Friday, April 26, 2002

I was reading an interview with Abbas Kiarostami when I came across this quote, which underscores much of what I have been feeling lately about film and music.

Mahdi: Western culture is so accustomed to background music, and there was an absence of any kind of soundtrack in this movie. Is this a practice you employ often in your films or just this one?

Kiarostami: Music is a perfect art by itself. It's very powerful and impressive. I dare not try to compete with music in my films. I can't engage in that kind of activity as the use of music has a great deal of emotional charge and burden and I do not want to place this on my spectator. Music plays on the spectators' emotions, make them excited or sad, and takes them through a veritable emotional roller coaster like ups and downs and I respect my spectator too much to do that.

Posted by gdd @ 09:37 PM CST [Link]

If you're in Chicago, the Chicago Cultural Center is hosting an exhibit called Magnum Cinema: Photographs from 50 Years of Movie-Making which looks quite interesting. For more information feel free to visit the website.

Posted by gdd @ 09:12 PM CST [Link]

Had an afternoon off work and took in another watching of Kiarostami's Close Up and confirmed my earlier opinion that watching it on the train had ruined it. I think the biggest problem is the noise. Kiarostami makes quiet films, almost entirely without soundtrack and minimal ambient noise, and the excess chaos of the train (announcer, people around you, general machinery clanking) really detracts from this experience. I will have to keep this in mind when choosing train movies in the future.
[more]

Posted by gdd @ 09:09 PM CST [Link]

I have a problem with junkie movies, largely because I have a problem with junkies. I find little interesting in their escapades. One reason junkie movies bother me is that I feel they largely glamorize the junkie lifestyle even when disaster occurs. There are always going to be fucked up impressionable people hellbent on self-destruction who will find much to like in a portrayal of the junkie lifestyle. Think I'm wrong? Look at the kind of hero-worship people like Jim Morrison and Sid Vicious get from their followers. The message is junkie + genius = art. It bothers me. I've seen too many talented and lovely people who I knew or admired ruined by it. Maybe its a personal problem, I don't know. Even a film like Requiem For A Dream I only like because it is a stunning piece of filmmaking. The way it gets a hold on you is quite amazing. Traffic at least had two other stories two keep you going, and that film truly had a message behind it. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 08:29 PM CST [Link]

Thursday, April 25, 2002

I don't know if Douglas Trumbull lives in Chicago or not, but this is the third time in as many years he's been in town doing a presentation for one reason or another. This lecture was mostly about Trumbull's early attempts at filmmaking, and how they shaped his desire to turn filmmaking from a third person to a first person experience. He argues that Kubrick did this successfully with the Jupiter And Beyond The Infinite episode of 2001, and since he's been looking for other ways to do so. He covered a lot of ground mostly focusing on various technologies he's been involved with over the years - simulation rides, his Showscan tecnology (a 70mm format projected at 60 fps, more information here), and his recent work using virtual sets on the new Winnie The Pooh cartoons (described here. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 08:50 PM CST [Link]

Tuesday, April 23, 2002

Another fascinating film from Kiarostami, again made more interesting when I learned the story of its making. I also again found myself thinking that a train viewing would not do this movie justice. Sometimes you watch a movie, and after its done you scratch your head and say, "what was that all about? What a piece of crap!" This is how I think about a lot of David Lynch's work. On the other side is something like Close Up, where after its done I scratch my head and say, "what was that all about? I need to give that one another viewing." After seeing two movies from Kiarostami, I have to say I can't immediately think of another filmmaker who can put so much into so little. This film covers such a wide range of territories - our relation to films, film's relation to us, everyone's relation to actors and directors in films and vice versa, statements about mailaise in Iranian life (much of which I believe could certainly be expanded to apply to the rest of the world)...a wonderful rich and highly textured piece of filmmaking. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 10:29 PM CST [Link]

There was an article in the Christian Science Monitor today entitled Is Hollywood Capable of 'thinking' movies? in which Johnathan Rosenbaum (Chicago Reader) and Stuart Klawans (The Nation) trod out a lot of the standard arguments about Hollywood and filmmaking. However, the article spawned some semi-interesting discussion over at Plastic.

Posted by gdd @ 07:52 PM CST [Link]

Monday, April 22, 2002

I had never seen a Bette Davis movie before, and this was really great. Man she sure can play a bitch well. Amazing how the subject matter - the rise of greed over the good of a community - is being played out today more than ever. I like how the class issues are addressed, with the servants being portrayed in a much more sympathetic light than most of the main characters. The scene where they feed the neighborhood kids off the back porch seems to be the only place this is played out directly, although the subtext is felt throughout the film. Its kind of put to the background. At first I didn't think the inclusion of a class statement was completely intentional and I was just reading into it since I've recently seen Gosford Park and been thinking about its relation back to Rules Of The Game, but the more I think about it, the more deliberate it seems. It also feeds into the main theme, about how the main characters treat everyone around them like garbage, or even worse as if they simply aren't there. Its really great to see a period piece set in 1900 seem fresh and vital in the modern age.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the cinematography by Gregg Toland. This was his first film after Citizen Kane, and although its less showy the cinematography is marvelous. There's a scene where Bette Davis is walking around a room, discussing a business deal putting while putting out candles with a snuffer thing (apologies for being a modern heathen unfamiliar with such things.) The way the light is handled in this scene is great, as she snuffs out the candles this darkness follows her around the room. Its like for every candle she snuffs out, she drags that much more life out of her town and the people around her. A lot of great group compositions as well, people perfectly placed within the frame with deep focus. Bethany chose this and I had never heard of it, and I have to give her credit. I really got a lot out of this viewing.

Posted by gdd @ 10:02 PM CST [Link]

Saturday, April 20, 2002

OK. I did not go see Tristana, alas. There are about 800 movies showing this week, of which I will probably get to see 0. Douglas Trumbull is speaking on Wednesday and maybe, just maybe, if I'm lucky, i can make it to that. *sigh* I need to find a job in the city again.

I spent a lot of time getting used to the heat by sleeping on the train last week. I did manage to get in the Belle De Jour commentary, which while interesting was not essential. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 06:40 PM CST [Link]

Thursday, April 18, 2002

There's a pretty interesting interview with Peter Bogdanovich at The Onion this week.

Posted by gdd @ 12:59 PM CST [Link]

Tuesday, April 16, 2002

Salon has a pretty entertaining story today about two guys who do a documentary about their quest to steal a script from Sony, change it, and secretly return it in order to see their changes unwittingly introduced.

Posted by gdd @ 12:48 PM CST [Link]

Monday, April 15, 2002

I'm going to try and make these a little less structured for a variety of reasons. I think they will be more interesting, I think the rambling will promote something (good or bad, we'll see), and sometimes I just want to ramble about things that don't fall under a subject heading. The original idea behind the suject headings was that it would make it easier to find things and hunt down specific entries, but it feels too much like I'm reviewing things, which isn't the purpose. 4/22 Note: Obviously I've changed my mind again
[more]

Posted by gdd @ 10:04 PM CST [Link]

Sunday, April 14, 2002

Just a quick note, this commentary was really basically a waste. Many of the topics discussed were already covered in the other supplemental materials (deleted scenes commentary, making of documentary). The only real cool insight was during the scene where Tim Robbins confronts Jason Alexander outside the courtroom. Apparently this scene was supposed to be shot in the hallway, but it played really comically because of the height difference between Robbins and Alexander. So instead they shot it on a stairwell, with Robbins always running two or three steps in front of Alexander in order to lessen their height differental. Cool little detail, the kind of thing I wish there was more of in the commentary.

Posted by gdd @ 11:59 AM CST [Link]

A wonderful film. I had seen this on the train recently, and I wanted Bethany to see it. I also wanted to see it whole and in one piece. Certainly the dramatic impact is greater without having to break it into three chunks. The middle section seemed more heavy than I had remembered, certainly a function of having to go through it all at once. The film has a very voyeuristic view. Many of the shots are taken from very far away, or from outside looking in through a window. The reflected window shots are magnificent, filled with color, implicating the reflection going on in each character's mind. The cinematography as a whole was excellent, great work by Wei-han Yang. I kept thinking of Magnolia while watching this, except the funloving presence of Yang-Yang (Johnathan Chang) keeps Yi Yi from being nearly so oppressive. I heard part of the audio commentary with Edward Yang, and I believe he said that this was Chang's first time acting. A really impressive debut. I may keep this around to go through the commentary at a later date. Certainly one of my favorite of the films I've seen in the last year or so. An example of how a simple understated style can create a work of beauty. I'm now quite interested in seeing the rest of Yang's work, despite the fact that none seem to be available on DVD. Maybe I can get them from overseas.

Posted by gdd @ 11:49 AM CST [Link]

Wednesday, April 10, 2002

A frustrating film. So good and yet at the end so disappointing. First off, I was amazed that this was directed by the same guy who made Indecent Proposal, one of my most despised movies of all times. That was one of the only times I have ever walked out on a movie (well, it was on tape.) This film however captures its subject so well. It is shot and lit gorgeously. It judiciously uses odd camera angles to just the right effect, highlighting Tim Robbins' breaks from reality to just the right effect. Quick cuts and strobe lights highlight the perfectly done dance party seen. Like many of the best horror films, the creatures are more felt than seen. The incedental soundtrack just barely exists, coming in really just for highlights. On the other hand, after capturing a mood so perfectly throughout and really creating a feel that we were building up to something, the whole movie falls flat with an ending that was missing something essential and wraps everything up in a neat little package. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 09:19 PM CST [Link]

Tuesday, April 9, 2002

I finished this book today (see previous post for more info.) I enjoyed it, but still came away with the sense that had the journal entries been replaced with more interview segments it would have been a stronger book. I'm really interested in seeing the Lester films now, even though the major ones are unavailable. And damnit, How I Won The War is available and netflix doesn't have it. Crap. So much for that idea. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 07:38 PM CST [Link]

Monday, April 8, 2002

This is a film that I believe suffered badly from being watched on the train. Stop announcements and a break of 8 hours between the two halves of the movie did not serve it well. I loved its slow pace and the way it was shot. Reading today about the way the film was made was fascinating (Rosenbaum piece, contains spoilers) only served to raise my appreciation of it. But I really need to see it again in a quiet dark room with no interruptions.

Posted by gdd @ 08:49 PM CST [Link]

I'm going to stop linking through movies and stuff in the text because man, its just too much work. Look them up on imdb. I've been reading this book called Getting Away With It, its a collection of interviews Steven Soderbergh did with Richard Lester. Interspersed through the interviews are diary entries Soderbergh made which discuss the things he was working on at the time - doing rewrites for Mimic, trying to get distribution deals for Gray's Anatomy and Schizolpolis, etc. I mainly bought the book for the journals, because i like Soderbergh a lot and thought it would be interesting. Unfortunately they've been a let down. They're fun to read, but they're not very illuminating.
[more]

Posted by gdd @ 08:16 PM CST [Link]

Sunday, April 7, 2002

My second viewing of the 70mm release at Music Box was interrupted right at the beginning of the Jupiter journey when Bethany got violently ill and I had to take her home. Of the three times I have attempted to see this remastered release, I have succeeded only once (the other was interrupted at the intermission due to a parking issue at the old Film Center.) I get one more chance next weekend thankfully. While this is undoubtedly my favorite film of all time, I find I have little to say about it as a story and experience that isn't better said elsewhere. My father refers to 2001 as a rorschach, and I think he's onto something there. Suffice it to say that seeing 2001 letterboxed for the first time was a pivotal moment in my appreciation of film as art as opposed to film as entertainment.
[more]

Posted by gdd @ 09:49 PM CST [Link]

A fun, enjoyable film, mainly interesting because it allowed me to see three actors do something completely different than what I'm used to seeing them do. My only real exposure to Terence Stamp was through Soderbergh's The Limey, Hugo Weaving I knew as Agent Smith in The Matrix and Guy Pearce from his roles in L.A. Confidential and Memento. All three were great in their respective parts, and all three are fantastic here in polar opposite roles. Pearce's role is a little more one-dimensional than the others, but Stamp and Weaving really get a chance to stretch out and have some fun. Stamp in particular was very impressive, he really pulled it off. Technically the movie is pretty straightforward, although there's some nice photography of the Australian outback.

Posted by gdd @ 10:18 AM CST [Link]

Saturday, April 6, 2002

This was part of the Gene Siskel Film Center's Buñuel series. Of the four Buñuel movies I have seen (the others being The Discrete Charm Of The Bourgeoisie, That Obscure Object Of Desire, and The Exterminating Angel) this is definitely the one that struck me the least. It is also the most straightforward. I'm unsure if the two are connected, but I wouldn't doubt it. I'm somewhat hard pressed to describe why this left me so cold. Many of the standard Buñuel themes like religion and class relations are present, and there are some very funny and well done scenes. The bit where dirty old man Jean Ozenne is making Jeanne Moreau strut around in the little boots, cooing about watching those tiny shoes move, was quite great and felt like something out of his later works. [more]

Posted by gdd @ 11:04 PM CST [Link]

Search entries: