2004 Foreign, Alternative and Independent Films - Page 5

Jason Seaver · 08-16-2004, 02:46 PM

Gozu -

¼

Wow. A Takashi Miike movie in a multiplex, albeit a boutique multiplex. For those who have not yet experienced his work, Takashi Miike brings to mind some bizarre experiment in genetic engineering where the DNA of Takeshi Kitano, Quentin Tarantino and David Cronenberg was mixed, too-quickly grown to adulthood, and let loose on an entertainment industry with no MPAA to hold him back and a mandate to crank out an average of five movies a year, for theaters, television, and video.

So, even though I'm recommending Gozu, remember the director. He makes crazy, violent, disgusting (and often sickly funny) movies, and he starts early here. If what happens to the dog in the first five minutes makes you want to leave, then by all means, leave. Pull out your cell phone and act like there's a family emergency; maybe you'll get your money back. Because by the time the movie is over, you'll see some even weirder shit. You won't even be able to eat corn flakes the next morning, because it would involve spoons and milk.

At first, young yakuza Minami thinks that it's just his mentor Ozaki who is crazy - he was, after all, responsible for that terrible bit of animal cruelty (really, I don't approve) that opened the film, claiming that a little Peke was in fact a vicious "yakuza attack dog". But, someone being that nuts is a danger to the gang, so Minami is tasked with bringing his "Brother" north to a body dump and eliminating him. As Minami and Ozaki approach the dump, though, it soon becomes clear that it's not just Ozaki who's crazy - it's the whole world.

Not just people, although almost everyone around Minami (Hideki Sone, the sane center of the movie) acts in a peculiar fashion. Roads just run straight into rivers, minotaurs appear during the night, and - in what provides most of the plot that pushes Minami to investigate the surreal world around him - a corpse apparently walks off while he's using the toilet, forcing him to find it. And when he does, things get really strange.

The middle portion of the movie moves somewhat slowly, as Miike and screenwriter Sakichi Sato throw one bizarre situation after another at Minami (and the audience). I can't say I really understand what the point of a lot of this section was about. The rest of the movie follows a sort of strange logic - well, not logic, but there's a sort of story through-line which works if you grant the filmmakers a gigantic unexplained impossible element - but the middle is a sort of surreal padding, a detour to put some space between the start and end of the story.

But, then, making sense isn't what this movie is about. After all, just as the movie finishes perhaps its most grotesque scene, and I really think I get how it works, it shifts gears for a completely incongruous epilogue that, though it features the same actors, is so different in tone and look as to appear to be taken from another movie.

But that's okay. This is, after all, a horror movie, at least in part, and the horror comes from Minami's interaction with an unknown and possibly unknowable world outside his experience. For things to suddenly make sense at the end would be something of a cop-out, even if making peace with that strangeness isn't.

**HTF Ads**

Jason Seaver · 08-18-2004, 11:57 AM

Zatoichi -

I found myself half-wondering during Takeshi Kitano's Zatoichi whether this was supposed to be a semi-parodic remake. Not full-out, but some elements seemed just a little exaggerated (and others greatly so). Having only seen one entry in the original series, I'm really not equipped to judge this movie's relation to its forebears; on its own, I found it an enjoyable movie that could have been great except for one large flaw.

That flaw is the blood. Not that there's too much - when the various yakuza, ronin, and other swordsmen pull out their blades and start going after each other, the red stuff is bound to fly. However, instead of going to the experts and KNB (or whatever the Japanese equivelent is), Kitano opts for digital effects which are quite unsatisfying. Digital blood doesn't stick to people and surfaces, and it doesn't ever seem to jet from the bodies at the right angle or speed. There are some scenes when it doesn't even look as good as the Pepto-Bismol that Klingons had coursing through their veins in Star Trek VI.

I've read that this was a deliberate decision by writer/director/editor/star Takeshi Kitano, and for all I know, it was a great artistic success in Japan. The crowd in Cambridge last night, however, laughed every time it happened. It's partly that reaction that made me wonder whether Takeshi was going for comedy; it so thoroughly undercut almost every action beat. It had me reacting like "whoa, that was bada... (giggle)" a lot, and not like I had with Gozu two nights earlier. Gozu served up black comedy that shocked and amused with its audacity and perversity, while Zatoichi's fake blood just had me laughing at a shortcoming.

It's a shame, because the rest of the movie is, well, great. Kitano displays a warmth as Zatoichi that I don't recall seeing from him in other movies, though my exposure has been somewhat limited. The rest of the cast is good, too, expressive but pulling back from the overacting that can plague Asian films, especially when it comes time for comic relief.

The story template for a Zatoichi movie is straightforward, and Kitano doesn't deviate far from it: Blind masseur and gambler Ichi (Kitano, credited as "Beat" Takeshi) arrives in a town after dispatching some highwaymen who thought to give the blind guy trouble (only to wind up learning that Ichi's cane contains a wickedly sharp sword which he wields with gruesome skill, his four other senses heightened). The town, of course, has yakuza issues, and other recent arrivals threaten to make things worse. When the yakuza threaten the woman who gives Ichi a place to sleep, Ichi makes them deeply regret it in the seconds before they die.

Among the arrivals are the ronin Hattori and his sickly wife. Hattori is a man of honor who dislikes the yakuza-bodyguard work he takes, but does it professionally so that he can afford medicines for his wife. In broad daylight, he may be a match for Ichi. Also recently arrived are a pair of geisha who early on establish that they're on a quest for bloody vengeance for something that happened when they were children. Kitano establishes these characters quickly, using extended flashbacks to show us their backstory.

The sights and sounds of this village are enjoyable, as well. Where previous Zatoichi flicks were sort of B-movies, cranking out three or four a year at times, Kitano has a decent budget and invests it in solid-looking sets. There's a tone of whimsy to much of the music, with the farmers in the background occasionally working in sync with it. And the rousing tap-dancing festival number that closes the movie is so delightful that one can forgive its complete incongruity.

The action, up until the point of someone actually being cut and spewing fakey CGI blood, is well choreographed. Some of the blades must be CGI as well, or else a few scenes of yakuza and ninjas getting run through involved some very real trips to the trauma ward.

Supposedly, Takashi Miike was considered as the director at one point in production, which may have produced the coolest movie ever: Miike directing Kitano in a bloody samurai/yakuza epic starring a beloved character. Maybe Miike wouldn't have gone for the "real fake blood", either, and maybe he would have just veered into bizarre territory

Kitano does a bang-up job, though, except for the blood. I must sound like a sicko for harping on this, but this one flaw is what keeps Zatoichi from being one of the year's best, as opposed to one of the year's very good.

Edwin Pereyra · 08-20-2004, 07:58 AM

Jean-Pierre Jeunet will be aiming for the Best Picture Oscar with his latest pic, A Very Long Engagement with Audrey Tautou and Jodie Foster instead of Best Foreign Language Film. Too bad most of us won't see it until early 2005. From Variety:

Quote:

Helmer Jean-Pierre JeunetJean-Pierre Jeunet's "A Very Long Engagement" will not be eligible as France's Oscar submission for foreign-language film, so the WWI drama's backers are setting their sights on a best picture nomination instead.

Pic reunites star Audrey TautouAudrey Tautou with her "Amelie""Amelie" director and also toplines a French-speaking Jodie FosterJodie Foster.

The film's Oct. 27 French release was set 15 months ago when Warner Bros. Intl. agreed to finance the project. Under old Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences rules, a film had until Oct. 31 to debut in its country of origin. But last year, with the Oscarcast going a month earlier, the foreign-lingo eligibility period was switched, with Sept. 30 as the cutoff date.

When Warner execs realized that the switch would mean foreign-language ineligibility, they decided to keep the French opening date and target the best picture category as well as other Oscar races.

That will be a priority for Mark GillMark Gill, president of the fledgling Warner Independent shingleshingle. Gill learned Oscar strategy working alongside Harvey WeinsteinHarvey Weinstein when Miramax successfully campaigned for best picture nominations for foreign-language pics "Il Postino" and "Life Is Beautiful."

"This was an unexpected disappointment that has revealed itself to be a tremendous opportunity," Gill said. "I had a part in helping those foreign films get nominated for best picture before, and the quality of this film makes 'A Very Long Engagement' every bit as promising as those other two."...

Warner Independent will platform the film on Nov. 26, broaden to 200 screens on Dec. 22 and add screens in January.

~Edwin

Jason Seaver · 08-22-2004, 09:26 PM

Intimate Strangers -

½

Part of what's enjoyable about watching foreign films is that the characters are often played by unfamiliar actors, and thus come without the baggage of other roles; the only familiar face in Intimate Strangers for me was Gilbert Melki, who appeared in the "Trilogy" movies but has a fairly small role here. Sandrine Bonnaire (Anna) and Fabrice Luchini (William) are just these characters for me right now.

Shame they're not in a more interesting movie. It's got an interesting set-up - attractive woman with marital problems goes into the wrong office and winds up confessing her marital problems to a tax attorney rather than a psychiatrist - and he is too stunned to immediately correct her. It's a situation that really can't be strung out too long before it becomes absurd, and director Patrice Leconte doesn't, having Anna figure out the situation before her third visit.

Unfortunately, Leconte and screenwriter Jérôme Tonnerre don't have much to replace that with. The two of them talk, we see some background on William's life - he and his ex Jeanne (Anne Brochet) are friendly, and he has inherited his father's clients, office, and secretary. Luchini has a sort of sad-sack face, and his slumped body language indicates a sort of uncertain dissatisfaction. Ms. Bonnaire is pleasant enough, but the filmmakers keep her character somewhat in reserve. There's a half-hearted effort to make the film's last half into a thriller of sorts as Anna's husband Marc (Melki) enters the picture, but it doesn't amount to much.

That's the problem with the movie. I got William's dissatisfaction pretty quick, and sort of liked the guy, but never felt the story was anything special. Luchini and Bonnaire are pleasant enough together, but don't generate a lot of heat. It's an open question as to whether we'd rather see William with Anna or with Jeanne, or whether he's interesting enough to make a good match with either.

Paramount Classics turned this movie around fairly quickly, getting it from France to American theaters in less than six months, presumably to capitalize on the relatively recent success of Leconte's Man on the Train. I haven't seen that movie, so I can't say how this compares. Based upon this movie, though, I'm not terribly tempted to seek the rest of Leconte's body of work out. Just too much talking and not enough happening.

Edwin Pereyra · 08-24-2004, 11:45 PM

Maria Full Of Grace

Every year, we get a handful of dramas that really stand out from the rest of the pack. Joshua Marston’s Maria Full Of Grace is one of those films. Beautifully acted and written with such dramatic intensity, it is an engrossing film that examines the lengths some will go through to escape the life of poverty, desperation and a dead-end job, in this case, to act as drug mules from Colombia to New York.

Newcomer Catalina Sandino Moreno gives a spot-on performance from maintaining her composure in front of immigration and custom officials while being interrogated to the story’s more somber moments. The details of the drug muling were handled in such a way to be educational but with terrifying realism.

This is the type of film that gets a director instant international acclaim in the same manner City of God did to Fernando Meirelles, Before Night Falls to Julian Schnabel and Amores Perros to Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu.

~Edwin

Jason Seaver · 08-25-2004, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Latest seen: Maria Full Of Grace (Colombia)

Heh. I'm pretty sure that this is an American film with an American director produced by an American company (HBO).

Edwin Pereyra · 08-25-2004, 04:16 PM

I think you're right, Jason. I didn't look closely on the production notes.

~Edwin

Michael Reuben · 08-26-2004, 06:49 PM

Nicotina

Pulp Fiction is the obvious blueprint for this Mexican film from the producers of Amores Perros. Like PF, this film shifts among several plots that intersect at odd points, so that a central character in one becomes a bit player in another. And like PF, this one is set mostly among criminals and features a lot of violence that is both horrific and comical (and Nicotina has a much higher body count). In the end, though, it doesn't quite work, and I think it's because the characters don't engage us to the same degree that Tarantino's characters do. There's no one as commanding as Samuel L. Jackon's Jules or as charming as Travolta's Vincent. Lucas Crespi's Nene comes the closest to achieving that kind of presence (his argument with his partner, Thompson, over the dangers of smoking could be seen as a homage to the "quarter-pounder-with-cheese" exchange in PF), but it takes more than one good character to keep a film like this aloft.

We start with Diego Luna's Lolo, whose character is two things, both of them trite: a hacker and a shy stalker (think William Baldwin in Sliver). Lolo has a crush on his neighbor Carmen, a cello player, but he's also hacking a Swiss bank for account information that Nene and Thompson want to sell to a Russian gangster in exchange for diamonds. The caper gets set up at the beginning of the film, but then it's put on hold while we watch Lolo's entanglements with Carmen. The film is already in trouble, because while Luna is a likeable actor, Lolo is just an incompetent creep and not much fun to watch. In fact, his incompetence is a major engine of the plot (but I'll leave it at that).

It gives nothing away to say that the caper goes wrong, because that's what happens to capers in films like this. The rest of the film plays out in a drugstore and a barbershop, each inhabited by an unhappy and feuding couple, before finally returning to Lolo's place for the finale. A lot of people die, and no one gets rich.

Writer Martin Salinez and director Hugo Rodriguez were clearly trying for something wild and madcap, but it just doesn't work despite some fancy camerawork and numerous plot turns that should have special subtitles saying "Droll, isn't it?" At the end, I just wanted to see Pulp Fiction again.

M.

Michael Reuben · 08-28-2004, 03:28 PM

The Brown Bunny

Almost half an hour shorter than the version that outraged audiences at Cannes, Vincent Gallo's one-man show is now being released in the U.S. Gallo is the writer, director, producer, editor and star, and he also did much of the 16mm camerawork. If anything qualifies as an auteur's creation, this is it.

I can see why the longer version drove viewers over the edge, because the 92-minute edit that Gallo is releasing here constantly teeters on the brink of boring its audience into revolt. Every shot is held longer than almost anyone else would hold it, and even though the shots are exquisitely composed (at times the film suggests a picture book of artsy stills), Gallo stubbornly refuses to provide anything resembling a conventional plot.

Which isn't to say that he fails to provide the audience with information. As we follow his character, Bud, a motorcycle racer, on a bizarre and mostly solitary trip across the country, we learn a great deal about him. We see him engaged in almost wordless flirtation with a series of women, all of whom have names representing flowers. We watch him make a laconic visit to the parents of his girlfriend, Daisy (Chloe Sevigny) -- it's a scene that would fit comfortably in a David Lynch film -- and finally we see his reunion with Daisy. (And yes, the oral sex scene is graphic, but no more so than what routinely shows up in my junk folder in Hotmail.) By the end, you realize that Gallo has managed to convey a dramatic (even melodramatic) story, but you can't see it until you reach the end.

Is it self-indulgent? Sure. Is it interesting to watch? I thought so. Is it a good film? It might well be, but I can't say for certain until I see it again. It almost demands a second viewing, for reasons which will be obvious to anyone who watches it.

M.