SCFZ

nrh wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 10:33 pm my theory is the french have a secret private internet where they all talk. they don't frequent movie twitter or letterboxd or kg.

I follow a few french cinephiles here and there - they seem to stick to themselves. Unlike other corners of world cinephilia (the brazilians, the portuguese, the spaniards, argentinians), we don't usually see what they're up to.

I think a lot of them still have blogs!

They're too busy having all their conversations about film irl at the Cinematheque Francaise and whatever Mitterand's Jazz Club/Art House Hybrid is called.

there's a few french on icm forum and i have at least one from mubi days on various sites (polkasan)

i'm always amazed at the lack of japanese and i suspect they only talk to each other. we did have one for awhile (lyricalnitrate) and he confirmed that was true iirc

Typing in English on English language sites doesn't strike me as a very French thing to do.

yeah given they were willing to kill/die to try for sovereignty in canada, good point ancient enmity there

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-French_Wars

list of anglo-french conflicts stretching from the 12th century to the 19th, an almost constant state of war

I do a podcast with two French cinephiles, and know others, but you are absolutely right - there seems to even be large French versions of IMDb and film communities to the extent most don't even need to interact with the rest of us.

I want to put this here because it was sorta beautiful in its design... No dialogue: the orig. soundtrack with narrator has apparently been lost. Bazin would love that...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y5ZJqepogw

thank you lencho nice little short

Spellbound (1945, Alfred Hitchcock) Rewatch 9 --> 6



Rewatched this teenage favourite of mine, with some slight worries about whether or not it would hold up - along with several in-laws - somehow none of which had seen it before, though I think some liked it more than me, as they were getting quite into it by the end. (They were watching Strangers on a Train when my wife and I arrived, and Spellbound ended up being chosen as the next film).

Frankly, my main memory of the film was the delicious dream sequence, designed by Salvador Dali, and it is every bit as breathtaking - though in the film for much shorter than I remembered and also far more fractured. I do remember loving the pairing (not so much this time) and the tension later in the film - some of which is still incredible - but these scenes are too few and too far in-between.

So, what failed this time? Well, for starters, the stiffness of Hitchcock, which can be delightful when there is a decent degree of pitch dark humour, works far less well here - especially in the first 30 minutes which play out as a state melodrama. Overlooking the repeated sexist humour, and long drawn out scenes of psychobabble-banter that just doesn't need to be there - the romance between Bergman and Peck feels unbelievable - even for the standards of the time, and overtly corny. Thank god Hitchcock generally kept away from the romance genre - he just can't handle it. Coupled with the stiffness and overbearing score which has to tell us how to feel at all time, this early set-up is only redeemed by the fact that it is nothing but a McGuffin/diversion manoeuvre - to trick us into believing we are seeing a very different film.

This is perhaps also what I appreciated the most with Spellbound, as it in so many ways act as a precursor to Psycho - though, in some ways this is the feature-length version of the worst and most excruciating scene in Psycho. You know ... "that scene" ... where the psychologist goes through a long explanation of everything that has happened.

This is present throughout the film, especially towards the end - and it feels like the audience is treated like utter idiots - though, given the introduction of the film - I suppose it is a love letter to psychoanalysis. Too bad the writing could not be better. It feels false throughout, and often without the correcting force, Hitchcock so often brings. Add to that Bergman's infatuation feels ridiculous, and hard to buy. She is lacking a lot of her usual charisma and struggles to be believable in her role.

Peck on the other hand does a far better job, granted with much better material, as he balances at least two characters/states of being at the same time: and when he does dark, the film comes to life. Once we end up in Rochester, with 3rd billed Michael Chekhov - is when the film actually starts to feel like a horror film. The darkest scene - Peck, razor in hand - murder in his eyes - is spectacular - in every way - and the delivery from Chekhov could not be more spot-on in terms of nailing the dark humour in play - and his "Burlow" is undoubtedly a fantastic and classic example of the Hitchcockian bit-character.

While the film is certainly playing in another gear from this point, the flaws are still there, just reduced - and they blow up like never before as Peck and Bergman get closer to the truth. Granted, without spoiling it, the actual final climax does - once again - pack a punch (even is the writing is a little lacklustre) and manages to hold the film together. I do wonder what I saw in the film the first time though. Perhaps I was simply too infatuated with Hitchcock and Bergman that I would swallow anything and call it great? It is odd how some rewatches can be almost the same (such as my Rope rewatch a few months ago) and others like night and day (like this film) but a really valuable and enjoyable viewing all the same.

SPELLBOUND is a pretty dreary little movie all round, agreed with much of what you said. It just devolves into a series of boring explanations. It's no NOTORIOUS or SHADOW OF A DOUBT. I'm a big fan of Leo G. Carroll's performance here, though. Check out his reaction upon meeting Gregory Peck near film's beginning -- that odd little flinch of surprise...

https://twitter.com/rbgscfz/status/1391 ... 54018?s=20

thx for alerting us sally

Roscoe wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 1:38 pm SPELLBOUND is a pretty dreary little movie all round, agreed with much of what you said. It just devolves into a series of boring explanations. It's no NOTORIOUS or SHADOW OF A DOUBT. I'm a big fan of Leo G. Carroll's performance here, though. Check out his reaction upon meeting Gregory Peck near film's beginning -- that odd little flinch of surprise...

Agree on all counts, Leo G. Carroll was rock-solid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcoMONr4MG4

the file is silent but surviving OST is here (includes sound effects and some synchronized songs)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOZAG3PV67w

not exactly in synch but it's quite atmospheric

Rent-a-Pal (2020, Jon Stevenson)



Press play, reply, pause, rewind, repeat. Press play, reply better, pause, rewind repeat. Pause, rewind, play, repeat. Feeling down or lonely? Why don't you rent a pal? Just grab the VHS-tape, press play, and it may just be the start of a beautiful friendship.

Frankly, the bleakly realistic, retro and darkly comedic madness-trip witnessed in Rent-a-Pal, has to be seen to be believed. In fact, it may very well be the most innovative film of last year. This low-key, low-budget thriller, with most of its significant scenes taking place in a small basement - lingering on the repeated conversation between two men - one of which is not even there.

We follow David. A 40-year-old man who has put his life on hold to care for his mother. He has no time for friends, and spends most of his time pursuing video dating - with no luck. However, one day, at the dating agency, he spots a different type of VHS-tape: "Rent-a-Pal". This cheerful, campy, awkward and overtly fake "friend" could not be better cast. Wil Wheaton is simply spectacular - managing to pull of both the sad, side-gig gimmick of an actor reading a shabby script - which slowly merges into something genuinely eerie.

David keeps watching the time, learns what his "pal" will say or respond to him - after a knowing pause - and starts to modify what he says and how fast he says it to match it all up and make it feel real. Soon, everything is memorised, and the conversations get more and more intimate. David, on the other hand starts to lose grip on reality - and as the videotape gets worn out - it is clear that the balance between a cheap product and a real friendship with a real person is wearing thin - to the point that you don't know if something is wrong with the tape or if it is simply David who is losing grip with reality.

The ending could certainly have been delivered a little better - but for what it is, this film is remarkably well done, well-performed and perfectly low-key. It threads the fine line between dark comedy and horror/thriller territory - and manages to actually make the characters feel alive - despite the stylization. And better yet, the core of the film is genuinely the conversations and the exploration of just what this relationship/sense of desperate loneliness is. 8/10

i kind of loved United Red Army. true edgelords



be aware it is definitely a horror movie

STATE FUNERAL -- an assembly of film taken in the USSR during the massive funeral demonstrations for Josef Stalin. No narration, only occasional superimposed identification of the locations across the country (the film's significant fault is a lack of identification of some of those dignitaries laying wreaths and bowing before the corpse of their fallen leader). Masses of people, masses of flowers, masses of faces and faces and more faces. A fascinating picture of those places and that time.

three poplars on plyuschikha street -- tatyana lioznova 1968



soviet new wave with theater star tatyana doronina as a sheltered village wife who has her horizons broadened in the big city. nice photography and performances --and almost as much erotic tension as brief encounter! wildly popular in it's homeland and it's easy to see why

this is a) gorgeous & b) the most joyous (and only) game of fish-slap i have ever seen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8do1XPXNQB4

battles - isabelle tollenaere (2015)

no-narration absurdist doc about the traces war leaves (lots of letterboxd views about how miserable it was. eh? it was hilarious, hello laila pakalnina) but anyway the problem was that it was intentionally low information however i need to know which ex-soviet places they filmed in so I CAN NEVER GO THERE

i mean where the hell is the soviet prison camp theme park where you stay overnight locked in a cell, get abused by guards, have to evacuate in the pitch dark due to gas attacks and attempt to escape over ground that still has real barbed wire and other obstacles buried in it and who the hell would think that was a fun thing to do? so weird.

8 1/2 -- the 4K restoration of the Fellini warhorse running at Film Forum. Gorgeous from start to finish. I'm an unabashed admirer of the film, and seeing it on a moderately big screen was a tasty refreshing treat, and I'm glad to see that most of the remaining screenings are sold out.

captain f e kleinschmidt's arctic hunt (1914)

they're not lying about the title! starts off all ooo pretty ships & ice and eskimo babies and lol! the cart carrying the dogs for once, and then segues into unwatchable torture and death of (baby) polar bear(s). felt like i was watching a gianikian and ricci lucchi thing by the end of it

Open Mic Solitaire (Julius-Amédée Laou, 1983)
LB notes

Stark and impassioned, this short film by French filmmaker and playwright Julius-Amédée Laou drives at the urgency of direct antiracist action even when found at odds with the complacency compelled within marginalized communities. Mathieu (Serge Ubrette) is startled from his painting to learn his brother has been killed and takes over a local radio station with his girlfriend to decry the loss of his brother and his community’s failure to actively respond to it. The abruptness and tonal conciseness of the events, structured at a clipped pace and shifting from color to black-and-white, convey the underlined severity as we see the characters continually enter rooms which are already filled, both through their physical presence in the hospital and radio station, and through Ubrette’s voice filtering into the ongoing lives of the radio station listeners. Thus the vocal outcry becomes a necessary interruption even if ultimately, as the film itself contends in much a similar manner, it can only go so far as to reach out to its audience, who must then choose how they will respond to it.

Worth a watch (and only 18 minutes!) if one is interested here: https://mediacityfilmfestival.com/thous ... edee-laou/

umm soldier of orange is a good popcorn movie with rutger hauer looking hot doing adventure stuff. it was what i needed today

rewatched la otra which is restored and looking fabulous!

Those are some great-looking stills, damn.

the bedroom mirror scene is now mindblowing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhwZShgqkwQ

i love the opening credit sequence, it's like dolores might be a space alien

OPIUM -- Robert Reinert's 1919 melodrama about a good deed that goes very very punished, a 90 minute mass of plot machinations and betrayals and an implacable revenge-sworn villain who keeps popping up damn near literally out of nowhere, and it's a gas.

watched hughes/whale's hell's angels - better than i expected and the flying is stellar. talk about films that couldn't be made today. hughes himself got a skull fracture attempting a stunt no one else would try. harlow got crap at the time but it's the male leads (neither i've ever heard of) who are theatrical and at times silly. but the film has heart and i love this fatalistic genre. what a madman

Malmkrog / Manor House (2020, Cristi Puiu)



Daunting, dark and verbose - Manor House may just be scaring away audiences with its 201-minute runtime and promise/threat of non-stop philosophy and theology on screen. Sparse in setting and exposition, the action takes place entirely within and outside a large estate, the titular Manor House, as the residing couple and their guests - all members of the ruling class - enjoy an elaborate Christmas dinner. Throughout the evening engage in in-depth discussions of Christianity, war, politics, morals, enlightenment, good and evil.

One thing that is slowly intriguing is the quiet craft of Cristi Puiu (best known for The Death of Mr. Lazarescu). He varies the style each scene is shot with a great degree of restraint and deliberation. The changes are subtle but vary from few cuts and a moving camera of full figures to scenes composed entirely of intimate close-ups, to restrained scenes from afar, with characters suddenly removed from their previous importance. Divided into 6 sections, each bearing a character's name, and often taking place in a singular room, such as the library, lounge or dining room, this nuanced filmmaking adds an additional sense of cinematic power, urgency and dynamism - ripe, in itself, with possible interpretations and implications.




It is tempting to draw a slightly misleading, but still accurate comparison to My Dinner with Andre, as both are films that build suspense and intrigue through dialogue, stories and discussion - but the tone and purpose of these films could hardly be further apart. However, where the more light-hearted 80s offering intends to make us lose ourselves in the stories and discussion of the two main characters, Manor House wishes the opposite. It actively wants us to observe from a distance, consider what they are saying, consider why and even consider the context we are placed in, and who it is making the arguments.

There are beautiful subtle touches just in the use of language. The action takes place in Russia (note, the film is Romanian and shot in Romania) but the common language of our 5 ruling class characters is French. When they speak to their servants, the language is often German. When they quote literature, it may indeed be English. These are not everyday Russians, but the ruling class - and their morals, values and arguments are often an example of their own privileged worldview and to advance their own interests, or simply their own ego or sense of self. Few scenes speak to this clearer than their discussion of Europe, and whether or not they are European. There is a clear disdain for the majority of the population from most of the participants and in general, the discussions are purely theoretical and consists of pretentious posturing quite removed from reality.

There are a few cold wake-up calls throughout the film, and a key shift already happens in act two, which is the only act with the name of a servant, rather than one of the 5 lead characters. Here, we see them continue their discussion, but obscured, the focus now on the servants around them - performing their menial tasks. There are even moments of humour here, as we see what happens behind the scenes, and the splendour of our leads become cemented in their appropriate context. There is also another event, which I will not spoil, which changes much of what we see afterwards.





There may also be interesting contrasts between the intention of the book itself, written by 19th-century philosopher Vladimir Solovyov and released posthumously as "War, Progress, and the End of History: Three Conversations, Including a Short Story of the Anti-Christ" aka "War and Christianity". While Solovyov's work (which I have not read) has been deemed prophetic, this adaptation feels ghostly - like spectres of the old world. Talks of the future can be looked at not just in their then reality, but in what we know of the wars that would break out and the events that have happened in the 120+ years since the book was first written.

Regardless of intention, and this is indeed left very open to interpretation - the face of the old world, coupled with tense lighting, excellent and subdued performances and striking dialogue make Manor House an increasingly engrossing, if not chillingly unnerving experience. It is a dense film, possibly a difficult film, but also a thoroughly immersive experience if you are of the right mindset. Despite our protagonists often being seated or standing still, Manor House can only be described as an active film - and no, this is not a contradiction. It asks you to actively engage in what you see - to make judgments and assessments - and try to reach your own conclusions and interpretations. If this sounds like your type of film, I can not recommend it enough. If not, it may be better to let it rest. 8.5/10.

just so enjoying the early stuff at the moment - 1917