I just watched Elephant and found it both compelling and puzzling. What puzzles me partly is its schizophrenic strategy of following precisely many of the details of the Columbine Harris/Klebold shootings (the attraction to Hitler, the playing of violent videogames, the timeline and strategy of pipe bombs and shootings, the warning to a student outside, the directive to “have fun,†even the realization of the rumor that the spree ended with harris shooting klebold rather than a mutual suicide) while allowing for a very loose improvisational style. Is the film a dramatization, deliberately courting status as a kind of lyrical re-creation of Columbine, or does it mean to suggest itself as a kind of film about Anywhere USA where banality is inexplicably interrupted by violence? What am I missing in the folding together of these two approaches? Why does it deliberately court cliché—the repetition of one of the most well-known pieces of classical music, the repeated images of “storm clouds massing?â€
Continue reading Perils of Minimalism?
Author: michael
After All These Years, To Believe in Jesus/Narrative-rhea
Did somebody take this blog off its feeding tube? In what is perhaps a misguided attempt to revive it, let me ask a question or a series of interrelated questions:
When not sculpting an exact scale model of Notre Dame from a bar of Zest I spend a great deal of time watching TV—I follow regularly the dramas The Shield, Third Watch (in reruns on A&E), NYPD Blue (until it lamely went off the air a couple of weeks ago), West Wing and 24, as well as The Simpsons, King of the Hill, Malcolm in the Middle; occasionally I also catch various versions of CSI and Law and Order and Raymond. And I am leaving out the various movies—what I see in theaters, what I rent and what I catch glimpses of on TV (god help me, I am so weak I will sit through the whole showing of “Home Dangerous Home†starring Karen Valentine and Richard Crenna on Court TV, only to discover what I already suspected—it wasn’t her husband (Steven Weber) at all but the envious business partner (Morgan Fairchild)).
Continue reading After All These Years, To Believe in Jesus/Narrative-rhea
Sin City
Well, I saw the controversial Sin City last night and my reaction was much closer to Edelstein’s than to Taylor’s. But, of course, that just proves I am in fact a pimply fanboy, aging badly, according to Ella Taylor. And in this aggrieved fanboy mode, can I just ask what kind of reviewer mistakes the barrel of an automatic pistol for a “dagger.” wasn’t she paying attention? The movie looks great and is thrilling. I don’t think you will find well-crafted lessons on “how we live†but something that takes the visual aspect of movies seriously—if you don’t like it, fine, but at least it is fully a movie where every element is working together in a stunning way. Manohla gives it some lukewarm praise but ultimately finds it a bore, as does Hoberman—no doubt in Film Comment both will give it one or two stars while the latest by Godard—a French-accented monologue about “the elusiveness of the past and the duplicities of cinema†accompanying a two hour tracking shot of Isabelle Huppert walking across a Parisian parking lot where all the cars are on fire—receives four. And, by the way, what’s up with skipping Sin City and watching
Continue reading Sin City
Oscar Odds Update
On the theory that the “academy” likes to be broad-minded and internationally-inclined, I would take as longshots Don Cheadle and Sophie Okonedo from Hotel Rwanda. particularly Okonedo since it is better to be broad-minded in a major but lesser category. Nobody’s seen it, but you know when genocide’s in the air, that great ACTING can’t be far behind. At 33-1 I am taking Winslet over Swank, since all the others are….er, foreign or something. Finding Neverland is 100 to 1 for Best Picture. nice odds but the academy takes a resolute and brave position against pedophilia. will the academy heal the wound between movies and TV by granting Alan Alda a best supporting actor? tantalizing, but he would have to beat both a black man in a heart-tugging role and a “breakout” actor in a little indie hit, two formidably ideological choices for the academy. The Incredibles is a lock. If I could afford to bet $10,000, I could make a nice $700 or so. plus I have a weird crush on Elasti-Girl. The Aviator will win both best picture and best director…finally “making it up” to martin scorsese for Raging Bull, Goodfellas and Gangs of New York. the topic is “safer”–no wife-beating, greasy Italians, funny- horrific violence or people saying “tuppenny fuck” and slicing up dead pigs–and it’s an epic treatment of a hollywood figure (for extra academy “self-regard” points). I expect a cut, if you take any of my recommendations. but, of course, I had expected to make a killing off Queen Latifah in Chicago when that overstuffed couch Zeta-Jones won best supporting actress! damn her and her creepy husband Lee Majors! any side bets on “Most Embarrasing Speech” or “Nearly Dead but Acclaimed Foreign Director Who Will Win Lifetime Achievement Award after Being Snubbed for Four Decades?” Will the academy have a sense of humor and give “Best Make-Up” to Passion of the Christ? it’s interesting how the Jews killed Our Lord and founded Hollywood. Discuss.
melancholy baby
Whenever I read Film Comment magazine, as I’m doing now, I feel particularly stupid. First it is unlikely that I will see the new retrospective of whatever at Lincoln Center, and second, I rarely know the celebrated Turkish, Georgian or Finnish directors who apparently have been turning out masterpiece after masterpiece during the last decade, while I struggle to catch up with the episodes of Futurama that I’ve missed. This experience leads to melancholy thoughts regarding “film culture” and “netflix:” what happened to seeing films “publically”–now it is only consistently possible in New York City and in some rare other locations (say San Francisco/Berkely where they have a major Film Archive or Minneapolis which has the Walker Art Center) to see a movie in a well-designed theater or even to see a movie in a theater at all. do people really wish to stay at home so goddamm much? on one hand, the bizarre corporate cineplex where I have to sit through a fucking half hour of TV commercials now (and then, like a bad freshman essay, they summarize what you’ve just seen–“we’ve taken a sneak peak at the big screen update of “Green Acres” and talked with its star Colin Farrell…) and on the other, the stupefaction of “home” where you can safely piss yourself while you slog through all 13 hours of Berlin Alexanderplatz. as peggy lee whispered to me during an amorous embrace, “baby, is that all there is?” To which I replied, “when the boundaries of public and private life are muddled, public life becomes the unsatisfactory adjunct of a private life that is nevertheless misshapen by “public” but inaccessible forces.” She slapped me and left with that cheap Sinatra-fake Jack Jones. I retaliated by copping a feel of Connie Francis, who had passed out over her most recent Gin Rickey.
House of Flying Daggers
House of Flying Cliches, laboriously presented. Only a self-consciously retro and “pretty” chinese film could get away with some of this creaky stuff. a couple of exciting sequences, especially a fight and chase in a bamboo forest. but perhaps it’s time to ask the same question of Chinese filmmakers like Yimou that the popularity of Kurosawa in the 1970s/80s raised: How much do these costume dramas, calculated to wow western audiences with their scenery, scope, art direction, etc., prevent other more daring and significant films from receiving distribution and reaching larger audiences. I remember the first time I saw the Japanese film “Pigs and Battleships” about Japan immediately after the war—I was amazed because I thought Japanese film was all samourai’s and emperors. Of course, very few people have seen films by either Imamura or Kurosawa, but is it entirely cynical to wonder why Kurosawa in particular was chosen as a “global” film darling?
So Bad, etc.
I saw a bit of The Osterman Weekend on TV the other day. It got me thinking–Are there other movies that are really quite bad as conventional movies but that are nevertheless great. The Osterman Weekend, taken as a conventional thriller is really ridiculous–it makes next to no sense and it includes an extended slow motion sequence involving crossbows. However, as a document of decline , corruption and paranoia it’s unbelievably right on. everyone in the movie seems to be a victim of coke addiction and gin sweats. I feel edgy and upset watching it. John Hurt and Dennis Hopper in particular look like they might die onscreen. If I were to teach a course on movies of the 1970s I would use this film to catch its “mood” rather than something “well-made” but hardly as compelling like “All the President’s Men.” Something about Peckinpah that allows him to take a piece of Robert Ludlum nonsense, hardly direct it at all and yet still make a very personal movie?
other stuff? 24 and more
er…are we allowed to discuss other (ahem) cultural items other than movies on this list or will that endanger its purity? I spit on your rules! since I live in out in the woods now I rarely see any movies except on DVD–and the movies I have seen lately at the cineplexes overrun by teenagers have run to the likes of Blade: Trinity, National Treasure and Aliens vs Predator rather than all this high-toned consequences of irresponsibility stuff I keep hearing about (by the way, the Predators win–apparently because they have cool dredlocks like Bob Marley and secretly dig humans. me, I’d rather have 3 sets of fangs and acid for blood. baby, then somebody would pay! since when did the predators become such sell-outs?). Anyhoo, I have been watching last season’s 24 on DVD, thanks to Netflix….and, er, I don’t know what point I have to make, except it’s cool when the helicopter blows up. oh wait, here it is, I think–it is a weird combination of slick dense overplotting with remarkably blatant “holes” in it–it makes me think of us and the dinosaurs. apparently they died when they became too specialized in evolution–then the slightest change became lethal because they were so adapted to current circumstances. a giant edifice of knowledge with a spot of stupidity, small but of stunning vulnerability. make cultural hay out of that! jesus, I’m tired…..