't matter that much to me when it's all at the service of blunt force trauma (so much ridiculous head bashing in this film). I watched it after enjoying A Bittersweet Life. That film didn't over do it's violence until the very end at which point I sort of checked out there as well.

[Grouchy]

Robinson Crusoe becomes, in the hands of the master Luis Buñuel, a sort of eulogy in praise of friendship and trust. Buñuel makes the story his own while at the same time showing respect and devotion to the spirit of the original text. In a couple of scenes that bear his distinct trademark, Crusoe dreams about his father who definitively won't give him a glass of water and, in a particularly brilliant moment that might seem cliché to modern audiences, Friday accurately questions Christian theology in his broken English. This is a fun, entertaining film and yet it's sort of destined to oblivion since it's not memorable or important enough to warrant much more than a curiosity status. It will forever remain a sort of odd duck in the director's already wildly varied filmography.

[D_Davis]

Sure, the aesthetic of I Saw the Devil is fine, but it just doesn't matter that much to me when it's all at the service of blunt force trauma (so much ridiculous head bashing in this film). I watched it after enjoying A Bittersweet Life. That film didn't over do it's violence until the very end at which point I sort of checked out there as well.

There isn't much in the realms of crime cinema that tops A Bittersweet Life; it's a remarkable film.

[Qrazy]

There isn't much in the realms of crime cinema that tops A Bittersweet Life; it's a remarkable film.

It's very good until the last set piece at which point it becomes melodramatic and silly.