Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club - Page 103

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Been meaning to watch Veronique forever. Kieslovsky is a fav just based on his major work. His themes (connections, second chances, fate) just click with me. Red was one of the first art films I saw, perhaps the first, and it was a defining point in my film experience.

--
H

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

I saw Veronique a few days ago, and I was really disappointed. I just couldn't get into it at all, though Irene Jacob is of course totally stunning and very sympathetic, but I didn't care about anything that was happening. I do remember liking Red when I saw it, although it was far too long ago for me to remember much about it.

I guess Kieslowski is one of those film-makers where you either "get it," and his stuff really speaks to you, or it just leaves you cold. Wong Kar-Wai is one of my favorite directors around today, though I can't really blame people who don't find much to enjoy in most of his movies. His favorite themes are similar to what H talks about with regards to Kieslowski, and though their styles are probably somewhat different, their general approach of almost always going for "mood" over plot is obviously similar. Yet Veronique was a big dud for me.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

That's interesting Haggai, because I haven't really "connected" with Kar-Wai. That's not to say that I don't recognize the beauty in his work (particularly In The Mood For Love), but my favourite of his films so far has been Fallen Angels which I think was also the most straightforward and was your least favourite.

I just got caught up in the visuals with Veronique (no, not just Irene...). Have you seen all of his Three Colours trilogy? I thought both Blue and Red were stunning both visually and story wise. As well, his use of music has been extremely key in my enjoyment of his films so far. Zbigniew Preisner's scores are really moving for me and mix so perfectly to what he brings to the screen.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Yeah, my point is that these two particular directors have an idiosyncratic sort of appeal that doesn't really work for everyone. The fact that one can be a fan of one and not the other, as our reverse preferences seem to indicate, just illustrates that for me.

I saw Red a really long time ago, and Blue in the only slightly less distant past; never seen White. I'll have to re-visit those at some point. Wong Kar-Wai actually used a piece by Preisner in 2046, from the Decalogue. WKW is undoubtedly a Kieslowski fan.

My least favorite WKW is actually As Tears Go By; it seems like he just had to get a genre movie made (Triad/gangsters, in this case) before he could get into the sort of thing he really wanted to do. Though I do love the "Take My Breath Away" sequence in ATGB, a favorite among WKW fans. The way I look at it, what he really wanted to do was to make an entire movie like that one scene, and he managed to do it the next time out, with Days of Being Wild. I like Fallen Angels OK, but I don't think it's on the level of Chungking Express, which it was spun-off from.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Yep, full agreement here...Just curious about your impressions of other Kieslowski. I also fully see why someone might not like DLoV or be moved by the trilogy.

Irene Jacob being hot is indisputable however...

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

No doubt about that! Also, Bob, since we're talking about her and since you also posted about The Conformist, I just thought to point out that the star of that movie (among many other famous roles in his career) was also Jacob's co-star in Red, Jean-Louis Trintignant.

Actually, Holadem, have you seen what was one of Trintignant's other best-known roles: Z? Since you were so keen on Battle of Algiers, you should also check out Z, if you haven't seen it.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Nope. I just check imdb, it seems right up my alley. The premise and Yves Montant made me think at first of I comme Icare (I for Icarus?) which I only saw once long ago but remember as an excellent thriller as well (you should check it out if you haven't). I'll add Z to the queue if it's available.

Speaking of WKW, it seems you reacted to Veronique the same way I did to Chungking Express: pretty dissapointed following the hypnotic In the Mood for Love. It happens. Of course you also have to be in the right mood and viewing conditions for this sort of stuff since they are not exactly plot driven. I doubt anything could make me enjoy Chungking Express though, I can't get past irritating leads.

--
H

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

I knew his name sounded familiar! Didn't recognize him though and I just didn't follow up on IMDB. Damn, I may really have to rewatch the trilogy again soon...

I really gave The Conformist short shrift in my comments. There's a lot more to it than just the cinematography and I found all of it enjoyable. The weak-willed Clerici's need to conform to fascism as well as societal expectations (marriage) sets him up for his eventual downfall.

As well, I'll echo that Z is terrific.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

WKW and KK are similar in mood, but WKW tends to go more for emotional themes while KK is more on the conceptual side. I like both, but I definitely prefer Kieslowski, precisely because I enjoy that kind of conceptual stuff. I can see how some people might find it too gimmicky or over-reaching, though.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

I love Chungking Express, though I can see how that point would have made it a tough slog for you. I've probably mentioned this to you before, but since ITMFL really worked for you, definitely check out Days of Being Wild, which is where WKW really got started with that particular style (DOBW is from '91, ITMFL from 2000). And then check out 2046, which heavily references both of those earlier movies. Those three are all very similar to each other; Chungking Express is kind of different.

I comme Icare sounds interesting, I hadn't heard of it. Looks like it's not on DVD, though. I'll check it out if it becomes available.

Martin, interesting comment on the differences between Kieslowski and WKW. That sounds like an accurately succinct way of putting it.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

#155 - Marnie - Fine Hitchcock effort. Though I was worried about the over 2 hour running length, the story never really flagged at all and kept me interested and (if not on the edge of my seat) certainly not relaxed. I love the reds jumping out throughout the film, though the resolution of that particular thread wasn't quite up to what I had hoped. I expect when this film was released, there must've been some controversy or commentary on some of the subject matter. Having said all that, I'm not sure the story really warranted the length and I don't quite see this as a top tier Hitchcock (though still quite entertaining).

#156 - Children Of Paradise - I've had this in my hands a number of times at the rental store, but until Holadem turned into a blithering fool trying to describe it ( ), I had not actually brought it home. It's a wonderful film with outstanding characters that are complex, interesting and rise and fall in your estimation as the story unfolds. I expected something different when I was thinking about "poetic realism" - visuals along the lines of Beauty And The Beast, etc. - but somewhere within the first half hour you start to see the poetry through the characters' words and actions. The film really grabbed me when Baptiste came to Garance's rescue to be a witness (via his pantomime description of the events). If that didn't do it, than Garance's come hither look to Baptiste later on (when she sits on the bed, taps it lightly and states "I'm not very sleepy") put me over the edge. Her look, movements and the way she said the words were simply one of the most sensual and feminine moments I've seen on screen. I will certainly need to see it again to pick up on more of the plays within plays facet of the story, but the simpler moments of the stories are what really caught me the first time around.

#157 - Cries And Whispers - I'm not quite sure what to say about this..."Bergman does horror", "Red Room" or "WTF?" don't quite cover it. Technically, it's beautiful. The visuals (the red, oh my the red!) and Bergman's framing of just about every single moment in the film are truly exceptional. I love the dream like feel of the flashbacks, the turn at times towards horror and even what I thought was an uplifting ending (after a great deal of depressing elements)...But I really didn't care for the characters and that didn't help me negotiate the depressing waters or the earlier dream like moments, so I didn't truly gather up exactly where things were going at times. It's a work of art rich in symbolism, so I don't have a problem seeing it on the S&S list as a representation of how film can be used to capture feelings, thoughts and relationships. I don't think it'll ever make a personal favourites list though nor would it be something I would revisit for entertainment.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Seen 151

I watched four Preston Sturges films today and they just happened to be the first I've seen from the director. Overall, I'm really wasn't impressed and thought none of the three below lived up to their reputations. I thought they were all rather light weight, wannabe Capra films. The one I enjoyed the most, CHRISTMAS IN JULY, isn't on the list so I do have to question these three making it.

t-95 Lady Eve, The (1941)

Here's a film I've been meaning to catch for quite some time but it's reputation as being one of the greatest comedies ever made certainly goes way over my head. The story is pretty simple (and unoriginal) as a con woman (Barbara Stanwyck) tries to sink her teeth into a naive rich boy (Henry Fonda) but naturally they end up falling in love. I really don't get all the hype surrounding this film. It's certainly cute in parts and funny in others but on the whole I was really bored by the fifty-minute mark so the rest of the film dragged along at a snail's pace. I didn't see any chemistry between Stanwyck and Fonda, although both were good, not great, in their roles. We've seen this film countless times before so there wasn't any great shock to anything that happened. Perhaps I'm nitpicking at this aspect but the twist of the "Lady Eve" character was just downright stupid and I didn't buy into it for a second.

t-157 Sullivan's Travels (1941)

A movie director (Joel McCrea) wants to know about real life so he makes himself up as a hobo and heads out to see the other side of America. This Preston Sturges message film is certainly better than the above movies but in the end I was still somewhat letdown. I'm not sure what it is but Sturges is hitting me as a light version of Frank Capra but there's still plenty to enjoy in this film and I think I'll enjoy it even more after a second viewing. The best thing the film has going for it is the two leads who do very good work. McCrea is always good but Veronica Lake really steals the show with her beauty and attitude. The message of the film is certainly very strong but the film just seemed overly light to me.

t-157 Palm Beach Story, The (1942)

Preston Sterges directed comedy about a wife (Claudette Colbert) who decides to leave her husband (Joel McCrea) so that she can use her sex appeal to get them the things they need. As with other films from this director, I found this movie to be sweet and cute but I must admit that I didn't laugh too much. As with others, I found the ending to be incredibly stupid and the stuff on the train with the shooting was just downright stupid. I don't mind over the top comedy but there's a line you shouldn't cross. What I enjoyed most were all the performances. Colbert and McCrea were terrific together and Mary Astor and Rudy vallee nearly steal the show. Robert Dudley as the Wienie King is the highlight here.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Loves of a Blonde

Everything I read about this indicated it was a comedy, so I was expecting a film somewhat in the Closely Watched Trains vein. Unforunately, this is a drama, not a comedy. It's not bad for what it is, and I understand this inclusion on the list, but I was still disappointed and did think this movie had the potential to be so much more.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

All I can say Michael, is that any comparison of Preston Sturges to Frank Capra, means to me, that you have completely missed the point.

That you may not care for screwball comedies in general or Sturges in specific is one thing, but confusing Capra’s everyman presenting his social message of the goodness (and greatness) of the common man with Sturges’ efforts in a different genre altogether is a mistake—perhaps occasioned by Sullivan’s Travels, by far the most direct message (socially) movie made by Sturges.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Well, it's just an opinion so I'm not really sure "missing the point" has anything to do with it, although I might agree in some ways.


I love a good screwball comedy but I didn't see that with any of the three films I listed. Even the screwiest of screwball comedies have some sort of reality going on but that wasn't the case with these. Especially THE PALM BEACH STORY and that silly train ride with everyone shooting off their guns. That was just too silly for me to really laugh at.

I'm not yet ready to agree that Sturges doesn't work for me but I do get that feeling after watching TLE since that's considered his greatest film by many. Perhaps one of the lesser titles will strike me more but as of right now I'm going to call him a poor man's Capra since I obviously don't see what the big deal is about him. SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS is a film I'd watch again but I doubt I'd watch the other three. I've got the rest of his films sitting here to watch and will get to them eventually.

Sweet and cute is what all four hit me as and they were just too sweet and cute for me personally. I'm not really sure why that is but as you can see, I certainly think the three films listed on this list are overrated. I thought it was funny that in ST Capra is brought up because I know a lot of people hate that director for his "cute" films. The cuteness of Capra never bothered me since he's one of my favorite directors but I can't say the same for Sturges.

From what I've seen, they were all rather light, too cute, not funny enough and the screenplays weren't that original and many contained some very stupid and cheap endings. I guess the director made a "point" in this with the ending of ST where it shouldn't matter as long as people laugh but again, I didn't laugh too much with these.

I'll admit there must be something I'm missing because I've said it time and time again that (most) films/directors have their reputation for a reason. I wouldn't mind seeing a documentary or listening to a commentary about Sturges to see if my mind could change but I don't believe there are any extras on the Universal set I picked up. As it is now, I'm going to wait a few more months and then try again with the other films.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Pandora's Box

Louise Brooks pulls off her role very well here. She's by far the best thing in the film. But everyone else is doing the usual silent overacting in this melodramatic film that Brooks can't really save. I wouldn't mind seeing more of her , but I'd never want to have to watch this movie again to do so.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Anybody willing to trade me their copy of Death in Venice for the four-disc Ben-Hur?



Happy Holidays Everyone!

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

#158 - A Canterbury Tale - A slight Powell and Pressburger entry that felt REALLY slight until the last half hour or so when they reach Canterbury and the individual stories/quests come to their conclusion. I was disappointed a bit with the earlier part of the film (with the 'mystery' of the attacker who pours glue in women's hair), but upon further reflection that mystery felt like something Chaucer would've actually used in one of his own tales.

#159 - King Kong - Fun stuff. My first full viewing of Kong. I admit to chuckling at some of the close-ups of Kong, but for its time all the other special effects were quite excellent - in particular throughout the adventure on the island to rescue Fay Wray. Speaking of the damsel in distress, she was quite stunning in a few scenes. The early scene on the boat doing the film test certainly captured her beauty.

#160 - Great Expectations - I knew the cinematography would be gorgeous throughout the film (and it was), but I was worried about the story...Let's just say that Dickens wasn't my favourite author during high school. As it turned out, 10 minutes into the film I was hooked for the long haul. There's quibbles about it (the older Pip looked WAY too old for his character), but the entertainment factor was high.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

A Taste of Cherry

A film about a suicidal editor, depressed cause he messed up a great film. He took the 25 minute film, and added a bunch of stuff at the beginning, including a 30 minute montage of a guy driving around doing nothing (although he makes it look like the guy is trying to pick up some male sexual companionship). Then, after the 25 minute film ends eloquently and gracefully, he accidentally tacked on 3 minutes of behind the scenes footage. He's completely ruined what could have been a great movie, and so is now looking for someone to help him commit suicide.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Wow. I'm stunned, simply put.

To me, nobody has bettered Antonioni at encapsulating the overall theme of a film with a final shot (sometimes scene and shot, in the case of BLOW-UP).

L'Avventura, La Notte, L'Eclisse, Red Desert, Blow-Up, even Zabriskie Point, all have some of the best endings (i.e. final shots, in this context) I can recall in the history of cinema!

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Wow. I'm stunned you think Antonioni has a clue how to end a film. I really admire the dude, but it ain't for his endings.

Take L'Avventura, what does hanging around the street have to do with encapsulating the overall theme of the film?

Great talent at knowing how to end a film? Try Hitchcock. I'll take Rear Window, North By Northwest and Vertigo as my three hole cards and take my chances.

Wilder is terrific too. I'd add Some Like it Hot for sure.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Well considering that the theme of the film Blow-Up was a murder and who committed the murder, ending it by not revealing who committed the murder and instead having mimes play tennis does about as good as job as encapsulating the overall theme as Custer did figuring out how to fight Little Big Horn.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

First of all, that's not a theme, it's a quasi concise plot summary. A theme would be something like, "the message of this film is that there is no concrete reality as positivists would have you believe; individual and/or group perception determines reality, as the mimes signify." That's just the tip of the iceberg, of course. But that's a theme.

Anyway, I'm not bashing you at all. I respect your opinion. But considering what you wrote with your post, the entire point(s) of the film obviously went completely over your head.

But, again, lord knows there are "great" films that go over my head too, so I'm not superior to you. It's just that you don't seem to know how to read Antonioni's cinema at all.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

For starters, you might want to listen to Gene Youngblood's commentary on the DVD to help you with the meaning and symbolism of the last shot.

This one:
http://www.idyllopuspress.com/bigsof...avventura2.jpg

You really think the film ends with the two of them "hanging around the street?"

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Thomas,

I won't get into a long aesthetic argument with you about it, but it's not that I don't understand what some critics claim Antonioni was doing with Blow-Up, it's that I disagree. He can claim that it's some kind of treatise on loneliness and perception all he wants, but when I watch the film, I come to the conclusion that he was too lazy or too stupid to figure out a solution to the mystery. It's not like you can't make a mystery film that is complete as a mystery, and also has lots to say about other types of themes. Both Rear Window and Vertigo are films that are complete in plot, with clear and wonderful endings, but that both stand as explorations of human interactions in various ways. And frankly, any film can be put forth as having deep meaning, whether that's true or not. Here's just one example of many critical analyses of a film that I think is far better than Blow Up in every way, and while I'm not sure I fully accept the analysis of the deeper layers, I find it more convincing that anything I've read about what Antonioni was supposedly doing in Blow-Up.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

If you want to avoid the question so be it, but the question is based on your statement that the ending of the film encapsulates the overall theme of the film.

Gene Youngblood makes no such statement himself so you seem to be on your own on that one.

Even point by point commentary within L'Avventura can be difficult. For example, a very phallic like structure needs to be taken as irony otherwise it doesn't make any sense to Mr. Youngblood. Naturally the danger in this is that something that has meaning thus runs the risk of having no meaning.

Antonioni himself is quoted near the end by Youngblood as saying "My films are like your paintings, they're about nothing with precision."

Youngblood does a decent job of making it clear to the viewer that it really is up to the viewer to define the interpretation of things.

None of this helpful to supporting your point.

L'Avventura is art and taken as such can be quite interesting and enjoyable, but I think you're out on the limb on this specific point.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Hmm, I liked Chungking MORE than ItMfLove. And I think I'd put 2046 right between the two of them. Wong is a little more mainstream in that his stuff is so focused on romantic tension (IMO). Then again I guess K is a bit more willing to keep a plot moving.

But I love the comparison of the two directors. There is no getting around the fact that both like things paced SLOW and are centered on mood and tone more than plot (as mentioned).

I've had good experiences with both but neither are what I would consider "easy" viewings.

That's a pretty good comment on the issue I think. Funny that Bergman was mentioned for Cries and Whispers and I love his stuff, despite his work also being so strongly conceptual and modernist (in the sense of the making the viewer aware of the presence of the author).

Why his artifice works for me while directors like Tark or Antonioni don't is beyond me. I know it's "just taste", but I'd like to identify exactly what differs between them that makes me feel this way. Perhaps it's just the visual style.


I actually thought Soderbergh improved the film by tightening it up a little. They aren't that far apart, but Tark spends A LOT more time getting things going.


Interesting. I hadn't thought of his work this way (frankly I wasn't enthralled enough to pursue deeper understanding by way of commentary or reading - lots of other films to see). I did get some of that from The Passenger, but I saw that recently while Avventura was quite some time ago.

On the other hand I do agree with George's point on the issue. You chose to use a plot for a reason, and to me it's a little "easy" to bail on it at the end to get to your "statement" image.

I'm not knocking that statement moment, but rather I'm saying that IMO a craftsman director will put in the subliminal structure leading up to that shot. A pattern will be established, perhaps as in Fassbinder's Fear Eats the Soul. A director can say to the audience "these are the ground rules, here is the structure"...and that doesn't have to mean a Spielbergian push to make sure you get it (love his work but he does pound the point home compared to most "high art" directors).

Even Godard's annoying (IMO) choppy editing within scenes of Breathless sets a tone that the audience comes to understand. "This is how it will be", and it doesn't have to be plot driven. The color changes in Cook, Thief, Wife, Lover establish a structure despite being bizarre by normal narrative film standards.


So when Antonioni enjoys the audience buy-in benefits of a "normal" mystery plot and then leads them along by those rules, he has to expect some blowback when he abandons those rules at the end because the tracks don't line up with what he wants the final shot to say. A good director will line that moment up with the previous structure.

In fairness to Antonioni, he does frame Blow-Up at the front and back, but it's so disjointed from everything else he's saying that the connection is difficult to make (or was for me).

Look, the point of communicative arts is to communicate. If you have to come back and then explain to people what you wanted them to think or feel then what was the point of your work? That was when you were supposed to get the point across, not over coffee during the bullshitting session after the film.

I know that if I write something and the reader misunderstands I feel frustrated and as if I've failed a bit. It's also on the reader to try to understand of course, but the artist must know his audience.



BTW, on George's link to the Groundhog Day reading...
I think you have intended meaning and "baggage" meaning that can be found within any work. An artist will overtly, intentionally make a statement. But what statement he chooses to make, how he makes it, what ideas he ASSUMES go without saying, and so on all speak to deeper understandings of life.

What this means is that there is cultural/philosophical/human condition readings to be found in EVERY film or work of art, but that's not the same as author's intent.

I believe this is George's point. It would be so easy to take that reading of Groundhog Day and then suggest that all those points were what they had in mind as their intentions. But more likely most of the deeper meaning is just the cultural baggage they carried into the making of a fun comedy.

Maybe Antonioni meant many, many things that the final scene all brought into the open, and a retro reading brings these to the surface. Or maybe he had one rather simplistic metaphorical shot he wanted to end on, and from that a mystery plot social commentary on a shallow character takes on tons of deeper meaning that wasn't really intended. And he goes with the flow and says "yeah, all that, that's what I was saying".

The question then is did he say it or did the interpreting theorist actually say it when they noticed the cultural baggage.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

So along those lines, I just struggled through another Antonioni, L'eclisse, and I still had a similar reaction to George. I get that he is an observer director, he likes us to take notice of everyday life and the meanings that can be found there, but the long final set of shots just didn't do it for me. In fact I wasn't thrilled with a lot of the first scene either.

Not a bad film, but somewhat frustrating. I wouldn't cite it as a greatest film and I rank it below L'avventura and Blow Up, and well below the outstanding Passenger (in which he does consistantly establish the contemplative structure throughout the film, leading perfectly to its ending).

And my LAST FELLINI (woo hoo). Turned out to be one of the good ones, Ivitelloni. This is perfectly in line with his other "remembering scenes from my youth" films like Amarcord or La Dolce Vita. It was a little more basic than 8 1/2 or Dolce but a little bit better than Amarcord. La Strada remains my favorite Fellini. I definitely seem to have preferred his older works.


And then the other film everyone was raving about (besides Children of Paradise), The Battle for Algiers. I don't know what else to add to the comments already made. Outstanding film, good commentary on the nature of both sides of this type of conflict. Twice as powerful given the current Iraq situation.


Those 3 put me at 242 scene, 102 left to go if my count is correct.

Next on deck appears to be Pickpocket (I liked Man Escaped, hated Lancelot) and Masculin Feminin. Then I'm setting aside something a bit more fun with Don't Look Back.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

Fantastic posts Seth.

I have Aguirre from netflix, will try to watch it this week.

Re: Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club

But if the assumption is that Antonioni was going for "there is no concrete reality - perception defines it", why would we assume that he ever cared about the murder as a plot point? Given his theme, how do we know a murder even took place? The photographer is the only one who thinks he saw something. When he blows up the images, the fuzzy picture suddenly becomes very clear that there was a gun (even though everything else looks quite pixalated), so could that just be what he chooses to see? This fits with the concept of the movie like some other scenes:

- inside the club, it was worth fighting off the crowd to hold on to that broken guitar neck. Outside, it was useless to him and got tossed away.
- while the photographer was rolling around with the two young naked women, their faces seemed to alternate between happy and frightened.
- the perception by the stoned model at the party that she was somewhere else.


I fully understand the disappointment in not seeing that storyline resolved. The first time I saw the film I thought "Wha?" at the end. But given that, it made me reconsider what I saw and think about the film over the next few days. I ended up buying it. That's not to say these kind of art films are better than something a bit more straightforwardly narrative - just different and enjoyable in a wholly different way.

I think Antonioni always meant to include an unresolved "murder", so there was no intention of bringing that story to a close (and therefore no need to try to think up an ending to it).