“Lessons Of Darkness”; a film which annihilates the distinction between reality and fiction more powerfully than any of his other “documentaries” (which is indeed a problematic term, but for many more documentary filmmakers than just Herzog; I am hard pressed to think of a filmmaker who couldn’t be accused of fictionalizing his subjects in some way). The collision between the absolute reality of the images and the absolute fantasy of the narration creates a picture which is neither here nor there, and exists in the kind of in between place that not only stimulates, but confronts the mind. To top it off, the moment in which the cigarette is thrown is the single most powerful image in Herzog’s body of work.
Rivette, more Chris Marker, Monte Hellman’s Acid Westerns, Mann’s “Desperate” and “Men in War”, Alain Robbe-Grillet, Chabrol (especially “Les Bonnes Femmes”), Jean Rouch, Roger Corman’s “The Trip” and “The Intruder”…
My experience has been that generally, the shorter films are superior to the features. The features can become, well, rather arduous. That being said, “Chelsea Girls” is excellent very much worth seeing, despite the run time. I’d love to get my hands on “Poor Little Rich Girl”…
If any body lives in or around Pittsburgh, The Andy Warhol Museum (big surprise), screens his films regularly, and gets my strong recommendation.
“Masculine Feminine”
The first Godard film I ever saw; in a cinema and not knowing at all what to expect. It was a great liberation to me- the use of text, film as comment rather than illustration, exploration of emotions without becoming subservient to them…
Each subsequent Godard has effected me in different ways (the next two on my list for changing my views on cinema would be “Week End” and “First Name: Carmen”), but none have ever had the ice-water shock of that first viewing.
“Glen or Glenda?”
I saw this when I was very young, 10 or so. I saw it shortly after seeing “Plan 9”, which I sought out because of my already well cultivated taste in old low-budget sci-fi and horror (Thank you, MST3K, for giving me access to such marginalized beauty). My primary cinematic interests at this time were The Twilight Zone and 30s Universal horror, which I was eased into during countless hours of late night TV. A feeling I relished at the time was the occasional lapses of logic, the world of absolute confusion and nonsense that I could be flung into by these films. “Glen or Glenda?” is that sensation, incessant and concrete, for its entire running time. It is suddenly 3 AM, no matter what time you view the film.
“In A Lonely Place”
I viewed it, and realized what it meant for a film to be perfect. The rare film that can still bring me to tears, no matter how many times I view it; not only due to its content, but its form, the way it moves, the way it sounds; a film which has always felt to me to be as much about the individual viewing it as it is about the characters within it, or the director who made it.
Clint Eastwood-
Perhaps “lost it” is a little bit extreme, but his recent efforts strike me as entertaining and well-crafted, although much less interesting than his work from the 70s-90s. I would pinpoint “Unforgiven” as a high point, and perhaps “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” as the beginning of a falling away.
Wes Anderson-
“Bottle Rocket” is all potential, “Rushmore” is excellent, and everything after that is a slow slide into the disjointed, wanna-be intellectual/spiritual mess that is “The Darjeeling Limited”.
In response to Almodovar: I don’t think you could be more wrong about Godard. While there is a magic in the films with Karina, I certainly don’t think that are “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” or “Week End” failures because they lack her presence. For that matter, isolating Godard to the 60s is a mistake, as it overlooks masterpieces such as “First Name: Carmen”, “Passion”, “Nouvelle Vague” and "Historie(s) du Cinema.
Not to attack you, but people dismissing mid and late Godard is a major pet peeve of mine.
Ed Gordon—- Care to justify your statement about Morris? I think “Fog of War” is arguably the best film of his career; even if one doesn’t go that far, it is certainly stands up next to “Gates of Heaven” or “The Thin Blue Line”…
In defense of recent Allen:
I actually believe that the 90s were a weak time for him, but, with the exception of “Scoop” (which is awful) his recent career seems to imply new possibilities and vitality. “Cassandra’s Dream” and “Vicky Christina Barcelona” are both flawed, but possess an energy and originality (that is, not merely rehashing previous jokes), that has long been absent from Allen. And, in my opinion, “Match Point” is probably one of his 5 or 6 finest films, both for its immaculate structure and for its content— An Allen comedy that doesn’t include punchlines! Satire through action and behavior rather than writer commentary. It’s like “Manhattan” with murder.
Anything that brings him farther away from making atrocities such as “Anything Else” or “The Curse of the Jade Scorpion” are good in my book.
A pretty solid list, fairly conservative both with a few strong inclusions that are too often neglected. It was nice to see Jean Eustache on the list, but where is the Rivette? Come on Cashiers, he was one of your greatest critics, and went on to be one of the countries greatest directors!
Good to see Nick Ray so high on the list (he should be even higher), although there are a few films I would pick before I got to “Johnny Guitar”, despite its excellence.
I’d like to counter Iliveinfear by saying that I am in full support of the inclusion of “The Barefoot Countessa”. A film that should be viewed infinitely more, Mankiewitz’s masterpiece.
Seeing a non-restored print of Dreyer’s “The Passion of Joan of Arc” in Italy.
I had only seen the film via Criterion’s DVD, with soundtrack. I convinced my entire family to come out to a late night screening of it. Before the movie was an unsubtitled documentary on nun’s in an Italian convent. We thought it would be a short, but it turned out to be an (extremely boring) feature. Every one was antsy. It seemed like it would never end. Then was “Joan of Arc” started, all the intertitles were in French with italian subtitles. It was completely silent. The rest of my family left in the first 15 minutes, but I stayed.
With no intelligible intertitles or soundtrack, the film became entirely about image. At first I felt disconnected from it, but slowly I sunk into this way of viewing it. Every camera movement and cut became a revelation. Each shot felt like an entire film in and of itself. By the end of the film I was as entirely involved, both emotionally and intellectually, as I had been during previous viewings; yet the experience was entirely different.
The film, while occasionally repulsive, certainly does not deserve its reputation as “one of the most offensive films ever made”. I found it to be a suprisingly intelligent, even delicate film. Having read the novel on which it is based, it is miles away from its source material; where de Sade is wild and indulgent, enjoying every word and texture, assaulting a world he sees as false and repressed, Pasolini seems to be crying out to a world he believes is dying.
de Sade’s novel is about freedom, Pasolini’s film is about the loss of it.
That being said, it is by no means a masterpiece. If you have an interest in Pasolini, Italian or Art Cinema I would reccomend viewing it. If your tastes tend more towards entertainment and craftsmanship, you’ll probably find little of interest, other than some shocking images.
What was the first Criterion movie you watched? over 3 years ago
“Tokyo Drifter”
Go to Comment
When I say "A Perfect Film", What One Film Pops Into Your Head First? over 3 years ago
The answer was immediate for me, and I am surprised it hasn’t been mentioned: Nicholas Ray’s “In A Lonely Place”.
Next in line: Dreyer’s “Ordet”, Cassavetes “Faces”, Bunuel’s “The Exterminating Angel”, and the entirety of Jean Vigo’s cinematic work.
Go to Comment
Favorite Werner Herzog Film over 3 years ago
“Lessons Of Darkness”; a film which annihilates the distinction between reality and fiction more powerfully than any of his other “documentaries” (which is indeed a problematic term, but for many more documentary filmmakers than just Herzog; I am hard pressed to think of a filmmaker who couldn’t be accused of fictionalizing his subjects in some way). The collision between the absolute reality of the images and the absolute fantasy of the narration creates a picture which is neither here nor there, and exists in the kind of in between place that not only stimulates, but confronts the mind. To top it off, the moment in which the cigarette is thrown is the single most powerful image in Herzog’s body of work.
Go to Comment
Movies That Should Be In the Criterion Collection over 3 years ago
Rivette, more Chris Marker, Monte Hellman’s Acid Westerns, Mann’s “Desperate” and “Men in War”, Alain Robbe-Grillet, Chabrol (especially “Les Bonnes Femmes”), Jean Rouch, Roger Corman’s “The Trip” and “The Intruder”…
Go to Comment
Andy Warhol over 3 years ago
My experience has been that generally, the shorter films are superior to the features. The features can become, well, rather arduous. That being said, “Chelsea Girls” is excellent very much worth seeing, despite the run time. I’d love to get my hands on “Poor Little Rich Girl”…
If any body lives in or around Pittsburgh, The Andy Warhol Museum (big surprise), screens his films regularly, and gets my strong recommendation.
Go to Comment
Movies you hated that everyone else loves over 3 years ago
“Lost in Translation” and “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”.
Pathetic. Not just style over substance, but style against substance.
Go to Comment
The longest movie you've ever sat through over 3 years ago
Star Spangled To Death
Go to Comment
Films that changed how you looked at cinema over 3 years ago
“Masculine Feminine”
The first Godard film I ever saw; in a cinema and not knowing at all what to expect. It was a great liberation to me- the use of text, film as comment rather than illustration, exploration of emotions without becoming subservient to them…
Each subsequent Godard has effected me in different ways (the next two on my list for changing my views on cinema would be “Week End” and “First Name: Carmen”), but none have ever had the ice-water shock of that first viewing.
“Glen or Glenda?”
I saw this when I was very young, 10 or so. I saw it shortly after seeing “Plan 9”, which I sought out because of my already well cultivated taste in old low-budget sci-fi and horror (Thank you, MST3K, for giving me access to such marginalized beauty). My primary cinematic interests at this time were The Twilight Zone and 30s Universal horror, which I was eased into during countless hours of late night TV. A feeling I relished at the time was the occasional lapses of logic, the world of absolute confusion and nonsense that I could be flung into by these films. “Glen or Glenda?” is that sensation, incessant and concrete, for its entire running time. It is suddenly 3 AM, no matter what time you view the film.
“In A Lonely Place”
I viewed it, and realized what it meant for a film to be perfect. The rare film that can still bring me to tears, no matter how many times I view it; not only due to its content, but its form, the way it moves, the way it sounds; a film which has always felt to me to be as much about the individual viewing it as it is about the characters within it, or the director who made it.
Go to Comment
Which Film Critics Do You Read? over 3 years ago
Living/Working: Jonathan Rosenbaum, J. Hoberman, A.O. Scott, Dave Kehr, Tim Lucas, Chris Fujiwara.
Dead/Inactive: Manny Farber, Serge Daney, The 50s Cashiers writers.
Also: Alain Silver/James Ursini Commentary Tracks
Go to Comment
Who do you think had it and lost it? When? and Why? over 3 years ago
Clint Eastwood-
Perhaps “lost it” is a little bit extreme, but his recent efforts strike me as entertaining and well-crafted, although much less interesting than his work from the 70s-90s. I would pinpoint “Unforgiven” as a high point, and perhaps “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” as the beginning of a falling away.
Wes Anderson-
“Bottle Rocket” is all potential, “Rushmore” is excellent, and everything after that is a slow slide into the disjointed, wanna-be intellectual/spiritual mess that is “The Darjeeling Limited”.
In response to Almodovar: I don’t think you could be more wrong about Godard. While there is a magic in the films with Karina, I certainly don’t think that are “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” or “Week End” failures because they lack her presence. For that matter, isolating Godard to the 60s is a mistake, as it overlooks masterpieces such as “First Name: Carmen”, “Passion”, “Nouvelle Vague” and "Historie(s) du Cinema.
Not to attack you, but people dismissing mid and late Godard is a major pet peeve of mine.
Go to Comment
Who do you think had it and lost it? When? and Why? over 3 years ago
Ed Gordon—- Care to justify your statement about Morris? I think “Fog of War” is arguably the best film of his career; even if one doesn’t go that far, it is certainly stands up next to “Gates of Heaven” or “The Thin Blue Line”…
In defense of recent Allen:
I actually believe that the 90s were a weak time for him, but, with the exception of “Scoop” (which is awful) his recent career seems to imply new possibilities and vitality. “Cassandra’s Dream” and “Vicky Christina Barcelona” are both flawed, but possess an energy and originality (that is, not merely rehashing previous jokes), that has long been absent from Allen. And, in my opinion, “Match Point” is probably one of his 5 or 6 finest films, both for its immaculate structure and for its content— An Allen comedy that doesn’t include punchlines! Satire through action and behavior rather than writer commentary. It’s like “Manhattan” with murder.
Anything that brings him farther away from making atrocities such as “Anything Else” or “The Curse of the Jade Scorpion” are good in my book.
Go to Comment
Cashiers du Cinema's 100 Greatest Film List over 3 years ago
A pretty solid list, fairly conservative both with a few strong inclusions that are too often neglected. It was nice to see Jean Eustache on the list, but where is the Rivette? Come on Cashiers, he was one of your greatest critics, and went on to be one of the countries greatest directors!
Good to see Nick Ray so high on the list (he should be even higher), although there are a few films I would pick before I got to “Johnny Guitar”, despite its excellence.
I’d like to counter Iliveinfear by saying that I am in full support of the inclusion of “The Barefoot Countessa”. A film that should be viewed infinitely more, Mankiewitz’s masterpiece.
Go to Comment
Films you love but most people hate. over 3 years ago
Godard’s “King Lear”!
Go to Comment
Films you love but most people hate. over 3 years ago
Also: Second the motion on “Fire Walk With Me”— a great film, why do even Lynch fans seem to dismiss it?
Go to Comment
What is your most memorable film going experience? (Only one per post please!) over 3 years ago
It is hard to pick just one, but…
Seeing a non-restored print of Dreyer’s “The Passion of Joan of Arc” in Italy.
I had only seen the film via Criterion’s DVD, with soundtrack. I convinced my entire family to come out to a late night screening of it. Before the movie was an unsubtitled documentary on nun’s in an Italian convent. We thought it would be a short, but it turned out to be an (extremely boring) feature. Every one was antsy. It seemed like it would never end. Then was “Joan of Arc” started, all the intertitles were in French with italian subtitles. It was completely silent. The rest of my family left in the first 15 minutes, but I stayed.
With no intelligible intertitles or soundtrack, the film became entirely about image. At first I felt disconnected from it, but slowly I sunk into this way of viewing it. Every camera movement and cut became a revelation. Each shot felt like an entire film in and of itself. By the end of the film I was as entirely involved, both emotionally and intellectually, as I had been during previous viewings; yet the experience was entirely different.
I doubt I will ever forget that screening.
Go to Comment
Should it be seen? over 3 years ago
The film, while occasionally repulsive, certainly does not deserve its reputation as “one of the most offensive films ever made”. I found it to be a suprisingly intelligent, even delicate film. Having read the novel on which it is based, it is miles away from its source material; where de Sade is wild and indulgent, enjoying every word and texture, assaulting a world he sees as false and repressed, Pasolini seems to be crying out to a world he believes is dying.
de Sade’s novel is about freedom, Pasolini’s film is about the loss of it.
That being said, it is by no means a masterpiece. If you have an interest in Pasolini, Italian or Art Cinema I would reccomend viewing it. If your tastes tend more towards entertainment and craftsmanship, you’ll probably find little of interest, other than some shocking images.
Go to Comment