Hannah Takes the Stairs

This isn't pretentious. It's meaningless. It's shameful that this is what our generation has to settle for as the vanguard of cinema, when our parents had Herzog and Rohmer and Bertolucci and Scorsese and Fellini and Jodorowsky and Malle and Akerman, just to name a few of the great directors of the 60s and 70s... although this lack of deep thought is more a product of the generation itself than the filmmaker alone.

bees can see ultraviolet light likes this

Judicial Joe

24May11

Interesting postscript. I found Swanberg's Facebook profile and sent him a polite criticism of his film, mentioning that I'd written a feature length script and am a film buff. Instead of saying something like, "If you don't like it, don't see it", he wished me luck on making my film and hoped I'd show it to him. I aspire to be that polite when responding to my critics.
Mike Spence

22Aug11

Actually, Joseph, this lack of "deep thought" is not only an intentional part of the project Swanberg's film has set for itself, it's an essential aspect of many great works of art. Yes, i know, people look at Leigh and see the class struggle, or Chekhov and see insight into the Russian class struggle or some such but in truth, those guys are avoiding deep thoughts as well. No I'm not saying Swanberg is on their level but what he lacks is not the kind of depth I think you want. Whatever the case, this film and Nights and Weekends is greater than Scorsese's whole career. Jodorowsky is a joke, and whatever you think is great in Akerman is probably the opposite of what actually makes her great. I think you've been duped by modern ideas of what constitutes depth in film and art. The ideas you're looking for are static. This film is about the movement of expressions, hearts and minds all at the same time. It is the poetry of the present moment.
Miasma

4Sep11

Re: Judicial Joe's postscript: Just watched this. While I am not so much interested in Swanberg's content, I've seen him speak twice and find him to be a thoughtful, charming, hard-working guy and I'm very pleased that he's achieved all that he has. Incidentally, at this last talk he mentioned that he was growing a bit tired of stories that do not go anywhere and said "naturalism is a dead end." I was very happy to hear this confession :)
Mike Spence

4Sep11

Haha, I'm sure you figured I'd say this but that's what makes me kind of nervous about his upcoming work. All joking aside, even if you think Swanberg sucks at it, how can you and practically everyone else be so dismissive of the idea of an artist trying to capture the complexities of real life, or to make them even more complex than they are to enrich their viewer lives? Why does everyone think moving away from life is a step forward in a filmmaker's development? WTF!!!
Jonathan Cribbs

18Sep11

Better than Scorsese's whole career? ... If I could mail you jars of diarrhea, I would. But I don't have any jars.
Mike Spence

18Sep11

"jars of diarrhea"? Is that code for Shutter Island and The Departed? No need to send me those, I've seen them:)
Jonathan Cribbs

18Sep11

Wasn't a fan of "Shutter Island." "The Departed" was hugely entertaining. Doesn't matter though. Scorsese's still got "Raging Bull," "Taxi Driver," "GoodFellas," and I don't even need to keep on going. It's just false to suggest some guy like Swanberg is better than Scorsese. No one with half a brain thinks that. It's not even an interesting or well-considered contrary opinion.
Mike Spence

19Sep11

Well, I will give you that my obviously unsubstantiated statement about Swanberg's superiority was not what anyone could say was well-stated. To say it was not interesting or well-considered you would kind of have to know how much I've considered it, which you don't. I'm not going to go film by film, but I have considered the entirety of Scorsese's filmography and found it wanting, based on my expectations for great art. As simple entertainment, it's fine. I don't expect you to take my word for it, of course. Scorsese's work falls in line with a certain kind of film so I don't think it's necessary to take each film on a case by case basis but you have inspired me to perhaps do an essay about what is clearly lacking, to me, about his work and similar work. Before I write it, here's a hint: it starts with what is present in Swanberg's work and missing from Scorsese's.
Jonathan Cribbs

19Sep11

Hey, do the essay. Because I can't imagine it's possible to reasonably make the case you're trying to make.
Judicial Joe

14Oct11

I suggest you rewatch ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE before writing that essay. Joe Swanberg represents the 1%.
Jonathan Cribbs

17Oct11

I own a copy of "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore." It's great. It's kind of like B-level Scorsese, but it's a uniquely directed film, and Kris Kristofferson is great in it. Some people dismiss it because of the over-emphasized happy ending, but I think it works in a strange way – probably because everything leading up to the ending doesn't suggest a resolution like that, narratively or tonally.
Judicial Joe

24Oct11

ALICE is Scorsese doing Cassavetes, the origin of mumblecore. Agreed that Scorsese is not for everyone, but his films are certainly more interesting and probably more realistic than Swanberg's, if you apply the working class/criminal class characters to all ethnicities, not just Italians.
Mike Spence

24Oct11

Well, I'm looking forward to ALICE now. Thanks. Still, nothing else I've seen from him, which is practically everything, is as interesting as the 3 Swanberg films I've seen.