The Invisible Man (2020): dull critics horror like The Badadook and It Follows. The social commentary and attempts at 'seriousness' undermine the genre elements. Boring style too. 4.5/10.
Bill and Ted 3: not bad for a nostalgia trip. Not as good as the old films though, and Reeves looks a bit uncertain revisiting this role. Winter falls right back in place though. Their dopey daughters were an okay touch, but they weren't given great material. 5 or 5.5/10
Last Watched
Billy Wilder's The Apartment (1960) on the BIG SCREEN, and I liked it so much more that way. Huge cinema screens rule!
has anyone else seen borzage's secrets (1933)? soooo wanted it to be the leslie howard meet-cute it began with, but then it went tonally all over the place (in keeping with the development of the plot) and in the end left me farting in rage. such a bizarre little film
i just watched giraffe (2019) on mubi. struggle with modern film festival-bait movies now, all this ponderous 'meaning' just means the camera is constipated. so maybe i was too bored by the empty 'delicacy' to get it, but why is it called giraffe?
I watched that too just last night and felt very lukewarm about it. Also wondered why it's called Giraffe... the best I could come up with is that a giraffe is a metaphor for a higher point of view. The Danish woman doing archaeological research reads the diary of the woman who used to live in the farmhouse being demolished for the tunnel... she's peering into her life "over the fence" as it were, like a giraffe, the same way we get to peer at her life and love affair "over the fence" in a movie that feels almost like a documentary. I don't know, but if that's the case I can't find much to reinforce it.twodeadmagpies wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:01 pm i just watched giraffe (2019) on mubi. struggle with modern film festival-bait movies now, all this ponderous 'meaning' just means the camera is constipated. so maybe i was too bored by the empty 'delicacy' to get it, but why is it called giraffe?
Second theory: the film was submitted to the Locarno Film Festival, which likes spotted animals. (Its award is the Golden Leopard.)
gus van sant presumably saw a bela tarr movie and made elephant back in 2003. tbh i really liked elephant (in fact, in an act of provocation, i picked it as the number one film of the year, when i was the arts and entertainment editor for my high school newspaper whooppeeee; gallo's the brown bunny was second), but still don't know what the title refers to, other than 'the elephant in the room,' which would be stupid, if that was the case. all this is to say, i agree. slow cinema aesthetic for prepackaged film festival products has been used ad nauseam ad infinitum at this point. i think this is why papa jerry doesn't watch movies anymore. just a general malaise towards lazy filmmaking hidden behind a veneer of trendy aesthetics that helps limit the awareness of an actual lack of talent. i could be totes wrong about the film you're referring to though, cuz i haven't even heard of it, let alone seen it...
the gus movie's title is a reference to the alan clarke movie of the same name from 1989thoxans wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:32 pm gus van sant presumably saw a bela tarr movie and made elephant back in 2003. tbh i really liked elephant (in fact, in an act of provocation, i picked it as the number one film of the year, when i was the arts and entertainment editor for my high school newspaper whooppeeee; gallo's the brown bunny was second), but still don't know what the title refers to, other than 'the elephant in the room,' which would be stupid, if that was the case. all this is to say, i agree. slow cinema aesthetic for prepackaged film festival products has been used ad nauseam ad infinitum at this point. i think this is why papa jerry doesn't watch movies anymore. just a general malaise towards lazy filmmaking hidden behind a veneer of trendy aesthetics that helps limit the awareness of an actual lack of talent. i could be totes wrong about the film you're referring to though, cuz i haven't even heard of it, let alone seen it...
as to why clarke picked that title who knows...
edit: a friend of mine from high school used to caddy at this weird private golf course a 20 minute drive or so from our neighborhood, and gus vas van sant apparently was a regular there. don't remember any stories about him other than that he wore a sweater tied around his neck at all times, which is still something i think of people only doing in movies.
perfect description of breaking badthoxans wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:32 pm slow cinema aesthetic for prepackaged film festival products has been used ad nauseam ad infinitum at this point. i think this is why papa jerry doesn't watch movies anymore. just a general malaise towards lazy filmmaking hidden behind a veneer of trendy aesthetics that helps limit the awareness of an actual lack of talent.
(elephant was great)
oh yeah! i think i knew this at some point. alas, my brain has been leaking info like a sieve for the past few years. as an aside, i'm pretty sure i could kick gus van sant's ass in golf
damn, i swear every time i think about maybe possibly perhaps starting breaking bad, i get one of these. wba also dislikes it. i'll probs just stick with midnight diner for now, until i revert back to whatever other show i've seen a million times that doesn't force me to think about anything
Last edited by thoxans on Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
pretty sure the shit-talking would go something like this: 'hey drugstore cowboy, nice three putt, but don't worry about it, cuz even duffers get the blues'
but we'd still be cool cuz we'd smoke a joint, and i'd show him the place where you can hide a case of beer in a golf cart (pro tip: it's under the seat, near the battery)
but we'd still be cool cuz we'd smoke a joint, and i'd show him the place where you can hide a case of beer in a golf cart (pro tip: it's under the seat, near the battery)
the sea of trees puns would also be too ripe to pass up...
-
Joks Trois
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 9:51 am
Americans are not great at slow cinema. Don't care who it is. Kelly.R Van Sant etc. They just aren't amazing at it. That is partly due to cultural reasons. There is a tendency to soften the style and apply it to more obvious subject matter. This limits its impact as serious art in my view, and Van Sant, while skilled, to me, is pretty middlebrow. As much as I like Jarmusch at times, his films are often pretty basic and simple philosophically. Stoner corner store stuff, especially compared to the great European film makers.thoxans wrote: ↑Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:32 pm gus van sant presumably saw a bela tarr movie and made elephant back in 2003. tbh i really liked elephant (in fact, in an act of provocation, i picked it as the number one film of the year, when i was the arts and entertainment editor for my high school newspaper whooppeeee; gallo's the brown bunny was second), but still don't know what the title refers to, other than 'the elephant in the room,' which would be stupid, if that was the case. all this is to say, i agree. slow cinema aesthetic for prepackaged film festival products has been used ad nauseam ad infinitum at this point. i think this is why papa jerry doesn't watch movies anymore. just a general malaise towards lazy filmmaking hidden behind a veneer of trendy aesthetics that helps limit the awareness of an actual lack of talent. i could be totes wrong about the film you're referring to though, cuz i haven't even heard of it, let alone seen it...
Regarding contemporary slow cinema, is it really a thing now anyway? It seems to have had its day. I don't get the impression that it's as popular as it was 10 or so years ago. Most of the popular film makers in that 'style' either peaked a long time ago or have basically retired. New films in that 'style' are obviously being made, but they don't seem to be getting the same level of attention. The lack of real competition also appears to benefit the practitioners who have 'held on', so to speak, like Pedro Costa, who is really in a league of his own and is more praised now by critics, especially in the 'mainstream', than he was 10-15 years ago.
Who Killed Jam Master Jay: Netflix documentary. It's basically an indictment of American law enforcement that has nothing new or of interest to say. I would have preferred an actual documentary about him and Run DMC, who were pioneers that broke cultural, musical and racial boundaries in their time. 4.5/10.
Three On A Couch: Lewis' garbled response to feminism and the emerging sexual revolution. It's more interesting than good, but I appreciated his attempt at trying to make a different film. He is quite good in it. It's easily the best of his period at Columbia, not that that is saying much. 5.5/10.
Gerry was his Tarr inspired film, I believe.
The film's style was largely inspired by the work of Hungarian director Bela Tarr, namely its use of extended scenes playing out in uncut master shots. There are a few direct visual quotations from Tarr's Satantango such as a shot following the two protagonists while tumbleweeds blow around them that mimics a shot in Tarr's film where two men walk through a town as a windstorm blows around leaves and trash.
Besides the work of Bela Tarr, the video game Tomb Raider was cited as an influence on the style of the film. Van Sant had mentioned that he hadn't had much experience with video games and was struck by the fact that the lack of the ability to cut away from the action in video games meant having to stay with the characters during travel that would normally be glossed over in films. In an interview with Filmmaker Magazine Van Sant stated "In some ways, Gerry is Béla Tarr fused with Tomb Raider!"
on the other hand, assayas' non-fiction was very enjoyable. i could watch funny french films like that all the time. he should do comedy more often. also my memory is terrible because i'm surehe was referencing a scene from another film at one point but i just cannot think what it was. gah
Non-Fiction is indeed fun if maybe a bit too talky. Speaking of recent funny French films, have you seen La belle époque?
A great film! I absolutely loved Non-Fiction. I was pleasantly surprised, because it felt like a departure from the style of Assayas' previous films. I've only seen 6 of his, but enjoyed all of them to a varying degree. I wonder if he made something similar to Non-Fiction in the past that I haven't seen.twodeadmagpies wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 9:52 pm on the other hand, assayas' non-fiction was very enjoyable. i could watch funny french films like that all the time. he should do comedy more often. also my memory is terrible because i'm surehe was referencing a scene from another film at one point but i just cannot think what it was. gah
oh but i love the talky stuff, that's what made it so funny, all that entitled bourgeois angst (compared to the po-faced entitled bourgeois angst in eg giraffe) havent seen la belle epoque, looks a bit magical realist and i'm allergic to that for some reason, also, if it's not on netflix (and currently mubi till i've watched all the ones i want to), i have no way of watching modern films
i haven't seen that many assayas films (too much creep over maggie cheung put me off a bit) but i gathered that the relation between identity/reality/perception is something that interests him, and comedy is perfect for that, being about perceptual disconnects....hope he will do more
also, its not new, but that little 'thing' with binoche towards the end, just made me go 'wheeeeeeee' in delight....
i haven't seen that many assayas films (too much creep over maggie cheung put me off a bit) but i gathered that the relation between identity/reality/perception is something that interests him, and comedy is perfect for that, being about perceptual disconnects....hope he will do more
also, its not new, but that little 'thing' with binoche towards the end, just made me go 'wheeeeeeee' in delight....
yeah the binoche thing was truly excellent
it's not a comedy but i found parts of clouds of sils maria very funny, and it's my favourite assayas of the few i've seen to date
it's not a comedy but i found parts of clouds of sils maria very funny, and it's my favourite assayas of the few i've seen to date
nice, looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
MARY POPPINS much to my surprise worked some good magic on me last night. No denying the film's problems here, but somehow they didn't overwhelm the pleasures, and the pleasures are real. When Julie Andrews starts to sing about making a job a game and spoonfuls of sugar I am just helpless in her grasp, and I forgive Dick Van Dyke's accent for his dance with those penguin waiters, and so on. The film's pretty straight up condemnation of Patriarchal Assholishness doesn't disguise the fact that Mummy's keeping herself out of the picture too, avoiding the kids through social engagement. A mixed bag, no doubt. The glorious penguin waiters scene is followed by a carousel ride that turns into a foxhunt of total charmlessness, but it leads to "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" so well, whatever. I'm more inclined now to dig on the good stuff that pokes its head through the relentless control apparently exercised on the film, those odd little moments of spontaneity and humanity, like the look of sheer unabashed Stroheimian GREED that Old Mr. Dawes has when he snatches tuppence out of that kid's hand, and David Tomlinson's little meltdown near film's end had me very happy indeed. Tomlinson is the film's real secret weapon.
These matters are best disposed of from a great height. Over water.
as usual catching up on films well after a poll is over, with terence fisher's man who could cheat death
everything that letterboxd horror kids seem to hate about the movie makes it fascinating to me - it's essentially a slow burning drawing room drama with 3 characters engaged in very serious discussion about medical ethics, aging, and enlightenment ideas about science. and on top of that is a kind of weird fiction story with anton diffring as a 104 year old doctor/sculptor who has been elongating his life with gland transplants extracted from people women he may or may not have murdered, and may or may not have murdered many more when he goes a bit wild at the end of his 10 year rejuvenation cycle.
there is also such a great sense of wardrobe and room decor, where the frontal figures kind of melt into these background environments. why don't horror kids care more about foreground actors matching with wallpaper?
everything that letterboxd horror kids seem to hate about the movie makes it fascinating to me - it's essentially a slow burning drawing room drama with 3 characters engaged in very serious discussion about medical ethics, aging, and enlightenment ideas about science. and on top of that is a kind of weird fiction story with anton diffring as a 104 year old doctor/sculptor who has been elongating his life with gland transplants extracted from people women he may or may not have murdered, and may or may not have murdered many more when he goes a bit wild at the end of his 10 year rejuvenation cycle.
there is also such a great sense of wardrobe and room decor, where the frontal figures kind of melt into these background environments. why don't horror kids care more about foreground actors matching with wallpaper?
Heh. That sounds like the Fisher stuff I like best, I'm not really into the horror in action bits, so the surrounding stuff is more my thing. I'll have to try and see it sometime.
-
Evelyn Library P.I.
- Posts: 1370
- Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:36 pm
That write-up and those gorgeous stills certainly make it sound up my alley! Hopefully I can add a Fisher or two to my Halloween viewing.
THE KENNEL MURDER CASE -- Michael Curtiz's 1933 film of S.S. Van Dine's novel, with William Powell as Philo Vance, here straightened out and brought down to earth and played by Powell as a sober version of his Nick Charles that would follow the next year. It's a complicated murder case with assorted suspects and twists, and Curtiz keeps it lively with some tasty camera and sound flourishes. Good fun mainly.
These matters are best disposed of from a great height. Over water.
MAN WITH A MOVIE CAMERA -- sometimes you just need a jolt of Vertov to clear the cobwebs and sharpen the senses. And cleared and sharpened they are. As always.
These matters are best disposed of from a great height. Over water.
watched TRANSIT by christian petzold tonight... wow. my first petzold, through from what i heard, i was expecting to like him. but this exceeded all expectations. one of my favourite films of last decade, for sure. i'm completely haunted by this, and can't watch to watch his new one (UNDINE) at viff later this month
I was curious about Farocki's presence in Transit so I read some interviews with Petzold.¨:
Speaking of Harun Farocki, his voice has flowed through your work forever. Where is Farocki in “Transit”?
I must say that I only realized this years after his death: I was together with his widow at the premiere [of “Transit” in Berlin], and we both started crying because we realized the main character is him. Harun was half-Indian, he’s born in Czechoslovakia, his father was a Nazi or not a Nazi, nobody knows really. He was always around, he was always looking, he was always through the world, and he knows that you can find yourself by yourself. The main character in the book by Anna Seghers, he’s telling a story, he had lost everything, but he can talk about this loss, so he has an identity. I’ve seen Harun every time I’ve read this book.
How did you first come across the book?
Harun passed it to me because I made bad jokes about Anna Seghers. I hadn’t read a line of hers, but we were both together in a car on a way to a football match—he was a left defender and I’m a right offender on the same team, Tasmania Berlin is the name—and I make jokes about Anna Seghers because other people made jokes about Anna Seghers and I copied them. He stopped the car and asked me if I was crazy, and said she was one of the best German-language novelists ever. He passed me “Transit” and other books in the same weekend, and I must say he was right.