Minnie and Moskovitz 9 Pas de deux 13
well i really hope McLaren wins, as he’s in more need of promotion.
Minnie & Moscowitz 1 – Pas De Deux 0
Minnie and Moscowitz 1, Pas de Deux 0
Like some others said, although I preffered Cassavetes’ film, I hope McLaren wins.
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) – 0 vs Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) – 1
although sad to vote against that fantastic moustache… :{(
Go McLaren!
“Cassavetes went out to defy Hollywood and the canon. Now he’s somewhat canon himself. Shall we vote politically today? Yeah, why not. No-one else will…”
So in the last two completed matches Tarkovsky and Ozu were eliminated, yet people still insinuate that the “canon” always wins. I don’t understand.
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 1 – Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 0
You don’t understand my comment? Or you don’t understand why people make random postings about how ‘canon’ always wins? (I don’t understand that one myself, since it’s obviously not true).
All I meant was that, in this particular match, I couldn’t see many people voting against Cassavetes in favor of Pas de Deux. Since, in my opinion he’s going to get the ‘popular’ vote as well as a good chunk of the ‘political’ voters.
So far, I’ve been proved wrong, which is interesting.
Minnie & Moscowitz-1
Pas De Deux-0
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 1 – Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 0
One of the hardest choices… Norman McLaren is such an important filmmaker that sure goes highly unnoticed (as most animators do…especially abstract/experimental animators) and Pas De Deux is a brilliant and perfect film but I simply cannot vote against my favorite modern American director. Cassavetes’ films are a genre in themselves and Minnie is such a wonderful story of chanced love… wouldn’t be dissapointed if either won though…
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 0 vs Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 1
I love Cassavetes, but I’m not too big a fan of M & M. On the other hand, Pas de Deux is probably my favorite McLaren film.
14 – 15 Pas de deux at the moment
Minnie & Moskowitz 0 – Pas De Deux 1
Of course the canon doesn’t always win, and nor does it always lose. Voting in this tournament has by and large been very honest i think. Cassavetes like Brakhage is very much canon, indeed i get the impression on many film courses they’re canonised as saints of independence and integrity. Personally i’ve got a blind spot,
Minnie and Moskowitz is a very weak Cassavetes’ film. The quirks of the people start getting a bit weary. The emotion of A Woman Under the Influence seems to be missing. But then again, this is also a quintessential Cassavetes’ film. The seeming unscripted nature of filmmaking, the uncomfortable close-ups, Gena Rowlands make this movie essential watching to understand the genius of Cassavetes.
Pas De Deux was beautiful. The black background worked wonderfully well and made the dancers seem angelic. The pairing felt strangely ironic because one’s technical prowess was pitted against someone who cared more about the people and their story rather than the way he told it.
Minnie & Moskowitz 0 – Pas De Deux 1
I’m glad Norman McLaren seems to be in the lead, atleast for now.
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 0 vs Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 1
What is this, Cassavetes channeling Paul Morrissey? Cassavetes’ brand of egoless dysfunction and playing with audience’s displeasure is useful when he’s revealing undercurrents of relationships in his dramatic work, but this satire is mostly one yelling voice too many.
Meanwhile, these two movies are actually, once again, surprisingly great counterparts to each other. Both representative of independent voices, but one revels in raw feeling of realism on low budget, the other in abstract beauty in technical skills and graceful precision..
However, Norman McLaren proves you can not only find beauty in this world, but also make it a part of your own. Taking Maya Deren’s theories of the camera as the new element in dance choreography, he creates an evocative production of the sublime. The dancer’s figures become almost like smoke and in dancing and in smoke is the same formal beauty of movement and light.
John Cassavetes (Minnie and Moscowitz) 0 vs Normal McLaren (Pas de Deux) 1
By a friggin’ long shot. I’ve liked some Cassavetes before, but fifteen minutes of beauty was so much more appealing than two hours of assholes, even if that’s Cassavetes’ thing.
—PolarisDiB
Minnie and Moscowitz – 0 vs Pas de Deux – 1
Sanjuro, your comment just reminded me of a famous vote from last year’s Cup. Anyway, here is an apolitical vote for Pas de Deux.
Minnie & Moscowitz – 0 vs. Pas de Deux – 1
I have mixed feeling about Cassavetes in general, but in M & M, there are no mixed feelings. These characters irritate me, and I spent the two hours wanting to shush them. Pas de Deux was pleasant enough to get my vote.
Political votes? Pah! How about nationalistic votes? I haven’t voted against a fellow countryman yet.
The irritation caused by the two main characters means an easy win for Stirling work.
Minnie & Moscowitz 0 Pas de Deux 1
Minnie and Moskovitz 14 Pas de Deux 22
things are looking bleak for Cassavetes, but bright for the Canucks and kilt wearers
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 1 – Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 0
Not one of the most interesting McLaren movie in my opinion, it’s a beautiful movie, but it bores me… and I just love every Cassavetes movie I’ve seen. I couldn’t vote against him, everything he does is just pure genius.
Of the 19 matches I have voted in so far (oh sod off, I had exams!) this is my favourite. It’s even better than the Winter Light/Nobody Knows match!
dp
John Cassavetes (Minnie & Moscowitz) 1 – Norman McLaren (Pas De Deux) 0
With Minnie and Moskowitz, these are both such fascinating characters, a complete mismatch for each other which is a source of not just comedy but also most of the fascination about their relationship. Minnie never expected someone like Seymour Moskowitz to walk in to her life, and after her first meeting with him never expected someone like Seymour Moskowitz to stay in her life, which makes their eventual emotional intimacy all the more fulfilling and all the more startlingly delightful.
They are both such flawed people. Even some of the more minor characters have quite clear flaws. Everyone feels so real. So utterly convincing. And it is these flaws that lend themselves to the film’s most bizarre piece of brilliance. It’s comedy. The film never mocks its characters, and is nothing short of thouroughly encouraging of the central relationship, and yet at the same time it manages to find humour in the most natural of ways from the most awkward of situations. In its revealing of people’s flaws it finds moments where all you can do is laugh, because not laughing is too depressing, and because how absurd we humans can be is, frankly, kind of funny, as well as achingly sad and endlessly interesting. Everyone is flawed and sometimes those flaws can be irritating or painful to watch and yet sometimes all you can do is laugh.
People have complained that the central couple are annoying due to their flaws. I’m reminded of something the wonderful Greta Gerwig said in defence of the recent film Greenberg; “I still feel very protective of Florence and Roger. I still have trouble separating it when people, very well meaningly, say things like, “Boy, he was really mean. I didn’t like him at all!” It’s like, “What, you so fuckin’ perfect?” I feel myself starting to flare a bit. Or if somebody jokingly says, “What a loser, right?!” I think, that’s the kind of thing that makes people like Roger crazy. I mean, it sounds like kooky actor talk, but for me these people became incredibly real. I think I’m interested in flawed characters that are actually flawed. They’re not flawed in a way that makes the picture more beautiful or makes them lovable, but actually just flawed. I think that that’s more true. I know it’s harder from an audience standpoint; it makes characters less palatable in some ways, because it makes them more familiar. And I think I’ve always admired writers who’ve done that. Noah said something in an interview once that I thought was very true. He said sympathetic characters don’t need our sympathy”
Pas de Deux was also absolutely wonderful, and stunningly beautiful, mesmeric. And it does win the Cecil Swooning Award for this match (those dancers standing still, looking in each other’s eyes, makes me all weak at the knees). In most matches it might have won my vote. Yet not here I’m afraid.
Re the irritation with the central characters in M&M. It isn’t the character flaws that I found annoying, but the fact they didn’t feel real at all to me. I sometimes feel the same way with some Mike Leigh characters, that the attempt at authenticity becomes an actorly version of reality, which doesn’t always work for me. I then find it difficult to go with the film as I feel aware of acting choices being made
Yes i have a big problem with several Leigh films for the characterisations (caricatures?) and acting, e.g in Life is Sweet and Secrets and Lies (the hideous mother-daughter meeting scene), and Cassavetes often feels not only forced, but also forced on me with close ups (as mentioned above), and often too his characters annoy me too anyway, so the overall effect feels inescapable and claustrophobic…well like so many responses it’s a matter of personal temperament
remember: if you find people annoying, people likely find you annoying; also if you choose not to go to someone’s funeral there is a good chance he won’t come to yours.
well, let’s say then do i want to spend 2 hours in their company. and in the way they’re presented?
Sanjuro
Oh, a quick read through the thread and it appears I was wrong and Pas de Deux is winning.
That won’t last long.