Recently Watched Films 2013

[Dan Warburton]

Bigas Luna, Angustia, 1987

Man goes on a shooting spree in US cinema during projection of violent action movie.. ring a bell? "Now let life obscure the difference between life and art." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Aurora_shooting




Boaz Yakin, Fresh, 1994

Fine performance from Sean Nelson as the 12-year-old pusher, but couldn't quite get into it as much as Roger evidently did http://www.rogerebert.com/far-flung-cor ... -with-life - maybe the Stewart Copeland soundtrack had something to do with it. Still, a damn sight better than most Spike Lees, though that's not saying much.




John Newland, Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, 1973

If someone's bricked up the fireplace in the creepy, dimly-lit basement of that big old house, there's probably a good reason for it. Wait till you see what comes out of it.. Vintage TV horror from 73 - and that means hairstyles and clothes as much as plot




Jean Eustache, Les mauvaises fréquentations- Du côté de Robinson, 1963

Montmartre hasn't changed much since 1963, and human nature certainly hasn't (girls, if two guys invite you out to a local disco, don't go dancing with a third and leave your wallet in your bag with the first two, ok?).

[Salty Swift]

Home for the Weekend (Was Bleibt) - Hans-Christian Schmidt, 2012

Some of the better movies I've watched this year happen to be German (Ping Pong, Atmen, Barbara, Halt auf freier Strecke).....this falls a bit short.
I've read this described as a family drama, whatever the fuck that means.....it's bleak yes....deals with depression, low self esteem, failure, break-up.....there's also a glimmer of hope.....disappointed in how one dimensional some of the characters are....wish there was further development in that area.

[Dan Warburton]

Wayne Wang, Smoke, 1995

VINNIE (Takes cigar out of his mouth and looks at it with disgust): I should stop smoking these damn things is what I should do. The fuckers are going to kill me one day.
AUGGIE: Enjoy it while you can, Vin. Pretty soon, they're going to legislate us out of business anyway.
VINNIE: They catch you smoking tobacco, they'll stand you up against a wall and shoot you.
AUGGIE: Tobacco today, sex tomorrow. In three or four years, it'll probably be against the law to smile at strangers.

The Paul Auster script I found online is longer and more detailed than the one that was eventually shot, but the movie's long enough as it is. Dunno, I remember enjoying it when it came out, but last night it left me unmoved. The adjective that pops up most often on the (ever amusing) IMDb user comments page is "nice" - and that's what it is, nice. Keitel and Hurt are so nice they're annoying, Hurt especially, but maybe it's the character. Shame Rashid stopped him from walking in front of that truck. Good performances all round ( thank god for Ashley Judd who adds a much-needed dose of vulgarity) but I wonder what it's all supposed to add up to. Still, I know it's way better than the tacky sequel, Brooklyn Boogie. That's one I won't be returning to.

[presquepartout]

Asghar Farhadi // A Separation


Stephen Chow // Kung Fu Hustle

[Dan Warburton]

Gordon Parks, Shaft, 1971

Just getting myself in a New York frame of mind here. Right on.

[Dan Warburton]

Claude Sautet, Max et les ferrailleurs, 1971

Michel Piccoli is superb (as always) as the tortured introspective detective, and the rest of casting is solid (watch out for Boby Lapointe going apeshit with a tommy gun), though I would have preferred someone other than Romy Schneider as Lily. Stéphane Audran would have done a better job, and I see Marlene Jobert was shortlisted for the part at some stage. But I have plot issues with the film: we know from the outset that Max has fucked up and got himself arrested (not hard to guess that he has killed someone) - the entire movie is a flashback, and we return to Max being taken away to prison at the end. This prior knowledge nags away at the you, the viewer, all the way through - "so when's he going to fuck up?" - and yet Max's own crime, shooting the Nanterre police commissioner in a desperate attempt to protect Schneider, seems unprepared, even stupid: if Max really cared for Lily Sautet should have shown it more - apart from a single night of passion (we assume - all we see is one kiss) he seems only interested in using her as a pawn in his game to incite Abel and his gang to rob the bank and be caught red-handed. More character background needed, and some serious plot storyboarding wouldn't have gone amiss.

[jon abbey]

Just getting myself in a New York frame of mind here. Right on.

nice, so you figured out how to visit 1971 also?

[Dan Warburton]

Fritz Lang, Scarlet Street, 1945

Will - may - report back when I've rewatched Renoir's La Chienne, of which this is a remake (albeit with some striking differences), and a much better one than the insipid Human Desire (see several pages back).

[Dan Warburton]

John Waters, Pecker, 1998

Full of grace!



Seth MacFarlane, Ted, 2012

"Lori, this is Angelique, Heavenly, Shereen and Sauvignon Blanc. I swear to God, her name is Sauvignon Blanc! Go ahead honey, show him your Chevron card."

[Lao Tsu Ben]

I found Pecker a little boring but there's no denying the charm of Edward Furlong- and when you see what he has become now...



Happy-Go-Lucky, Mike Leigh, 2008

This excellent website (check it out) gave me the idea to give it a go, and I'm sorry to say that it is one of the worst films that I've ever seen, which is disappointing, to say the least, as it is Mike Leigh who is responsible for it. Armond White's review of the film is an embarrassment. Sample:

When an incomprehensible homeless man growls, “You know?” she responds, “Yes!” That compassionate reply marks Leigh’s political advance (pace Fellini

This is nowhere as simple as that. No one should witness such a face-to-face. It's obvious that the bum couldn't care less about her answers, and that she looks like she's trying to convince herself that she's compassionate. See Please Give by Nicole Holofcener for a cleverer approach of the problem.
Otherwise, the real hero in this film is probably the supposedly racist, homophobic driving instructor. That he might be racist and homophobic is just implied in a typically snickering, condescending manner. If he seems mean (is he, really? or is the heroine, her pupil, bringing out the worst in people?), was it because he was bullied at school? she asks him; she's a primary school teacher, and as such, seems to know what she's talking about. In the next shot, we see her dealing with a bully at school. Isn't editing magic?
She also makes the suggestion, in front of him, that he's mean because he's secretly lusting for her. The end will conveniently confirm that, but feels spurious expect for the driving instructor saying:"Don't patronize me". That's what she is, really, a patronizing little fiend, not the superior specimen of a human being that she and the film thinks she is. It's a pity that Leigh does not want to explore more this side of the problem.
At one point in the movie, a character rushes out of a room shouting "It's not fair, why are you attacking me.", "No one is attacking you" says one, while the three other persons present, among them the heroine, nod.The fact remains that they were attacking her. That they do not seem to realize that perfectly sums up the film in my opinion. Truly an infuriating, offensive movie. I'm going forthwith to read the "I hated it" review on imdb to feel sure I'm not alone to think that.

[Dan Warburton]

Haven't seen this one (not in a hurry to do so now, either!) but I see what you mean. Leigh's better when he plays it straight, and lets people be funny naturally, or find themselves in funny (very often socially awkward) situations. Abigail's Party works, All or Nothing doesn't. Leigh's hatred of the upper clarses [sic], or more specifically the yuppies, means he's never able to portray them in any way other than vicious caricature (Sebastian in Naked, Rupert and Laetitia in High Hopes.. those names say it all!), which, when allied with his affectionate and realistic portrayal of working folks, frequently leads to danger and instability in the film itself. Very exciting at times, that "on the edge" feeling you often get listening to great improv, but risky.
Meanwhile, thrilled to discover last night, at last, a director I'd heard a lot about but never seen anything by (not for long! I'm now on a mission) -



Jerzy Skolimowski, Deep End, 1970

What a cracker - hope they're all going to be as good as this - easily as good as Blow Up, and sharing that same slightly surreal quality, the bemused outsider's view of Swinging London (though, amusingly enough, very little of the film was actually shot there - most of it was filmed in Munich!). There's a touch of Performance to it, too (though without the menace), or maybe that's just my imagination running wild again - the Roeg / Cammell film featured Anita Pallenberg, Deep End stars Jane Asher. Awesome scene in Soho - as it used to be, that sleazy alley by the Raymond Revue Bar at the bottom of Berwick Street - with terrific soundtrack by Can. Great handheld photography throughout by Charly Steinburger - you could swear he was using a SteadiCam but this was 1970 - wonderful eye for detail, tight formal plan, strong acting, everything to recommend it. Check out.

[Matt Wuethrich]

Nicholas Roeg, Eureka (1983)

Rutger Hauer in a Kabbalah shirt? Gene Hackman wallowing, womb-like, in a flood of underground gold? Rutger Hauer writhing with a snake dancer in a voodoo interlude? Mickey Rourke as the crony of Miami mobster Joe Pesci? Why does the richest man in the world apparently do his own accounting? What is up with that suicide in front of the claims office in the opening minutes? Was it meant to look so clearly artificial? Is one of Roeg's goals, with all his editing, to draw further attention to film's artifice? Does all that disorienting editing make the film better or does it hide a more interesting film? Why do I feel like the only sensible response to this film is to ask questions that may or may not have answers (This short blog post suggests some answers may lurk in competing belief systems.)




Peter Yates, The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973)

No questions here, just a great, great film. Everything worked for me on this: the pacing (measured but not leisurely, every scene and shot takes the time it needs), the cinematography with all the natural lighting (fall in New England has some awesome light), the performances (Mitchum is great but so is Richard Jordan as Eddie's police contact and Peter Boyle as the bartender), and, of course, the dialogue (which was the star of movie without drawing attention to itself as being particularly witty or authentic).

All movies about the mob should be about the middlemen. It's more human that way, so any tragedy is more sharply felt.

[Matt Wuethrich]

Errol Morris, Gates of Heaven (1978)

The inspiration for Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe. Werner obviously underestimated a) people's love for animals and b) people's capacity for compassion. And compassion is what Morris manages to invoke with all the straight-on, dead-pan shots (Ned Burgess was the cinematographer) of people talking, in very straightforward ways, about the disposal of dead pets. You want laugh at these people but then you start to take them seriously. You understand that they (pet owners and cemetery-keepers) have recognized the meaning of death in a profound but very practical way.

[Lao Tsu Ben]

Leigh's hatred of the upper clarses [sic], or more specifically the yuppies, means he's never able to portray them in any way other than vicious caricature (Sebastian in Naked, Rupert and Laetitia in High Hopes.. those names say it all!)

Yep, but you would think that he wouldn't make of the aforementioned driving instructor such a caricature (who ends up being, in spite of all his flaws, more sympathetic than any other character in the movie, thanks to the actor who plays him).

Jerzy Skolimowski, Deep End, 1970

It's something that, theoretically, I should watch. However, I was unfortunate enough to read an interview of Skolimowski when Essential Killings was released in which he came across as so unpleasant (to me) that I had to renounce him. That's silly of me, isn't it? But I had had time to see Moonlighting, The Shout (with its extremely funny, and frightening premise- I'm racking my brains to recall in which film it is, sorry for using the word again, hilariously referenced), and Four Nights with Anna, which manifestly is some sort of homage to Dostoievky's White Nights. Don't know what to think of them now.

Great handheld photography throughout by Charly Steinburger - you could swear he was using a SteadiCam but this was 1970 - wonderful eye for detail, tight formal plan, strong acting, everything to recommend it. Check out.

Oddly, these proto-Steadicam shots seem to be a sort of Polish specialty. I'm thinking in particular of Bruno Nuytten's cinematography in Zulawski's Possession.

[Dan Warburton]

Haven't seen the one with Vincent Gallo (as Afghan terrorist?!) yet, but Moonlighting, The Shout and Le Départ are in the queue, and I'm trawling for others. Amused to see that Skolimowski plays the mad scientist in Mars Attacks! - I knew I'd seen him somewhere before. Check out Deep End, Ben - I suspect you'll like it. Oh, I snatched that Gerard Blain you mentioned. That's in the intray too. Meanwhile, finally got round to watching this last night



Yves Allégret, Quand la femme s'en mêle, 1957

and thoroughly enjoyed it. Then again, as a huge Jean Servais fan, I was expecting to. Were those Pigalle nightclubs really like that at the time, with whole troupes of feathered and boaed dancing girls and ten-piece orchestras? I've seen so many of them now in films like Rififi and Bob le Flambeur, I wonder.. I had assumed they were, for the most part, figments of the Melville imagination. Anyway, this is a good solid good bad guy vs bad bad guy intrigue, with a complex but well-handled plot, snappy dialogue (not Audiard but not far off in places) and a host of intriguing minor characters played by a pretty stellar cast, including Bernard Blier, Bruno Cremer and Alain Delon in his debut role as hoodlum bodyguard to Godot (Servais). "Are you really Monsieur Godot's personal secretary?" asks naïve young Colette as they ride lift down on a short trip to the local patisserie during which Delon has time to eat a raspberry ice cream and ice two rival gangsters.. "What exactly do you do?" she asks. "Je tape," says Delon. Nice one.

[Lao Tsu Ben]

Yes, I shall see Deep End.

and meanwhile



Death Wish, Michael Winner, 1974

On 1 January 2007, Winner acquired the bacterial infection Vibrio vulnificus from eating an oyster in Barbados. He almost had a leg amputated and verged on the brink of death several times. Before recovering, Winner was infected with the "hospital superbug" MRSA.[33] In September 2011, Winner was also admitted to hospital with food poisoning after eating steak tartare, a raw meat dish, four days in a row. The dish is not recommended for those with a weak immune system and in retrospect Winner regarded his decision to eat it as "stupid".

That's understandable. Steak tartare is good, but four days in a row, come on, that's what I call a little unimaginative (or "living on the edge"), or perhaps he was writing a survey on it. Anyway, I had begun to read a book on this film by Christopher Sorrentino, the son of Gilbert, who is, as some of you already know, one of my favorite writers, and I had to see what he was talking about. "I'm quite appalled and very nearly walked out" said Michael Winner on TV as a presenter was attacking two lesbian guests, which is funny when you think of the number of people that were appalled and walked out by his movie, cursing him for being an advocate of right-wing views. This is a good film, and indeed one that is likely to make any audience in his right - no double entendre of course - mind uncomfortable. That it is the "progenitor", as Sorrentino puts it in his not very interesting but entertaining little book, of an entire genre is both a ludicrous and a fascinating idea. I have seen quite a lot of vigilante movies, for one reason or another, including for instance a Death Wish rip-off by Neil Jordan in which Jodie Foster was taking the place of Bronson (The Brave One): this is not a very interesting genre, as it invariably elicits the same scenes and issues, but I can understand why Sorrentino's son (sorry) chose to write about it. It's weird that he doesn't say anything about the son-in-law punctuating many of his sentences, as he speaks to Bronson, by a "Dad" that rings hollow -and that seems an understatement. Bronson finally comes off as a closeted psychopath- that was an interesting idea, but as a film, that was just ok, I guess.

[Dan Warburton]

Great story about there about steak tartare http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6QqSxmpRMM - can't say I agree with you on the film (the only thing I really like about it is the Herbie OST), but I acknowledge its importance and influence. Revisited a couple of old classics yesterday myself -



Robert Wiene, Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari, 1920

Story's a bit naff, and the acting over the top, but those sets.. what a trip.



John Schlesinger, Midnight Cowboy, 1969

I had read somewhere that this was the first movie to feature the word "fuck" (not so in fact: it seems that dubious honour goes to Ulysses), and spent the whole time looking for one (in vain, though IMDb sez there is one), rather like Jon Voight Not a happy experience, but you can see why it won the awards it did.

[3um]

re: Skolimowski.

Deep End is really good, The Shout is an interesting one (mainly because of the subject). Four Nights with Anna and Essential Killing are for sure worth watching but try if you can get a hold on of his early movies: Walkover, Identification Marks: None, Barrier and Hands Up! (finished in 1967 and then reworked in 1981). They are deeply rooted in Polish reality and/or history but I think someone from abroad shouldn't have problems grasping what they are about. The first free are also indebted in nouvelle vague aesthetics and Hands Up has this unique dream-like atmosphere while coming from the tradition of sad and heavy Polish Romanticism.

[P. Wretch]

Barrier

Yes, I've seen this one, which is as good as many things from the Czech New Wave. Can't say I really remember what little plot there was, but it was visually striking and disorientating. I think Second Run were scheduled to release a DVD (of this and possibly other early Skolimowskis), but haven't done so yet (although they have released many excellent things by Miklós Jancsó, František Vláčil, etc - recommended for those seeking 60s Central/East European material).

Skolimowski also features in Cronenberg's Eastern Promises, of course - one of the better things about that film.

[3um]

Skolimowski also features in Cronenberg's Eastern Promises, of course - one of the better things about that film.

so true