It’s been nearly a year since No Country won all that bling. So I think we can all step back and get a little bit critical without censure from our friends who have moved on to Slumdog Millionaire by now.
Can someone tell me what this movie is about? Why should I like it? Is there anything here besides a chic hipster nihilism that the cohen’s exhausted in Lebowski et al?
I sought this director out recently. The Truman Show was playing on cable TV, I couldn’t take my eyes off it. It imparted the same claustrophobia as it did back in middle school. So maybe that says I have low brow taste. ( James Parker has something to say about the existential Jim Carey here at The Atlantic http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200812/jim-carrey )
I know that I, for one, tend to brush aside mainstream movies for whatever snooty reason. Peter Weir gives me reason to pause.
Another reason to give Hollywood a chance, I’ve been watching a lot of Douglas Sirk and Preston Sturges lately. These guys are the epitome of mainstream, but they made deceptively layered and subversive films.
so yeah, thanks for the post Mr Jones
@ “god forbid they ever make a film that accurately portrays Che for what he was; a thug and a mass murderer. but that don’t sell t-shirts.”
Everyone knows Steven Soderbergh actually makes major motion pictures in support of his lame t-shirt shop in the U-district. And he gave Che a 260 minute runtime because he was trying get tweens to by shirts at Target.
I’m surprised that there hasn’t been a more renewed interest in Satyajit Ray following the box office success of Slumdog Millionaire. The Apu Trilogy gets at the themes for which Slumdog was praised. We see capitalism permeating and transforming society, we get a slice of life, and often the story is told from a a child’s perspective. But Ray avoids many of the criticisms laid against Slumdog. His films move at a much slower, more realistic, pace than Danny Boyle’s. They don’t fall back on Horatio Algiers cliches. And they’re made by people actually from India. So yeah, I guess the thrust of this post is that Ray is better than Boyle, which isn’t really saying anything unique. Still I’m posting it, because The World of Apu doesn’t have a dedicated post or even a review.
Wow, actually, just before posting this I noticed that there actually is renewed interest in Ray at this very site http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts?category=Ray
Wish I could get the Walter Reade theater this weekend…
For halloween a friend painted himself blue and and strapped red sausages to his face. He said they were representative of dynamite. It was off putting.
A year later I watched Pierrot le Fou because the box looked cool. It was pretty grand to be in on the joke.
My point is, that I don’t think you can just make a starter pack and expect people to be interested in Janus or New Yorker Films. It’s like two atoms meeting and forming a bond. Millions of factors have to align perfectly before someone has an “aha” moment.
If the goal is to take a friend to an enjoyable movie with subtitles (which is a really broad definition of “world cinema”) I think Bookwibble is insightful to point to Amelie. Kung Fu Hustle is another fun foreign movie.
Otherwise, coercing people into enjoying “world cinema” is about as likely as winning the war on drugs.
I lucked upon “Times and Winds”, by Reha Erdem, at Blockbuster. It was a nice. Simple, economical, the diagetic sound played a big role.
Is there a Turkish cinema movement? Nuri Bilge Ceylan is rad, are there any up-and-comers to check out?
I watched Mouchette the other day with Tony Rayns commentary track turned on. Near the end Mouchette is at a corner market eating a croissant and coffee. The severe looking shopkeeper calls Mouchette a mean name and then Mouchette spills the coffee. At this point in the commentary Rayns says something along the lines that Bresson is super popular with the gay community. That he has status comparable to Judy Garland’s, and this scene might be an explanation.
Can someone explain to me why, an agnostic film maker, also pretty seriously into catholicism, has such status (and if someone could explain the whole Judy Garland thing also…) I’m sure there’s plenty written on this topic, if you know a good link.
Respondents are pretty insistent that Bresson’s films lacked sexuality. This comes as quite a shock to me. First of all, this thread is based on a scene in Mouchette. A movie concerning, explicitly, Mouchette’s sexuality. It hinges on, and is structured around, her rape. Furthermore, Diary of a Country Priest is also a very sexually charged film. There are these scandalous moments where the young Chantal kind of creeps up on the priest and divulges her intent to sin.
@ Sandwhiches “Also where did you hear that Bresson was agnostic?”
A:Also heard it on a commentary track. Either on Diary of a country Priest or Mouchette, listened to both commentaries within a week of each other.
@ Ehrenstein “Did Tony Rayns actually say that? I find that hard to believe.”
A: Seriously? Why would I have any reason to skew the words of some critic?
Anyhow, I double checked while watching/listening because it was a comment out of left field. Go listen to the commentary, and feel free to transcribe Mr. Rayns’s words.
@ Vicari “I’m sorry, I’m gay and I’m a huge Bresson fan, but anyone with half an eye can see that this man did not want to be gay. He struggled with it mightily, and I think we need to respect that…”
I feel like you have a lot of perspective to offer, but in the end you’ve just confused me further.
Why do you say “he struggled with it mightily.” Are you suggesting Bresson was a closeted homosexual? Are you suggesting that it was an issue he overtly examined?
I am not trying to “out” Bresson or impose any method of viewing his films. I am very aware that I don’t know much about Bresson or homosexuality. Which is why I left the original post fairly open ended.
Can you just explain some of your assumptions. Especially why “gay role model”?
I’m interested in the veracity of the DVD commentary. Yeah, it’s very interesting to look for camp and undertones/overtones of homosexuality, but mainly I just want to know if Bresson really does hold special Garland-esque status.
Wow, this is still alive. That’s nice.
Anyway, here’s a link to the article that prompted me to ask this forum what No Country for Old Men is actually about.
So much of Andrei Rubilev invoked Alyosha from Brothers K. This seemingly naive young man, wandering through a world that antagonizes his ideals. I’ve always considered these to be closely related texts.
Oh yeah, Two Lovers, loosely inspired by White Nights
http://blog.spout.com/2009/02/13/two-lovers-james-gray-interview/
See link for James Gray’s assertion that Scorsese and Schrader did Notes from the Underground perfectly in ’76
gluttons, all of you.
I keep my list shorter than 10 films. That way I only get things I’m really interested in seeing.
I had a huge list, it was like a toys R us shopping spree. Grabbing everything because it was there. I felt overwhelmed, and obliged to watch films just because they’d worked their way to the top.
Here are two of the Ray threads
http://www.theauteurs.com/topics/3063/comments?page=1#comment_80249
http://www.theauteurs.com/topics/2111/comments
I’m not ok with the way you make reference to “bollywood sh*t”. I mean, a billion people really like it. It’s more constructive to consider why.
Despite that, I think you have a good question. What’s out there besides Ray? I saw a couple by Shyam Benegal back in 2007. They were purposely very left wing. One about milk coops that had a pretty big impact in its time.
Maybe Scorsese’s World Cinema Foundation will wow us with something lost.
@"attack someone"
I’m not attacking anyone. It’s absolutely not personal.
I simply do not approve of XAnadrew’s discourse.
Non-western films/voices/opinions are marginalized as is. I think calling an entire genre, unique to the Indian subcontinent, “sh*t” just fans the flames. I don’t think its appropriate for the seemingly open minded folks, the people searching for Indian films, to lazily drop what seem like racially tinged slurs… Whatever… this criticism is pretty non-unique. I just don’t like to see that kind of stuff in this forum.
Maybe part of the problem is that it’s a really vague idea as stated in the original post. “…w/out all the bollywood sh*t” I don’t even know what that means. There was only one real bollywood dance in Slumdog Millionaire, and that was at the very end. Would XAnadrew love Slumdog if Boyle cut off the last 5 minutes? Or is it the 2-D love story he’s in opposition to. In that case, we might have very similar gripes. Or does he dislike the way Indian People dress? I just don’t know what Bollywood shit means.
Any way, my broader point, that “It’s more constructive to consider why [people dig it]” I think stands. And I think it stands for Bollywood as well as Hollywood. I’m sure there’s some ostentatious Indian equivalent to M. Bay. I imagine that he’s an outlier there as much as here. I’m sure there are tons of worthwhile Bollywood films, as there are tons of worthwhile Hollywood films.
Anyway that’s a rant. Thanks for the Ghatak recommendation Sanjuro.
I watched Shoah for extra credit in a history class. Every few minutes I would back up the VHS to transcribe the subtitles to include in my essay. And it was all in the library because the film was on reserve. And it was totally worth it. From a ethical standpoint, sure. And simply as an exercise in actively watching movies.
Gray can squeeze the best out of actors. I don’t think I really took Phoenix or Paltrow all that seriously before Two Lovers. (I know they’ve both done good stuff, but they’ve never pulled me into the theater…)
Maybe Gray is a bit throwback. I couldn’t stop thinking of Dustin Hofman in Midnight Cowboy and Brando in On the Waterfront while watching Phoenix. I don’t see any reason that’s problematic.
I don’t know about European-ness. I feel like it’s all distinctly American. NYC figures so prominently in Gray’s work. In the way Antonioni makes setting a character.
For a pro con back and forth go to Disappointed by district 9
This film does something interesting with it’s Alien refugee camp. It levels pretty scathing charges at multinational capitalism, the UN, blackwater type contractors, and the whole military-industrial-academic complex. Accusing them (us?), of all sorts of bad -isms. It was surprisingly effective at making me think about unpleasant realities.
At the same time it seems to fall back on these tribal cliches by including mystical alien eating Nigerians as a sort of third force. A sort of evil that exists on the same plane as the multinationals. The Nigerians and the multinational company are involved in the alien weapons trade.
Actual refugee camps are not included in the film. Black South Africans often look like they have a high standard of living in this film. While in fact there are huge problems in South African society.
I wonder why the film, which seems so willing to be critical on one hand, turns a blind eye to reality on the other. Maybe it’s on purpose for some artistic reason. Maybe it was due to the fact it was filmed in Johannesburg.
Josh Ryan
The living standards I’m referring to are, I guess, implied. People pouring out of office buildings, working in western style fast food shops, mid level MNU workers.
Yeah, to be explicit about problems in South Africa risks “laying it on to thick”. But it’s not inevitable. District 9 did a lot of things well, they might have succeeded…
My point is that the film lets the South African government off the hook for some real failures, and reinforces the really negative stereotypes about the Nigerians.
I don’t see how it can claim kudos for such a lovely subtext and then fail on these key issues.
If there’s an interpretation that can link the Nigerians to the political critique, I’d feel a lot better about having so much fun watching District 9.
This is a lovely thread.
Is it legal to take screengrabs/photos and post them on non-monetized blogs or forums like the auteurs?
Question prompted by my mac dvd player, which refuses to allow screenshots. Is that part of the FBI warning at the start of films, or is it due more to apple covering their ass?
Krzysztof Kieslowski’s trilogy (Blue, White, Red) has a nice track by Annette Insdorf. Some spoilers slip out, and I should have waited until watching all three films before listening to the commentary for early films in the trilogy.
@Neil’s cooler brother “I actually found Mann’s Heat commentary dry and a bit boring.”
I agree that Michael Mann sounds dry, but not necessarily boring. I think he comes off guarded. Like he’s wary about how people interpret what he says. But he really does seem to let out some interesting tidbits, about how his film to be seen. I don’t know that it always works out the way he wanted, but it’s nice to hear his side of things. Which is part of the fun of auteurism.
What is No Country actually about? over 3 years ago
It’s been nearly a year since No Country won all that bling. So I think we can all step back and get a little bit critical without censure from our friends who have moved on to Slumdog Millionaire by now.
Can someone tell me what this movie is about? Why should I like it? Is there anything here besides a chic hipster nihilism that the cohen’s exhausted in Lebowski et al?
Go to Comment
Peter Weir's Fearless over 3 years ago
I sought this director out recently. The Truman Show was playing on cable TV, I couldn’t take my eyes off it. It imparted the same claustrophobia as it did back in middle school. So maybe that says I have low brow taste. ( James Parker has something to say about the existential Jim Carey here at The Atlantic http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200812/jim-carrey )
I know that I, for one, tend to brush aside mainstream movies for whatever snooty reason. Peter Weir gives me reason to pause.
Another reason to give Hollywood a chance, I’ve been watching a lot of Douglas Sirk and Preston Sturges lately. These guys are the epitome of mainstream, but they made deceptively layered and subversive films.
so yeah, thanks for the post Mr Jones
Go to Comment
Any good documentaries out there? over 3 years ago
The Burden of Dreams- On Herzog making Fitzcaraldo.
My Voyage to Italy, Martin Scorcese
Darwin’s Nightmare
Lake of Fire
The Gleaners and I
Idi Amin Dada
Iraq in Fragments
The Case of the Grinning Cat
Go to Comment
Eastern Promises Sequel about 3 years ago
http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/03/viggo-mortensen.html
Good news for people who love bad news.
Go to Comment
Best biographical movies about 3 years ago
Really?
@ “god forbid they ever make a film that accurately portrays Che for what he was; a thug and a mass murderer. but that don’t sell t-shirts.”
Everyone knows Steven Soderbergh actually makes major motion pictures in support of his lame t-shirt shop in the U-district. And he gave Che a 260 minute runtime because he was trying get tweens to by shirts at Target.
Go to Comment
Satyajit Ray about 3 years ago
I’m surprised that there hasn’t been a more renewed interest in Satyajit Ray following the box office success of Slumdog Millionaire. The Apu Trilogy gets at the themes for which Slumdog was praised. We see capitalism permeating and transforming society, we get a slice of life, and often the story is told from a a child’s perspective. But Ray avoids many of the criticisms laid against Slumdog. His films move at a much slower, more realistic, pace than Danny Boyle’s. They don’t fall back on Horatio Algiers cliches. And they’re made by people actually from India. So yeah, I guess the thrust of this post is that Ray is better than Boyle, which isn’t really saying anything unique. Still I’m posting it, because The World of Apu doesn’t have a dedicated post or even a review.
Wow, actually, just before posting this I noticed that there actually is renewed interest in Ray at this very site http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts?category=Ray
Wish I could get the Walter Reade theater this weekend…
Go to Comment
Satyajit Ray about 3 years ago
Joe Wright likes the Apu Trilogy too.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/soloist/news/1814225/five_favorite_films_with_director_joe_wright
Go to Comment
Orson Welles's "The Trial" should definetly be on Criterion..... almost 3 years ago
You can stream it from netflix, if you’re into that.
Go to Comment
world cinema starter pack almost 3 years ago
For halloween a friend painted himself blue and and strapped red sausages to his face. He said they were representative of dynamite. It was off putting.
A year later I watched Pierrot le Fou because the box looked cool. It was pretty grand to be in on the joke.
My point is, that I don’t think you can just make a starter pack and expect people to be interested in Janus or New Yorker Films. It’s like two atoms meeting and forming a bond. Millions of factors have to align perfectly before someone has an “aha” moment.
If the goal is to take a friend to an enjoyable movie with subtitles (which is a really broad definition of “world cinema”) I think Bookwibble is insightful to point to Amelie. Kung Fu Hustle is another fun foreign movie.
Otherwise, coercing people into enjoying “world cinema” is about as likely as winning the war on drugs.
Go to Comment
Turkish LIst almost 3 years ago
I lucked upon “Times and Winds”, by Reha Erdem, at Blockbuster. It was a nice. Simple, economical, the diagetic sound played a big role.
Is there a Turkish cinema movement? Nuri Bilge Ceylan is rad, are there any up-and-comers to check out?
Go to Comment
Campy Bresson? almost 3 years ago
I watched Mouchette the other day with Tony Rayns commentary track turned on. Near the end Mouchette is at a corner market eating a croissant and coffee. The severe looking shopkeeper calls Mouchette a mean name and then Mouchette spills the coffee. At this point in the commentary Rayns says something along the lines that Bresson is super popular with the gay community. That he has status comparable to Judy Garland’s, and this scene might be an explanation.
Can someone explain to me why, an agnostic film maker, also pretty seriously into catholicism, has such status (and if someone could explain the whole Judy Garland thing also…) I’m sure there’s plenty written on this topic, if you know a good link.
Go to Comment
Campy Bresson? almost 3 years ago
Respondents are pretty insistent that Bresson’s films lacked sexuality. This comes as quite a shock to me. First of all, this thread is based on a scene in Mouchette. A movie concerning, explicitly, Mouchette’s sexuality. It hinges on, and is structured around, her rape. Furthermore, Diary of a Country Priest is also a very sexually charged film. There are these scandalous moments where the young Chantal kind of creeps up on the priest and divulges her intent to sin.
@ Sandwhiches “Also where did you hear that Bresson was agnostic?”
A:Also heard it on a commentary track. Either on Diary of a country Priest or Mouchette, listened to both commentaries within a week of each other.
@ Ehrenstein “Did Tony Rayns actually say that? I find that hard to believe.”
A: Seriously? Why would I have any reason to skew the words of some critic?
Anyhow, I double checked while watching/listening because it was a comment out of left field. Go listen to the commentary, and feel free to transcribe Mr. Rayns’s words.
@ Vicari “I’m sorry, I’m gay and I’m a huge Bresson fan, but anyone with half an eye can see that this man did not want to be gay. He struggled with it mightily, and I think we need to respect that…”
I’m interested in the veracity of the DVD commentary. Yeah, it’s very interesting to look for camp and undertones/overtones of homosexuality, but mainly I just want to know if Bresson really does hold special Garland-esque status.I feel like you have a lot of perspective to offer, but in the end you’ve just confused me further.
Why do you say “he struggled with it mightily.” Are you suggesting Bresson was a closeted homosexual? Are you suggesting that it was an issue he overtly examined?
I am not trying to “out” Bresson or impose any method of viewing his films. I am very aware that I don’t know much about Bresson or homosexuality. Which is why I left the original post fairly open ended.
Can you just explain some of your assumptions. Especially why “gay role model”?
Go to Comment
What is No Country actually about? almost 3 years ago
Wow, this is still alive. That’s nice.
Anyway, here’s a link to the article that prompted me to ask this forum what No Country for Old Men is actually about.
http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/fq.2008.61.4.10
Go to Comment
Dostoevskian films almost 3 years ago
So much of Andrei Rubilev invoked Alyosha from Brothers K. This seemingly naive young man, wandering through a world that antagonizes his ideals. I’ve always considered these to be closely related texts.
Go to Comment
Dostoevskian films almost 3 years ago
Oh yeah, Two Lovers, loosely inspired by White Nights
http://blog.spout.com/2009/02/13/two-lovers-james-gray-interview/
See link for James Gray’s assertion that Scorsese and Schrader did Notes from the Underground perfectly in ’76
Go to Comment
Netflix Queue almost 3 years ago
gluttons, all of you.
I keep my list shorter than 10 films. That way I only get things I’m really interested in seeing.
I had a huge list, it was like a toys R us shopping spree. Grabbing everything because it was there. I felt overwhelmed, and obliged to watch films just because they’d worked their way to the top.
Go to Comment
Indian Films...or lack thereof almost 3 years ago
Here are two of the Ray threads
http://www.theauteurs.com/topics/3063/comments?page=1#comment_80249
http://www.theauteurs.com/topics/2111/comments
I’m not ok with the way you make reference to “bollywood sh*t”. I mean, a billion people really like it. It’s more constructive to consider why.
Despite that, I think you have a good question. What’s out there besides Ray? I saw a couple by Shyam Benegal back in 2007. They were purposely very left wing. One about milk coops that had a pretty big impact in its time.
Maybe Scorsese’s World Cinema Foundation will wow us with something lost.
Go to Comment
Indian Films...or lack thereof almost 3 years ago
@"attack someone"
I’m not attacking anyone. It’s absolutely not personal.
I simply do not approve of XAnadrew’s discourse.
Non-western films/voices/opinions are marginalized as is. I think calling an entire genre, unique to the Indian subcontinent, “sh*t” just fans the flames. I don’t think its appropriate for the seemingly open minded folks, the people searching for Indian films, to lazily drop what seem like racially tinged slurs… Whatever… this criticism is pretty non-unique. I just don’t like to see that kind of stuff in this forum.
Maybe part of the problem is that it’s a really vague idea as stated in the original post. “…w/out all the bollywood sh*t” I don’t even know what that means. There was only one real bollywood dance in Slumdog Millionaire, and that was at the very end. Would XAnadrew love Slumdog if Boyle cut off the last 5 minutes? Or is it the 2-D love story he’s in opposition to. In that case, we might have very similar gripes. Or does he dislike the way Indian People dress? I just don’t know what Bollywood shit means.
Any way, my broader point, that “It’s more constructive to consider why [people dig it]” I think stands. And I think it stands for Bollywood as well as Hollywood. I’m sure there’s some ostentatious Indian equivalent to M. Bay. I imagine that he’s an outlier there as much as here. I’m sure there are tons of worthwhile Bollywood films, as there are tons of worthwhile Hollywood films.
Anyway that’s a rant. Thanks for the Ghatak recommendation Sanjuro.
Go to Comment
WHO IS / WAS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL FILM ACTRESS EVER? almost 3 years ago
Laura Mulvey
Go to Comment
The longest movie you've ever sat through almost 3 years ago
I watched Shoah for extra credit in a history class. Every few minutes I would back up the VHS to transcribe the subtitles to include in my essay. And it was all in the library because the film was on reserve. And it was totally worth it. From a ethical standpoint, sure. And simply as an exercise in actively watching movies.
Go to Comment
James Gray: The Auteur Who Got Away? almost 3 years ago
Gray can squeeze the best out of actors. I don’t think I really took Phoenix or Paltrow all that seriously before Two Lovers. (I know they’ve both done good stuff, but they’ve never pulled me into the theater…)
Maybe Gray is a bit throwback. I couldn’t stop thinking of Dustin Hofman in Midnight Cowboy and Brando in On the Waterfront while watching Phoenix. I don’t see any reason that’s problematic.
I don’t know about European-ness. I feel like it’s all distinctly American. NYC figures so prominently in Gray’s work. In the way Antonioni makes setting a character.
Go to Comment
Age / Level of education? (An informal poll) almost 3 years ago
24, history BA, glad everyone here seems as lost as me.
Go to Comment
What is the future of mumblecore? almost 3 years ago
Even dwarfs started small.
Reichardt wants you to know that she’s US avant garde.
Go to Comment
Tribalism almost 3 years ago
For a pro con back and forth go to Disappointed by district 9
This film does something interesting with it’s Alien refugee camp. It levels pretty scathing charges at multinational capitalism, the UN, blackwater type contractors, and the whole military-industrial-academic complex. Accusing them (us?), of all sorts of bad -isms. It was surprisingly effective at making me think about unpleasant realities.
At the same time it seems to fall back on these tribal cliches by including mystical alien eating Nigerians as a sort of third force. A sort of evil that exists on the same plane as the multinationals. The Nigerians and the multinational company are involved in the alien weapons trade.
Actual refugee camps are not included in the film. Black South Africans often look like they have a high standard of living in this film. While in fact there are huge problems in South African society.
I wonder why the film, which seems so willing to be critical on one hand, turns a blind eye to reality on the other. Maybe it’s on purpose for some artistic reason. Maybe it was due to the fact it was filmed in Johannesburg.
Go to Comment
Tribalism almost 3 years ago
Josh Ryan
The living standards I’m referring to are, I guess, implied. People pouring out of office buildings, working in western style fast food shops, mid level MNU workers.
Yeah, to be explicit about problems in South Africa risks “laying it on to thick”. But it’s not inevitable. District 9 did a lot of things well, they might have succeeded…
My point is that the film lets the South African government off the hook for some real failures, and reinforces the really negative stereotypes about the Nigerians.
I don’t see how it can claim kudos for such a lovely subtext and then fail on these key issues.
Go to Comment
Tribalism almost 3 years ago
If there’s an interpretation that can link the Nigerians to the political critique, I’d feel a lot better about having so much fun watching District 9.
Go to Comment
What is (are) your favorite frame(s)? almost 3 years ago
This is a lovely thread.
Is it legal to take screengrabs/photos and post them on non-monetized blogs or forums like the auteurs?
Question prompted by my mac dvd player, which refuses to allow screenshots. Is that part of the FBI warning at the start of films, or is it due more to apple covering their ass?
Go to Comment
BEST AUDIO COMMENTARY almost 3 years ago
Krzysztof Kieslowski’s trilogy (Blue, White, Red) has a nice track by Annette Insdorf. Some spoilers slip out, and I should have waited until watching all three films before listening to the commentary for early films in the trilogy.
Sullivan’s Travels features Noah Baumbach
Michael Mann talking about Heat
Go to Comment
BEST AUDIO COMMENTARY almost 3 years ago
@Neil’s cooler brother “I actually found Mann’s Heat commentary dry and a bit boring.”
I agree that Michael Mann sounds dry, but not necessarily boring. I think he comes off guarded. Like he’s wary about how people interpret what he says. But he really does seem to let out some interesting tidbits, about how his film to be seen. I don’t know that it always works out the way he wanted, but it’s nice to hear his side of things. Which is part of the fun of auteurism.
Go to Comment
Best film for a snow storm? over 2 years ago
The Ice Storm. Ang Lee and actors who were still young in the 90’s.
Go to Comment