My Life As A Dog is a must. It still inhabits my daily dream-space. For Kurosawa I would second, of course, Ran and Throne of Blood, but am surprised that no one has mentioned his noir films, which I think are stellar, esp. The Bad Sleep Well and High and Low (probably my favorite Kurosawa). Essentially with him you cannot go wrong. Even his minor films have amazing qualities (see Sanshiro Sugata). I would also recommend Dreams, but come back to that again when you’re older. I was 9 when I first saw Dreams when it was released theatrically, and I knew it was powerful stuff, and again some of those images will stay with me forever, but it wasn’t until years later when I was able to catch a screening at MoMA that I was able to delve into some of the particulars.
Let me put my experience with Fellini this way: Satyricon was my first Fellini when I was 12 or 13 and is still my favorite. I like his other work much less having seen that first. I recently saw that again in a theatrical screening and it is still the halcyon insanity that he was never able to replicate.
L’Eclisse and Blow Up are probably my favorite Antonioni, but I do agree that some of his work is a little mature, but don’t let that put you off, see it and if you don’t like it come back to it again in a few years. Blow Up is probably his most accessible, and so a good place to start.
Truffaut, for me, is a loss. I enjoyed Small Change in a French class in jr. high school, but have not really liked any of his other films. Large caveat: I have not yet seen Shoot the Piano Player (I’m afraid of not liking it, in all honesty), but for my money Godard and Melville are where it’s at. Breathless is obviously a good place to start, and you can’t go wrong with Jean Seberg and Jean-Paul Belmondo; but Weekend, another film I saw at 12-13, is a pinnacle. Also check out Le Circle Rouge—the opening of that film is simply astounding.
I would recommend looking into the films of Kenneth Anger and Stan Brakhage as well for other directions that cinema can take you. I would heartily recommend Cocteau as well.
Claire Dolan by Lodge Kerrigan is the first to spring to mind (though his Keane also springs to mind). The Pillow Book and Primer follow closely behind this evening. Ran, too springs to mind. I feel that with all of these films, every aspect of them are at the highest level that they can possibly be. They are true unfiltered representations of the filmmaker’s artistic vision.
I wanted to post without reading anyone else’s, so after going through I have to say that I can’t believe that I forgot about Mirror and Touch of Evil. Both favorites. Major props with The Brown Bunny! And of course I also forgot La Circle Rouge as well. I’m glad Tarr is on here as well as Malik—I am waiting for a blu-ray Thin Red Line (easily one of the best war films ever).
I love Anger. Dru, no need to have grievances with The Auteurs at this young age. I’d love to see some more representation of avant-garde filmmakers: Tscherkassky, Arnold, Snow, Benning, Bromberg, Connor, Bokanowski, Fishinger, Kren, the list goes on…and on…and on…
I first saw the original Funny Games on video and was tortured as to whether or not I thought it was a good film. It was either amazing and I wasn’t there yet, or it was god awful, but I couldn’t get it out of my head. I went on to be subjected to The Seventh Continent a few years later and thought that Haneke was one of the worst filmmakers out there, but again I couldn’t get the ending of the film out of my head. I was annoyed by having to sit through the mundane and seemingly endless interactions between people who I didn’t feel any sympathy for and who I thought were awful actors. I had read good reviews about Code: Unknown, and so went to see that theatrically and was less than impressed, but thought that it at least had more going on than his previous films, but I agreed with J. Hoberman’s (was it?) review in the “Voice” when he said that the most disturbing section of the film is not anything that happens visually on-screen, but when Binoche is ironing and the soundtrack has the argument/physical abuse of a neighbor couple. This moment may have been the defining moment in my understanding of Haneke, but I don’t believe that I consciously decided that I understood him, for when I saw The Piano Teacher I still didn’t like it for the very same reasons (didn’t care about the characters, bad acting).
Then came Time of the Wolf which is one of the best post-apocalyptic films—presaging The Road by a few years (I have to think that McCarthy has seen Time of the Wolf). I cared about the characters, I thought the acting magnificent and I was wholly impressed with the leap in maturity in the film. Then came Cache, which I think is one of the best films in the last ten years. It is absolutely riveting and truly amazing.
I suppose what I am getting at here is this: does anyone else see a split in Haneke? Are his early films problematic? Has he matured in such leaps and bounds? I will add that Funny Games US I believe to be brilliant and I can’t wait for Das Weisse Band. I have really hesitated to go back to his early films, and so I guess I wanted others to weigh-in and see what you think about Haneke in general, if there is a favorite (strange word to use, I guess) film of his for you or if you truly despise him?
I was scared reading the first few comments not to see Barry Lyndon on there, isn’t that just proof that it is the most under-appreciated of Kubrick’s work? When someone can say that The Shining is under-appreciated (though he makes a decent argument), Barry Lyndon falls off the map for both audience and critic discussion. So I am glad to see all the Lyndon-ites speak up here on the lower section of this post. Definitely my number one.
Having said that, I have to take direct contest with what Rollie Schott’s evaluation of FMJ. I believe that a large part of why FMJ is so masterful is because it is a representation of what the soldiers go through. The most exciting and enjoyable part of the film is the first third because there is so much that the soldiers don’t know, there are so many possibilities, and while they are in a hellish environment, it is still a boy’s club, it is still a summer camp mentality. They are having fun, so we are having fun. Obviously that all ends when Pvt. Pyle kills himself and we are woken up to reality. The audience follows the characters descent into—not hell, because that’s not really what it is, but—purgatory; the same thing every day. New dead bodies, hopefully not yours, but that’s the only thing that changes—the faces. Even after the story picks up again in the last third, when we have another building up of tension with the sniper, it ends up being just another day, just another inhumane incident. By this time neither the audience nor the characters really have the heart left to be able to mourn the fact that they just killed a teenage girl. Ultimately even Joker isn’t able to hold on to the passion of his convictions.
The film ends with a bit of a confusing moment of the platoon walking along, singing the theme song to the Mickey Mouse club. Honestly, at first I thought that this was kind of a “happy ending” moment to give the audience something upbeat to walk out to, then there was the ironic reaction to it, that surrounded by all this killing, these men are reverting back to childhood, but I think it goes beyond both of these. I believe that there is nothing left. It’s another moment of nihilism in a long line of nothing. There was no preparing for the war, there was no preparing for what the soldiers would be forced to endure and enact, and in the end there is nothing. While these men were being massacred (physically and mentally), the people at home (at least at the beginning of the war) were joyfully spending their days as they always had. They were watching Mickey Mouse and other entertainment, hiding from the truths of the world so they wouldn’t have to worry about anything. What Kubrick is able to do with FMJ, is to make the audience actually experience some of what the soldiers did. By having to sit through the mundane, by having to see these horrors and how they ultimately no longer affect the soldiers, we are transformed at the end of the film. Mickey Mouse is no longer a cute song. We have passed through the looking-glass and can not see the innocence any longer. We began the film watching the entertainment, and ended enduring the hardships.
This is what Kubrick is doing in all of his films: attempting to wake his audience up, to make them actually see what is surrounding them. Yes, perhaps “Clockwork” is crypto- or proto-fascist, but it ultimately is asking the viewer to take sides. He is not saying that this is good or bad, he is showing the desire and the revulsion and leaving it up to the audience to say I want to be a Droog or not. This is the main reason why it was banned in the UK, and why Kubrick went along with the ban. He may have seen that he stepped too far. He did not give the audience a lifeline, he assumed that his viewers would be intelligent enough to be able to decide for themselves. He did what most filmmakers would be too scared to do, he made movies for the elites, for the cinephiles, he did not stoop to the lowest common denominator, which is why EWS is so underrated as well. Whether or not it is a complete vision, it is at least 95% there, and I think a telling swan song.
It’s not that I am annoyed by the mundane, just the opposite. I believe I was also speaking towards my own maturation towards Haneke, and was wondering if anyone else had substinative issues with him upon first take. I also wonder if there is anyone who loved him at first. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would say that Haneke is one of their favorite filmmakers right off the bat. I can appreciate his style, I can appreciate his attitude and approach, but it is not something that I felt comfortable with. I believe that my excuses of bad acting and the intolerable mundane were only logical ways of treating the subject matter (in the case of The Seventh Continent to be sure). I did mention that he is a favorite of mine at this point (I suppose in a roundabout way, though) and myself of ten years ago would be shocked to hear that. BTW Kieran, awards and nominations a good film/actor do not make (Life is Beautiful, anyone? Cinema Paradiso? Titanic?), but that notwithstanding I definitely also agree with E.H.L.
I adore Weekend and Le Mepris. King Richard is really great, as, of course, is Breathless. I also love l’histoire(s) du Cinema as well as Helas Pour Moi, JLG/JLG, Nouvelle Vague and a smattering of his Vertov group films, especially Le Vent d’est.
The Swimmer was available at one point, don’t know if it’s oop now, though.
I’d love to see the recent Greenaway and Ferrara get onto disc—at lest three or four movies each that haven’t found a US distro.
More Ozu is always nice, but we’re catching up with that (thanks criterion and eclipse).
Warhol, Bruce Conner, Michael Snow, any of the seminal 50s-00s experimental filmmakers, really.
I seem to have an aversion to Charlie Kaufman, Being JM and Confessions of A Dangerous Mind are the only films scripted by him that I like, but his others are atrocious. I have yet to find a way into The Seventh Seal, though I don’t know if I’d say that I don’t like it…. yes, right now I would.
Jennifer—“2001” is meant to be seen on a big screen, so if you’re in a major urban city and can wait for the (usual) yearly or bi-yearly screening, I would recommend doing that. If, however, you cannot, see it anyway. I first saw it on a small tv (letterboxed) and it only grows in stature. Ditto: “Lawrence of Arabia”, “Playtime”, “Vertigo”. Actually, these are all must 70mm screenings (esp. “Playtime”).
I have a huge hole where Bergman should be, but I’m weary. I’ve seen The Seventh Seal, and really didn’t care for it. I know I like Bergman in concept: isolated, cold, austere, cerebral, subtle, but I haven’t gotten beyond my hesitation to engage. It’s not like I don’t own enough Bergman, which is the other shameful part of it!
Antoine, I would only pose a question as to Scorsese simply because I think he still has a passion for the art. Spielberg, Lucas and Coppola no longer seem to share that passion—their passion, when it rears its ugly head is for the money and fame primarily. Scorsese’s Hollywood films are not god-awful nor are they great. They’re good. I hated Gangs, but I blame the Weinstein’s for that. Please, someday let Scorsese’s original edit out of the closet. The best thing that film had going for it was the side dramas around the edges of the main story, and that’s what got cut. I agree that Scorsese’s treading a narrow path that could have him fall into the hands of the cult of Lucas. He needs to remember what Cassavetes told him: “Martin, you just spend a year of your life making shit!” and come back to his own projects. Say what you will about post-GoodFellas Scorsese, I think Bringing Out the Dead is one of the most overlooked films in his oevure. Casino is an excellent film and I think that Kundun is easily pushed to the wayside when it should be seen much more.
David Lee, you may be correct about the first twenty minutes of Saving Private Ryan, but did you forget the remaining two hours? Pure drivel. As an extravaganza filmmaker Spielberg is pretty okay. Jaws is really good, as is Close Encounters (original edit only), and Raiders. Everything else is passable at best or simply offensive at worst (I put all of his dramas in this latter category).
Lang, definitely, especially Spies and Dr. Mabuse.
Griffith, especially Broken Blossoms.
Dreyer, especially Vampyr.
I want to see more Sjostrom—I’ve only had the opportunity to see The Phantom Carriage.
Eisenstein, Vertov, Pudovkin, Dovzhenko are all incredible filmmakers and any of their silent films are worthwhile, I believe. I am trying unsuccessfully to remember the name of a Ukranian filmmakerwho was working in the 50s or 60s ostensibly making silent films, though I belive he put them to a classical score. He made cinemascope black-and-white films, one is about swans. Anyone??
Since jr. high, I have had a theory about really really bad movies. I call it the Potato Scene theory. The first horrendous film that I can remember seeing in the theatre was Pet Sematary II. I was groaning the whole way through, though never thought to walk out. At some point in the film there is a crash on a local highway with a potato truck and one of the characters’ cars. There is one shot where the camera begins in a close up of a foot sticking out of a pile of potatoes. It holds for a second or two and just before it cranes up, a small line of blood trickles down the ankle. For whatever reason, perhaps the fact that this was actually the only piece of cinematic craftsmanship in an otherwise garbage film, I came up with this idea that even in the worst piece of drivel there is a Potato Scene, which, while it may not redeem the film, at least makes one thing in it good. As I’ve grown up I have had less and less patience for bad films—or perhaps there have more and more truly horrendous ones (thanks Abrahams and Zucker bros. for your “protogees” work, I mean… shit)—so I have seen fewer of them. I don’t know if this theory holds true for every bad film, because I cannot find any redeeming qualities in Haggis’ Crash—which should be stripped of its title so people stop confusing it with the real Crash.
At any rate, because of this theory, I had sworn to myself never to walk out on a movie because instead of writing the whole thing off, I would at least be able to focus on one decent thing in the film. I have tried to stick to this, and honestly cannot remember any film that I have walked out on. I really wanted to bail on Starship Troopers, but my friend and I decided to just lampoon it for the running time, much to the dismay, I’m sure, of the rest of the audience. But I do thank the heavens for dvds where I can just use the 16x or 32x ffw to run through those bad films.
I just have one more example for you about the Potato Scene to put it into more recent context. Secret Window—R.S. Brown, indeed a truly truly bad film—has one of the best one-line deliveries of Depp’s career. He has just driven to his old house which his ex-wife now owns (I think I’m getting this correct). And he’s standing there across the street from it. The camera holds on him in 3/4 profile with the house in the background and he says, simply: “This is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife.”
I’m sure imdb and wikipedia have a whole list of movies that have scenes at the end of the last credit roll, but I don’t want to be that lazy to look them up. I want to put it to you, those credit-watchers out there, what is your most favorite post-credit scene—or just list a movie that has them. I will put up Hideaway (Brett Leonard seems to have a thing for it, for both this and Virtuosity have significant post-credit scenes).
Next?
There are a few moments in my life that I can remember a significant paradigm shift in how I approach filmmaking. The first was when I saw Kenneth Anger’s Scorpio Rising and Robert Downey, Sr.’s Chafed Elbows on the same day. That pretty much blew the roof of the sucker. The next time was many many years later when I saw Outerspace by Peter Tscherkassky, which has to be one of the best movies ever made. EVER. Period. EVER. Soon after Outerspace was Figure/Ground (The Snowman) by Phil Solomon. Both Tscherkassky and Solomon continue to make awe-inspiring films and every single one that I have seen has been a jaw-dropping experience.
I really enjoy remembering specific scenes from films. Every year a group of friends and I make a top ten list like most cinephiles world-wide, but we have additional categories like: best scene and best moment. These are sometimes from films that don’t even make the top ten, though most of the time the level of filmmaking shines through in all aspects. One example that comes to mind immediately is from Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, when Li Mu Bai (I believe) is hopping across the water. It’s one of Lee’s masterful poetic asides from a film filled with them, and something about that one moment in particular stands out. I would also argue that the “baptism” scene in There Will Be Blood is one of the most memorable of that film as well. The former brings together the beauty and simplicity of the filmmaker’s passions with the story of the film while the latter is a prime example of throughly drawn and acted characters coming head-to-head in a pivotal moment in the narrative. Great filmmakers can create moments of pure brilliance from their already great films, though decent filmmakers can also achieve moments of greatness in otherwise mediocre films; it is these moments that stay with us forever.
They seem to have the same number as the corresponding sd-dvd release. See http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare3/chungkingexpress.htm for a comparison review of Chunking Express. If there ever is a time that Criterion releases a blu-ray without an sd-dvd complement, now that’s another question.
Zilla, mad props for Mt. Zion, definitely one of the best albums of the year, top five, if not top two in my opinion.
I would have to add:
Harvey Milk’s Life… The Best Game in Town
Gojira’s The Way of All Flesh
Ascend’s Ample Fire Within
Sunn O)))‘s Domkirke
Cult of Luna’s Eternal Kingdom
The Mars Volta’s The Bedlam in Goliath
The LA SunnO))) show was fantastic!!! It was inside an old cavernous abandoned theatre downtown—the Regent. They played a pretty long show. Completely body-shaking. There’s a boot somewhere out there in the ethernets, the dude in front of me was recording it.
I’ve always liked the title How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman, though I’ve never seen the film. I’ve also always loved Puce Moment. I agree with the late Bunuel, brilliant titles. Also Kuchar, nice one Kevin!
John Weise and Eagle Twin opened. I don’t know a lot of Weise, but his set (about 30m) was pretty awesome, mostly voice samples with a little guitar here and there. It ended up sounding like a Tibetan Buddhist chant. Eagle Twin—Gentry Densley’s new two-piece—was pretty freakin’ amazing. I could have listened to them for another hour, I can’t wait to hear their album next spring.
Finally Netflix is going to be Mac friendly. (It took them long enough.) I “rent” between three to six movies from Netflix a week and rarely do I have an issue with movies being delayed. The worst was Mad Men disc 1, which seemed to take forever, but my que is quite long and I play the shuffle game to kill time, going through my list and deciding that I haven’t heard of that film, I wonder why I put it in my que, let’s get it!
Early Argento titles are also really great: Four Flies on Grey Velvet and The Bird With The Crystal Plumage, most of the Italian giallo and horror titles are really great, actually. Fulci’s A Cat In the Brain, Murder-Rock: Dancing Death (aka Slashdance), Murder To the Tune of Seven Black Notes, and Don’t Torture a Duckling. I agree that Herzog always has some good ones too: The Strange Ecstasy of Woodcarver Steiner, Lessons of Darkness, and Little Dieter Needs to Fly.
Aaron, interesting query about the title sequence vs. cold openings. I think of Fight Club for a title sequence that is essential for contextualizing what you are about to witness. On the other end of the spectrum is Contempt, a truly great title sequence placing the viewer into what we are about to see—even the pre-“credit” sequence of Bardot, though Godard didn’t want to shoot it, speaks to the rest of the film beautifully. Ironically, the only “cold open” credit-less film that I can think of right now is Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, though the opening of that, while credit-less, does stand apart as a pre-credit sequence, showing a possible historic birth of Freddy Kreugar’s evil.
I think that a lot can be told in an opening that either stands seemingly apart from the film proper—be it in a title sequence or a pre-credit sequence—that can’t be told in the narrative itself.
I remember being confused by the Andrei Rublev opening when I first saw it, I initially thought that it was the wrong film (!), but it seems to amplify the rest of the movie. It is as out of time as, seemingly, Rublev is, wandering, expecting to go someplace specific, but ending up elsewhere completely. Pasolini’s Oedipus Rex, I also find has this sense of timelessness—a lot of Pasolini and Fellini, too, especially Satyricon and 8 1/2.
Here are ten movies that I would put down almost anything to watch at the drop of a hat (self-imposed rules are that it has to be a feature-length and only one film per director—i.e. even though I would love to put two or three Leone, Lynch, Kubrick, Kurosawa, Ozu, Godard, etc. I will limit myself to one):
Lost Highway
Playtime
Contempt
Once Upon A Time In the West
Le Circle Rouge
The Big Lebowski
Velvet Goldmine
American Psycho
High and Low
The Flavor of Green Tea Over Rice
Forgive me if someone has asked this before, but some of these posts are a bit long-winded and I browsed through some, but David K., the most important question that you should be asking is what type of film interests you the most?
If you are interested most in the traditional three-act narrative, or want to get into a mainstream narrative-driven film market, there’s no better place for you than film school from day one through grad school. Get in somewhere like UCLA, USC or AFI for grad school and you’ll come out ready to work on commercial shoots and music videos from day one. Then maybe you’ll get noticed if you work well and eventually make it onto a feature film.
I think what some of the people here are saying when they say forgo film school, is that they do not necessarily see the benefit in becoming another drone for the film industry since some of their favorite films may be attacks on the narrative structure that Hollywood was based on (neo-realism, French new wave, early American independents). I’m not making judgments here, simply stating facts. If you want to do narrative filmmaking in the vein of Hitchcock or Wes Anderson then this is certainly the route for you. You will most likely not be able to make it into the industry any other way (unless you have a script that everyone is slobbering over). You need to learn the ropes of the beast and these schools are really the only way for an outsider.
Having said that, and seeing that you are looking into Tisch and Toronto, perhaps the next logical question is going to be: will you settle for working a 9-5 day-job and every now and again making some indie films that may or may not get picked up for nationwide distribution? If the answer is yes, then by all means look into these schools.
The final option for schools is for the artists who don’t care that their films will or will not get distribution. They are happy to play the festival circuit and build a minor following that way. If this is the route for you, find a dayjob that you will be happy at, buy some equipment for yourself (a Bolex, some lights, a sound recorder and mic, a tripod), go get yourself a liberal arts education at a school that has some kind of film department (there are a lot of good SUNY schools that do) so that you can survive in the real world and go to film graduate school at an arts intitution (CalArts, SFAI, MassArt, etc.) so that you can make contacts with fellow-minded colleagues and professors who will be your artistic base for the rest of your life.
Full disclosure, I chose the latter route (Sarah Lawrence College, Post-Baccalaureate program at School of Museum of Fine Arts Boston, graduate program at CalArts) because I make experimental films. There is no place for me in the industry where I wouldn’t feel like shooting myself after a year or two.
Find where your passion lies and head in that direction. As long as you are happy with what you are doing and following your true dreams then there is no wrong in where you are at.
12-year old asking... over 3 years ago
Ryan, I love the enthusiasm.
My Life As A Dog is a must. It still inhabits my daily dream-space. For Kurosawa I would second, of course, Ran and Throne of Blood, but am surprised that no one has mentioned his noir films, which I think are stellar, esp. The Bad Sleep Well and High and Low (probably my favorite Kurosawa). Essentially with him you cannot go wrong. Even his minor films have amazing qualities (see Sanshiro Sugata). I would also recommend Dreams, but come back to that again when you’re older. I was 9 when I first saw Dreams when it was released theatrically, and I knew it was powerful stuff, and again some of those images will stay with me forever, but it wasn’t until years later when I was able to catch a screening at MoMA that I was able to delve into some of the particulars.
Let me put my experience with Fellini this way: Satyricon was my first Fellini when I was 12 or 13 and is still my favorite. I like his other work much less having seen that first. I recently saw that again in a theatrical screening and it is still the halcyon insanity that he was never able to replicate.
L’Eclisse and Blow Up are probably my favorite Antonioni, but I do agree that some of his work is a little mature, but don’t let that put you off, see it and if you don’t like it come back to it again in a few years. Blow Up is probably his most accessible, and so a good place to start.
Truffaut, for me, is a loss. I enjoyed Small Change in a French class in jr. high school, but have not really liked any of his other films. Large caveat: I have not yet seen Shoot the Piano Player (I’m afraid of not liking it, in all honesty), but for my money Godard and Melville are where it’s at. Breathless is obviously a good place to start, and you can’t go wrong with Jean Seberg and Jean-Paul Belmondo; but Weekend, another film I saw at 12-13, is a pinnacle. Also check out Le Circle Rouge—the opening of that film is simply astounding.
I would recommend looking into the films of Kenneth Anger and Stan Brakhage as well for other directions that cinema can take you. I would heartily recommend Cocteau as well.
Happy viewing!
Go to Comment
When I say "A Perfect Film", What One Film Pops Into Your Head First? over 3 years ago
Claire Dolan by Lodge Kerrigan is the first to spring to mind (though his Keane also springs to mind). The Pillow Book and Primer follow closely behind this evening. Ran, too springs to mind. I feel that with all of these films, every aspect of them are at the highest level that they can possibly be. They are true unfiltered representations of the filmmaker’s artistic vision.
Go to Comment
When I say "A Perfect Film", What One Film Pops Into Your Head First? over 3 years ago
I wanted to post without reading anyone else’s, so after going through I have to say that I can’t believe that I forgot about Mirror and Touch of Evil. Both favorites. Major props with The Brown Bunny! And of course I also forgot La Circle Rouge as well. I’m glad Tarr is on here as well as Malik—I am waiting for a blu-ray Thin Red Line (easily one of the best war films ever).
Go to Comment
Kenneth Anger Anyone? over 3 years ago
I love Anger. Dru, no need to have grievances with The Auteurs at this young age. I’d love to see some more representation of avant-garde filmmakers: Tscherkassky, Arnold, Snow, Benning, Bromberg, Connor, Bokanowski, Fishinger, Kren, the list goes on…and on…and on…
Go to Comment
Haneke...split decision over 3 years ago
I first saw the original Funny Games on video and was tortured as to whether or not I thought it was a good film. It was either amazing and I wasn’t there yet, or it was god awful, but I couldn’t get it out of my head. I went on to be subjected to The Seventh Continent a few years later and thought that Haneke was one of the worst filmmakers out there, but again I couldn’t get the ending of the film out of my head. I was annoyed by having to sit through the mundane and seemingly endless interactions between people who I didn’t feel any sympathy for and who I thought were awful actors. I had read good reviews about Code: Unknown, and so went to see that theatrically and was less than impressed, but thought that it at least had more going on than his previous films, but I agreed with J. Hoberman’s (was it?) review in the “Voice” when he said that the most disturbing section of the film is not anything that happens visually on-screen, but when Binoche is ironing and the soundtrack has the argument/physical abuse of a neighbor couple. This moment may have been the defining moment in my understanding of Haneke, but I don’t believe that I consciously decided that I understood him, for when I saw The Piano Teacher I still didn’t like it for the very same reasons (didn’t care about the characters, bad acting).
Then came Time of the Wolf which is one of the best post-apocalyptic films—presaging The Road by a few years (I have to think that McCarthy has seen Time of the Wolf). I cared about the characters, I thought the acting magnificent and I was wholly impressed with the leap in maturity in the film. Then came Cache, which I think is one of the best films in the last ten years. It is absolutely riveting and truly amazing.
I suppose what I am getting at here is this: does anyone else see a split in Haneke? Are his early films problematic? Has he matured in such leaps and bounds? I will add that Funny Games US I believe to be brilliant and I can’t wait for Das Weisse Band. I have really hesitated to go back to his early films, and so I guess I wanted others to weigh-in and see what you think about Haneke in general, if there is a favorite (strange word to use, I guess) film of his for you or if you truly despise him?
Go to Comment
What is Kubrick's Most Under-Appreciated Film? over 3 years ago
I was scared reading the first few comments not to see Barry Lyndon on there, isn’t that just proof that it is the most under-appreciated of Kubrick’s work? When someone can say that The Shining is under-appreciated (though he makes a decent argument), Barry Lyndon falls off the map for both audience and critic discussion. So I am glad to see all the Lyndon-ites speak up here on the lower section of this post. Definitely my number one.
Having said that, I have to take direct contest with what Rollie Schott’s evaluation of FMJ. I believe that a large part of why FMJ is so masterful is because it is a representation of what the soldiers go through. The most exciting and enjoyable part of the film is the first third because there is so much that the soldiers don’t know, there are so many possibilities, and while they are in a hellish environment, it is still a boy’s club, it is still a summer camp mentality. They are having fun, so we are having fun. Obviously that all ends when Pvt. Pyle kills himself and we are woken up to reality. The audience follows the characters descent into—not hell, because that’s not really what it is, but—purgatory; the same thing every day. New dead bodies, hopefully not yours, but that’s the only thing that changes—the faces. Even after the story picks up again in the last third, when we have another building up of tension with the sniper, it ends up being just another day, just another inhumane incident. By this time neither the audience nor the characters really have the heart left to be able to mourn the fact that they just killed a teenage girl. Ultimately even Joker isn’t able to hold on to the passion of his convictions.
The film ends with a bit of a confusing moment of the platoon walking along, singing the theme song to the Mickey Mouse club. Honestly, at first I thought that this was kind of a “happy ending” moment to give the audience something upbeat to walk out to, then there was the ironic reaction to it, that surrounded by all this killing, these men are reverting back to childhood, but I think it goes beyond both of these. I believe that there is nothing left. It’s another moment of nihilism in a long line of nothing. There was no preparing for the war, there was no preparing for what the soldiers would be forced to endure and enact, and in the end there is nothing. While these men were being massacred (physically and mentally), the people at home (at least at the beginning of the war) were joyfully spending their days as they always had. They were watching Mickey Mouse and other entertainment, hiding from the truths of the world so they wouldn’t have to worry about anything. What Kubrick is able to do with FMJ, is to make the audience actually experience some of what the soldiers did. By having to sit through the mundane, by having to see these horrors and how they ultimately no longer affect the soldiers, we are transformed at the end of the film. Mickey Mouse is no longer a cute song. We have passed through the looking-glass and can not see the innocence any longer. We began the film watching the entertainment, and ended enduring the hardships.
This is what Kubrick is doing in all of his films: attempting to wake his audience up, to make them actually see what is surrounding them. Yes, perhaps “Clockwork” is crypto- or proto-fascist, but it ultimately is asking the viewer to take sides. He is not saying that this is good or bad, he is showing the desire and the revulsion and leaving it up to the audience to say I want to be a Droog or not. This is the main reason why it was banned in the UK, and why Kubrick went along with the ban. He may have seen that he stepped too far. He did not give the audience a lifeline, he assumed that his viewers would be intelligent enough to be able to decide for themselves. He did what most filmmakers would be too scared to do, he made movies for the elites, for the cinephiles, he did not stoop to the lowest common denominator, which is why EWS is so underrated as well. Whether or not it is a complete vision, it is at least 95% there, and I think a telling swan song.
Go to Comment
Haneke...split decision over 3 years ago
It’s not that I am annoyed by the mundane, just the opposite. I believe I was also speaking towards my own maturation towards Haneke, and was wondering if anyone else had substinative issues with him upon first take. I also wonder if there is anyone who loved him at first. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would say that Haneke is one of their favorite filmmakers right off the bat. I can appreciate his style, I can appreciate his attitude and approach, but it is not something that I felt comfortable with. I believe that my excuses of bad acting and the intolerable mundane were only logical ways of treating the subject matter (in the case of The Seventh Continent to be sure). I did mention that he is a favorite of mine at this point (I suppose in a roundabout way, though) and myself of ten years ago would be shocked to hear that. BTW Kieran, awards and nominations a good film/actor do not make (Life is Beautiful, anyone? Cinema Paradiso? Titanic?), but that notwithstanding I definitely also agree with E.H.L.
Go to Comment
Age / Level of education? (An informal poll) over 3 years ago
27 mfa in film/video
Go to Comment
Your Favorite Godard Film? over 3 years ago
I adore Weekend and Le Mepris. King Richard is really great, as, of course, is Breathless. I also love l’histoire(s) du Cinema as well as Helas Pour Moi, JLG/JLG, Nouvelle Vague and a smattering of his Vertov group films, especially Le Vent d’est.
Go to Comment
Classic movies you can't get on d.v.d. over 3 years ago
The Swimmer was available at one point, don’t know if it’s oop now, though.
I’d love to see the recent Greenaway and Ferrara get onto disc—at lest three or four movies each that haven’t found a US distro.
More Ozu is always nice, but we’re catching up with that (thanks criterion and eclipse).
Warhol, Bruce Conner, Michael Snow, any of the seminal 50s-00s experimental filmmakers, really.
Go to Comment
Movie's you just don't like. over 3 years ago
I seem to have an aversion to Charlie Kaufman, Being JM and Confessions of A Dangerous Mind are the only films scripted by him that I like, but his others are atrocious. I have yet to find a way into The Seventh Seal, though I don’t know if I’d say that I don’t like it…. yes, right now I would.
Go to Comment
CONFESSIONS--FILMS YOU ARE ASHAMED TO SAY YOU HAVE NOT SEEN (YET) over 3 years ago
Jennifer—“2001” is meant to be seen on a big screen, so if you’re in a major urban city and can wait for the (usual) yearly or bi-yearly screening, I would recommend doing that. If, however, you cannot, see it anyway. I first saw it on a small tv (letterboxed) and it only grows in stature. Ditto: “Lawrence of Arabia”, “Playtime”, “Vertigo”. Actually, these are all must 70mm screenings (esp. “Playtime”).
I have a huge hole where Bergman should be, but I’m weary. I’ve seen The Seventh Seal, and really didn’t care for it. I know I like Bergman in concept: isolated, cold, austere, cerebral, subtle, but I haven’t gotten beyond my hesitation to engage. It’s not like I don’t own enough Bergman, which is the other shameful part of it!
Go to Comment
Directors that consistently make terrible films over 3 years ago
Antoine, I would only pose a question as to Scorsese simply because I think he still has a passion for the art. Spielberg, Lucas and Coppola no longer seem to share that passion—their passion, when it rears its ugly head is for the money and fame primarily. Scorsese’s Hollywood films are not god-awful nor are they great. They’re good. I hated Gangs, but I blame the Weinstein’s for that. Please, someday let Scorsese’s original edit out of the closet. The best thing that film had going for it was the side dramas around the edges of the main story, and that’s what got cut. I agree that Scorsese’s treading a narrow path that could have him fall into the hands of the cult of Lucas. He needs to remember what Cassavetes told him: “Martin, you just spend a year of your life making shit!” and come back to his own projects. Say what you will about post-GoodFellas Scorsese, I think Bringing Out the Dead is one of the most overlooked films in his oevure. Casino is an excellent film and I think that Kundun is easily pushed to the wayside when it should be seen much more.
David Lee, you may be correct about the first twenty minutes of Saving Private Ryan, but did you forget the remaining two hours? Pure drivel. As an extravaganza filmmaker Spielberg is pretty okay. Jaws is really good, as is Close Encounters (original edit only), and Raiders. Everything else is passable at best or simply offensive at worst (I put all of his dramas in this latter category).
Go to Comment
FAVORITE SILENT FILMS/DIRECTORS over 3 years ago
Lang, definitely, especially Spies and Dr. Mabuse.
Griffith, especially Broken Blossoms.
Dreyer, especially Vampyr.
I want to see more Sjostrom—I’ve only had the opportunity to see The Phantom Carriage.
Eisenstein, Vertov, Pudovkin, Dovzhenko are all incredible filmmakers and any of their silent films are worthwhile, I believe. I am trying unsuccessfully to remember the name of a Ukranian filmmakerwho was working in the 50s or 60s ostensibly making silent films, though I belive he put them to a classical score. He made cinemascope black-and-white films, one is about swans. Anyone??
Go to Comment
Which Movies Have You Walked Out On? over 3 years ago
Since jr. high, I have had a theory about really really bad movies. I call it the Potato Scene theory. The first horrendous film that I can remember seeing in the theatre was Pet Sematary II. I was groaning the whole way through, though never thought to walk out. At some point in the film there is a crash on a local highway with a potato truck and one of the characters’ cars. There is one shot where the camera begins in a close up of a foot sticking out of a pile of potatoes. It holds for a second or two and just before it cranes up, a small line of blood trickles down the ankle. For whatever reason, perhaps the fact that this was actually the only piece of cinematic craftsmanship in an otherwise garbage film, I came up with this idea that even in the worst piece of drivel there is a Potato Scene, which, while it may not redeem the film, at least makes one thing in it good. As I’ve grown up I have had less and less patience for bad films—or perhaps there have more and more truly horrendous ones (thanks Abrahams and Zucker bros. for your “protogees” work, I mean… shit)—so I have seen fewer of them. I don’t know if this theory holds true for every bad film, because I cannot find any redeeming qualities in Haggis’ Crash—which should be stripped of its title so people stop confusing it with the real Crash.
At any rate, because of this theory, I had sworn to myself never to walk out on a movie because instead of writing the whole thing off, I would at least be able to focus on one decent thing in the film. I have tried to stick to this, and honestly cannot remember any film that I have walked out on. I really wanted to bail on Starship Troopers, but my friend and I decided to just lampoon it for the running time, much to the dismay, I’m sure, of the rest of the audience. But I do thank the heavens for dvds where I can just use the 16x or 32x ffw to run through those bad films.
I just have one more example for you about the Potato Scene to put it into more recent context. Secret Window—R.S. Brown, indeed a truly truly bad film—has one of the best one-line deliveries of Depp’s career. He has just driven to his old house which his ex-wife now owns (I think I’m getting this correct). And he’s standing there across the street from it. The camera holds on him in 3/4 profile with the house in the background and he says, simply: “This is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife.”
Go to Comment
Post-credit scenes over 3 years ago
I’m sure imdb and wikipedia have a whole list of movies that have scenes at the end of the last credit roll, but I don’t want to be that lazy to look them up. I want to put it to you, those credit-watchers out there, what is your most favorite post-credit scene—or just list a movie that has them. I will put up Hideaway (Brett Leonard seems to have a thing for it, for both this and Virtuosity have significant post-credit scenes).
Next?
Go to Comment
Films that changed how you looked at cinema over 3 years ago
There are a few moments in my life that I can remember a significant paradigm shift in how I approach filmmaking. The first was when I saw Kenneth Anger’s Scorpio Rising and Robert Downey, Sr.’s Chafed Elbows on the same day. That pretty much blew the roof of the sucker. The next time was many many years later when I saw Outerspace by Peter Tscherkassky, which has to be one of the best movies ever made. EVER. Period. EVER. Soon after Outerspace was Figure/Ground (The Snowman) by Phil Solomon. Both Tscherkassky and Solomon continue to make awe-inspiring films and every single one that I have seen has been a jaw-dropping experience.
Go to Comment
Scenes you remember without effort over 3 years ago
I really enjoy remembering specific scenes from films. Every year a group of friends and I make a top ten list like most cinephiles world-wide, but we have additional categories like: best scene and best moment. These are sometimes from films that don’t even make the top ten, though most of the time the level of filmmaking shines through in all aspects. One example that comes to mind immediately is from Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, when Li Mu Bai (I believe) is hopping across the water. It’s one of Lee’s masterful poetic asides from a film filled with them, and something about that one moment in particular stands out. I would also argue that the “baptism” scene in There Will Be Blood is one of the most memorable of that film as well. The former brings together the beauty and simplicity of the filmmaker’s passions with the story of the film while the latter is a prime example of throughly drawn and acted characters coming head-to-head in a pivotal moment in the narrative. Great filmmakers can create moments of pure brilliance from their already great films, though decent filmmakers can also achieve moments of greatness in otherwise mediocre films; it is these moments that stay with us forever.
Go to Comment
the movies in My Style / Profile Images over 3 years ago
I thought #5 was Full Metal Jacket as well.
Go to Comment
Post-credit scenes over 3 years ago
F.B. is classic. I also love Gremlins 2.
Go to Comment
OKAY...I'M PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS BUT... over 3 years ago
They seem to have the same number as the corresponding sd-dvd release. See http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare3/chungkingexpress.htm for a comparison review of Chunking Express. If there ever is a time that Criterion releases a blu-ray without an sd-dvd complement, now that’s another question.
Go to Comment
Top Albums of the Year (aka What rocks your ipod) 2008 over 3 years ago
Zilla, mad props for Mt. Zion, definitely one of the best albums of the year, top five, if not top two in my opinion.
I would have to add:
Harvey Milk’s Life… The Best Game in Town
Gojira’s The Way of All Flesh
Ascend’s Ample Fire Within
Sunn O)))‘s Domkirke
Cult of Luna’s Eternal Kingdom
The Mars Volta’s The Bedlam in Goliath
Go to Comment
Top Albums of the Year (aka What rocks your ipod) 2008 over 3 years ago
The LA SunnO))) show was fantastic!!! It was inside an old cavernous abandoned theatre downtown—the Regent. They played a pretty long show. Completely body-shaking. There’s a boot somewhere out there in the ethernets, the dude in front of me was recording it.
Go to Comment
Best title over 3 years ago
I’ve always liked the title How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman, though I’ve never seen the film. I’ve also always loved Puce Moment. I agree with the late Bunuel, brilliant titles. Also Kuchar, nice one Kevin!
Go to Comment
Top Albums of the Year (aka What rocks your ipod) 2008 over 3 years ago
John Weise and Eagle Twin opened. I don’t know a lot of Weise, but his set (about 30m) was pretty awesome, mostly voice samples with a little guitar here and there. It ended up sounding like a Tibetan Buddhist chant. Eagle Twin—Gentry Densley’s new two-piece—was pretty freakin’ amazing. I could have listened to them for another hour, I can’t wait to hear their album next spring.
Go to Comment
Netflix; frustrations with over 3 years ago
Finally Netflix is going to be Mac friendly. (It took them long enough.) I “rent” between three to six movies from Netflix a week and rarely do I have an issue with movies being delayed. The worst was Mad Men disc 1, which seemed to take forever, but my que is quite long and I play the shuffle game to kill time, going through my list and deciding that I haven’t heard of that film, I wonder why I put it in my que, let’s get it!
Go to Comment
Best title over 3 years ago
Early Argento titles are also really great: Four Flies on Grey Velvet and The Bird With The Crystal Plumage, most of the Italian giallo and horror titles are really great, actually. Fulci’s A Cat In the Brain, Murder-Rock: Dancing Death (aka Slashdance), Murder To the Tune of Seven Black Notes, and Don’t Torture a Duckling. I agree that Herzog always has some good ones too: The Strange Ecstasy of Woodcarver Steiner, Lessons of Darkness, and Little Dieter Needs to Fly.
Go to Comment
Best or Favorite Opening Sequence over 3 years ago
Aaron, interesting query about the title sequence vs. cold openings. I think of Fight Club for a title sequence that is essential for contextualizing what you are about to witness. On the other end of the spectrum is Contempt, a truly great title sequence placing the viewer into what we are about to see—even the pre-“credit” sequence of Bardot, though Godard didn’t want to shoot it, speaks to the rest of the film beautifully. Ironically, the only “cold open” credit-less film that I can think of right now is Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, though the opening of that, while credit-less, does stand apart as a pre-credit sequence, showing a possible historic birth of Freddy Kreugar’s evil.
I think that a lot can be told in an opening that either stands seemingly apart from the film proper—be it in a title sequence or a pre-credit sequence—that can’t be told in the narrative itself.
I remember being confused by the Andrei Rublev opening when I first saw it, I initially thought that it was the wrong film (!), but it seems to amplify the rest of the movie. It is as out of time as, seemingly, Rublev is, wandering, expecting to go someplace specific, but ending up elsewhere completely. Pasolini’s Oedipus Rex, I also find has this sense of timelessness—a lot of Pasolini and Fellini, too, especially Satyricon and 8 1/2.
Go to Comment
What's your Top 10? over 3 years ago
Here are ten movies that I would put down almost anything to watch at the drop of a hat (self-imposed rules are that it has to be a feature-length and only one film per director—i.e. even though I would love to put two or three Leone, Lynch, Kubrick, Kurosawa, Ozu, Godard, etc. I will limit myself to one):
Lost Highway
Playtime
Contempt
Once Upon A Time In the West
Le Circle Rouge
The Big Lebowski
Velvet Goldmine
American Psycho
High and Low
The Flavor of Green Tea Over Rice
Go to Comment
Film School over 3 years ago
Forgive me if someone has asked this before, but some of these posts are a bit long-winded and I browsed through some, but David K., the most important question that you should be asking is what type of film interests you the most?
If you are interested most in the traditional three-act narrative, or want to get into a mainstream narrative-driven film market, there’s no better place for you than film school from day one through grad school. Get in somewhere like UCLA, USC or AFI for grad school and you’ll come out ready to work on commercial shoots and music videos from day one. Then maybe you’ll get noticed if you work well and eventually make it onto a feature film.
I think what some of the people here are saying when they say forgo film school, is that they do not necessarily see the benefit in becoming another drone for the film industry since some of their favorite films may be attacks on the narrative structure that Hollywood was based on (neo-realism, French new wave, early American independents). I’m not making judgments here, simply stating facts. If you want to do narrative filmmaking in the vein of Hitchcock or Wes Anderson then this is certainly the route for you. You will most likely not be able to make it into the industry any other way (unless you have a script that everyone is slobbering over). You need to learn the ropes of the beast and these schools are really the only way for an outsider.
Having said that, and seeing that you are looking into Tisch and Toronto, perhaps the next logical question is going to be: will you settle for working a 9-5 day-job and every now and again making some indie films that may or may not get picked up for nationwide distribution? If the answer is yes, then by all means look into these schools.
The final option for schools is for the artists who don’t care that their films will or will not get distribution. They are happy to play the festival circuit and build a minor following that way. If this is the route for you, find a dayjob that you will be happy at, buy some equipment for yourself (a Bolex, some lights, a sound recorder and mic, a tripod), go get yourself a liberal arts education at a school that has some kind of film department (there are a lot of good SUNY schools that do) so that you can survive in the real world and go to film graduate school at an arts intitution (CalArts, SFAI, MassArt, etc.) so that you can make contacts with fellow-minded colleagues and professors who will be your artistic base for the rest of your life.
Full disclosure, I chose the latter route (Sarah Lawrence College, Post-Baccalaureate program at School of Museum of Fine Arts Boston, graduate program at CalArts) because I make experimental films. There is no place for me in the industry where I wouldn’t feel like shooting myself after a year or two.
Find where your passion lies and head in that direction. As long as you are happy with what you are doing and following your true dreams then there is no wrong in where you are at.
Go to Comment