28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[megladon8]

More accessible sounds a lot like "dumb down" to me. There's a big difference between radio and written film criticism in terms of audience and purpose and I see no need to boil everything down to the most simplistic language possible simply to make things easily digestible to more people. Rosenbaum's not perfect (only the great, indomitable Quentin Tarantino reserves that distinction), but his diction is not among his faults and not everything that attempts to be intellectual is "posturing".

Read Mara's post.

The ideas don't need to be dumbed down at all, I just don't see why they need to be so overwritten.

It's unnecessary.

[Mara]

Aye, 1989 is super awesome, too. Which is why Driving Miss Daisy winning Best Picture for that year makes me wonder what the hell the Academy voters were smoking.

White guilt is a powerful motivator.

[number8]

"Raison d'etre" is pretty common use in English language. I don't find it posturing in the least to use words like that. Would it be overwriting to use "c'est la vie"? Or "homage"?

And "mise-en-scene" is pretty much just a film term now that they teach first year film students. It would be weird to not use a term that exists when you're speaking the language of film.

And I thought "bejeweled navel" was not so much a nonsense metaphor and more like a joke marrying the term "navel gazing" with the bellybutton jewel trend to refer to Hollywood, which is more than apt. Shrug.

[MadMan]

White guilt is a powerful motivator.

If that's the case, they should have nominated Do The Right Thing, and given it Best Picture. Stupid bastards.

[Sycophant]

Rosenbaum's article reads like the work of a witty academic with a gift for analogy and metaphor.

Its offhand genocidal message comes very close to being the only one that New Hollywood (from Taxi Driver to Star Wars to Apocalypse Now to Dressed to Kill) can find beyond its pretty, bejeweled navel — a pithy suggestion, derived from Conrad’s Kurtz in Heart of Darkness, that simply says, “Exterminate the brutes.”

This is a good sentence. The bit involving "pretty, bejeweled navel" is a more literate, entertaining, and descriptive statement--I can't see it as pure pomp--than just saying "Hollywood is self-congratulatory. And shiny." Or "Ho'wood's full of wankers."

Derek's absolutely right about the difference between writing for hourly news updates and composing a critical piece for print.

I'm not sayin' things can't be overwritten, or that purple prose is desirable. I'm sayin' this ain't it.

[baby doll]

Just one of the best years ever in my books.

As far as the best ever, I'd go with 1955, '67, '74, and 2007:

1955:
All That Heaven Allows (Douglas Sirk)
Artists and Models (Frank Tashlin)
The Cobweb (Vincente Minnelli)
East of Eden (Elia Kazan)
A Generation (Andrzej Wajda)
Guys and Dolls (Joseph L. Mankiewicz)
Kiss Me Deadly (Robert Aldrich)
Lola Montès (Max Ophüls)
The Man With the Golden Arm (Otto Preminger)
Moonfleet (Fritz Lang)
The Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton)
Nuit et brouillard (Alain Resnais)
Ordet (Carl Theodor Dreyer)
Pather panchali (Satyajit Ray)
Rebel Without a Cause (Nicholas Ray)
The Trouble With Harry (Alfred Hitchcock)

1967:
Anticipation (Jean-Luc Godard)
Belle de jour (Luis Buñuel)
Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn)
Branded to Kill (Seijun Suzuki)
La Chinoise (Jean-Luc Godard)
The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach (Danièle Huillet / Jean-Marie Straub)
Les Demoiselles de Rochefort (Jacques Demy)
2 ou 3 choses que je sais d'elle (Jean-Luc Godard)
Fuses (Carolee Schneeman)
Mouchette (Robert Bresson)
Oedipus Rex (Pier Paolo Pasolini)
The Perfect Human (Jørgen Leth)
Playtime (Jacques Tati)
The Red and the White (Miklós Jancsó)
Wavelength (Michael Snow)
Weekend (Jean-Luc Godard)

1974:
Ali: Fear Eats the Soul (Rainer Werner Fassbinder)
Alice in the Cities (Wim Wenders)
Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (Sam Peckinpah)
California Split (Robert Altman)
Céline et Julie vont en bateau (Jacques Rivette)
Chinatown (Roman Polanski)
The Conversation (Francis Ford Coppola)
Le Fantôme de la liberté (Luis Buñuel)
Fuji (Robert Breer)
The Great Ecstasy of the Woodcarver Steiner (Werner Herzog)
Lacombe Lucien (Louis Malle)
Lancelot du lac (Robert Bresson)
A Woman Under the Influence (John Cassavetes)

2007:
Les Amours d'Astrée et de Céladon (Eric Rohmer)
Boarding Gate (Olivier Assayas)
The Darjeeling Limited (Wes Anderson)
La France (Serge Bozon)
Gone Baby Gone (Ben Affleck)
Hairspray (Adam Shankman)
I'm Not There. (Todd Haynes)
In the City of Sylvia (José Luis GuerÃ*n)
Lust, Caution (Ang Lee)
The Man From London (Béla Tarr)
Margot at the Wedding (Noah Baumbach)
Persepolis (Vincent Paronnaud / Marjane Satrapi)
Silent Light (Carlos Reygadas)
Les Témoins (André Téchiné)
We Own the Night (James Gray)
You, the Living (Roy Andersson)

[megladon8]

I've never in my life encountered the "belly button jewel trend to refer to Hollywood".

Never.

So you can see my confusion in his use of it.

[Qrazy]

Given how many English speakers use the phrase "raison d'être," I don't think that qualifies as showing off his French.

As for the "pretty bejeweled navel bit," he's hardly the first writer to notice that Hollywood consistently and systematically dehumanizes people from other cultures by emphasizing their otherness. Sure, you can say he's making too much of this one example (which is a skillful bit of comic relief), but given how prevalent this sort of thing is, I can see his point.

It's not just Hollywood, it's a fairly common cinematic trope around the world. The other just happens to vary from place to place. For instance the token white martial artist that Jackie Chan always faces off against. This white guy is usually the right hand man of the villain of the film. He tends to be a good fighter and makes things hard on Chan but in the end game Chan always bests him.

[Sycophant]

I've never in my life encountered the "belly button jewel trend to refer to Hollywood".

Never.

So you can see my confusion in his use of it.

Neither have I. But as 8 pointed out, it's an adaptation of the idiomatic expression "navel-gazing." By calling it "pretty and bejeweled," Rosenbaum references both Hollywood's glitz and extravagance, as well as its fetishizing exoticism.

[number8]

Yeah, me neither. That's why I thought it was witty. Hollywood is not just navel-gazing, it's navel-gazing at a bejeweled navel, which is a fashion trend. It fits pretty well in the context of his criticism, and he cuts that idea across in, what, four words? That's not overwriting, that's efficient.

Shit, that's what I try to do in my reviews.

[Qrazy]

Personally I don't mind the sentence in and of itself. I just find the content obnoxious.

[megladon8]

I'm never going to be a writer, am I?

[soitgoes...]

As far as the best ever, I'd go with 1955, '67, '74, and 2007:

I've given up on trying to pinpoint which year is the best. All I know is that I can blindly point to any year between 1949 and 1969 and make a solid case for it being the best year. Plus there are still so many films I want to see from those years.

[Boner M]

These metaphors he uses are completely nonsensical - "Hollywood's pretty bejeweled navel"? And that idea that the scene provides the audience with some kind of "sexual release"?

I agree. What Rosenbaum is doing is simply jerking himself off and throwing the sticky, wet fluid in the faces of his readers.

[baby doll]

I agree. What Rosenbaum is doing is simply jerking himself off and throwing the sticky, wet fluid in the faces of his readers.

There's an image I'll never get out of my head.

[Boner M]

There's an image I'll never get out of my head.

[megladon8]

Boner could fart in a plastic bag and MatchCutters would say it was the best thing to ever happen to forum discussions.

[Skitch]

Boner could fart in a plastic bag and MatchCutters would say it was the best thing to ever happen to forum discussions.

Use bigger words so I can figure out what you're trying to say here.

[soitgoes...]

Tran returns to form, almost, with Norwegian Wood. I've read the book, and didn't think too much of it. The film is an improvement on the book, but again that's not saying too much on its own. While the direction and acting are top-notch, Tran's adaptation leaves much to be desired, but the fault probably lies as much with the source material as it does with his writing. A stunningly beautiful film (Hou regular Mark Lee is behind the camera), Tran paints two-dimensional characters drifting through 1960's Japan with a deep sense of melancholy. Who else to score melancholy, but Jonny Greenwood, guitarist of Radiohead? Skepticism in his score at first finally melted away as Greenwood perfectly encapsulates the despondent state of the film's characters as they search for love through loss. Tran tries hard to portray the inner turmoil of Toru, but ultimately fails as Murakami's character is too introverted.

Anyways, not as strong as his Vietnam trilogy, but definitely good enough to be recommended, which is something I could never come close to doing with I Come with the Rain.

[Stay Puft]

Tran returns to form, almost, with Norwegian Wood

ritch:

I haven't read the book, loved the film. Mostly though I'll admit I love Mark Lee's work on the film (though his work on Vertical Ray of the Sun is stronger, and of course that film is much better on the whole). I generally agree with your assessment though I responded to it more emotionally it seems. I think Tran was successfully able to convey a range of emotions through visuals and sound, and in many cases made up for whatever was lacking in the material.

That slow motion shot of them getting out of the pool, gosh. That does it for me. That's all I need.

[soitgoes...]

ritch:

I haven't read the book, loved the film. Mostly though I'll admit I love Mark Lee's work on the film (though his work on Vertical Ray of the Sun is stronger, and of course that film is much better on the whole). I generally agree with your assessment though I responded to it more emotionally it seems. I think Tran was successfully able to convey a range of emotions through visuals and sound, and in many cases made up for whatever was lacking in the material.

That slow motion shot of them getting out of the pool, gosh. That does it for me. That's all I need.

His direction conveys emotion, but his writing is inert. The actors do a good job with what they're given, but there really isn't a whole lot there. Like I said it's hard for me to pin down where the fault lies. I suppose Tran since he chose the material. It's awfully hard to take a poor script/source material and make a great film. Tran gives a valiant effort, but ultimately falls a wee bit short. At the very least this film is an encouraging step in the right direction.

[Stay Puft]

A few people worked on the script, maybe a problem is there. Somebody asked Tran about this during the Q&A at my screening. He wrote the first draft in French, a Japanese screenwriter translated it to Japanese, and then Murakami himself worked on the final draft.

But like I said, no familiarity with the source myself. And I won't argue the criticisms, this is a step removed from the Vietnam trilogy for sure. (I still haven't seen I Come with the Rain, so I'm also looking at this from a different perspective.)

[soitgoes...]

But like I said, no familiarity with the source myself. And I won't argue the criticisms, this is a step removed from the Vietnam trilogy for sure. (I still haven't seen I Come with the Rain, so I'm also looking at this from a different perspective.)

Oh totally, I'm laying the criticism on a little thick. The film is definitely more good than bad, hence my rating.

[Dukefrukem]

4 Bluray Alien set on Amazon at 10am?

Do we have a DVD thread?

[Sycophant]

Yes, and you have the last post in it, on February 22nd.