Foreign Favorites

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Johann
I'm curious what people here think of Peter Greenaway. The man makes my jaw drop with every new film.

---

I like Greenaway's audacious approach to film. On Easter Sunday back in 1990 my wife and I indulged in a huge brunch, then decided to check out a film at an art house in Kansas City. We knew nothing about Greenaway, but the title was enticing. So we saw THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE, AND HER LOVER. That has to be the most bizarre Easter we ever spent. Who can forget the tracking camera, the castrata dishwasher, the white bathroom, and especially the final meal.

I also like PROSPERO'S books. Where else could you see John Gielgud in the buff? Thank God, nowhere!

Greenaway says that his "films have no sell-by date"- meaning they stand outside of time. I buy into that fully. Every time I see one of his movies I get something new out of it. Usually by the fourth viewing I've qualified the whole thing a masterpiece. If I was an actor, I would be moving mountains to be in one of his pictures.

He doesn't appeal to mainstream audiences at all, and at first glance you may be bowled over by seemingly unending pretention. Don't be fooled! Peter is up to something very profound. Like Kubrick, he has a singular vision, and with near-perfect filmmaking/media manipulation he creates films that are by turns fascinating and disturbing.
Nobody has a style like Greenaway, and I don't think anybody can emulate him, either.
I was very happy to hear Vincent Gallo is in his next film. (Buffalo 66 is one of my favorite films- killer photography)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Johann
Yes, Saura's films are difficult to locate. It appears Blood Wedding is the only title of his in my city…

---

It's interesting that some films so readily available in the U.S. aren't available in Canada … and vice-versa. I have been able to buy a number of videos and DVDs from Canadian eBay sources when they were not sold in the regular U.S. markets. However, I would think, besides the two films mentioned by oscar jubis (AY, CARMELA and GOYA IN BORDEAU) you might be able to find TANGO. TANGO is a really imaginative work that Saura made in Argentina -- wonderful concept, stunning cinematography, powerful, but complex story.

I was able to get BLOOD WEDDING on laserdisc through eBay. Later I saw a chance to get the entire trilogy on VHS, so I bid and won. However, what I got was clearly duped. The copies were good, but the seller soon disappeared. CARMEN is the best of the three, and well worth buying even at higher prices. If you watch eBay auctions, you may be able to get a copy without taking out a bank loan. It's worth checking the seller's feedback.

"Come and See" was the most powerful anti-war film I have ever seen in any language.

Most of Tarkovsky's and Eisenstien's films are worthwhile. I love "Alexander Nevsky" with the Prokofiev score.

Bunuel: "Death in the Garden" "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" "The Phantom of Liberty" "Belle de Jour"

What I have seen of Fellini is great, but I have yet to delve too deeply.

No doubt about it, Russia has given us some amazing movies. Eisenstein's Nevsky is bombastic.
Kubrick said Eisenstein's films are all style & no content (with wooden actors), while Chaplin's films are all content and no style. I don't know if I agree with that.
Part of what gives Sergei's movies their power IS the stiff players. And when you consider how much he loved Disney, the films seem that much more poetic. Pudovkin (the first pontiff of editing)is the flip side- he's got a documentary feel with real emotion... Dovzhenko is another innovator who should be getting more notice. Anyone see "Earth"?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by docraven
You mention Saura's Cria and Erice's Spirit of the Beehive, both wonderful films that I've seen both on the big screen and on TV. Saura is one of my favorite directors, but many of his films are not available.

---

I'd like to call your attention to Carlos Saura's BUNUEL AND KING SOLOMON'S TABLE, which I just rented on vhs(eng. subs). Luis Bunuel, near death, is doing pre-production on his final film: Bunuel, Salvador Dali and poet Garcia Lorca meet in Toledo in the 30s to search for a mythical object that confers upon its owner the power to look into the past and into the future. A highly entertaining tale that cleverly incorporates the artistic output of these three masters.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by oscar jubis
I'd like to call your attention to Carlos Saura's BUNUEL AND KING SOLOMON'S …

---

Thanks for the reference … and for your assessment. According to the imdb this has not yet been released in the U.S. I'll be waiting for that, as I'd far rather see it on the big screen in the dark.

We don't get many foreign films here unless they grab a lot of attention. So I've been trying to find it on video, but have been unable to find any information on a commercial VHS or DVD. Do you have any idea who put it out? Is this possibly a Canadian edition?

I read Chris Knipp's review of TALK TO HER, and then talked with a local film house about booking. They are interested in bringing the Almodovar film.

Are you familiar with Lorca? Have you seen any of his stage plays?

I assumed I rented an American release of Saura's Bunuel because of the nice english subs. Turns out, video store owner bought a PAL dvd from Spain(released with eng. subs there) and transfered it to NTSC vhs. I hope it gets released here. He did same with TALK TO HER, further evidence of Almodovar at the peak of his powers. It just destroyed the competition at the European Academy awards last week. I'm glad you'll get to see it the way it was meant to be seen. Cinematographer Aguirresarobe(The Others, All about my mother) is a key collaborator.
I saw a theatre production of Lorca's La Casa de Bernarda Alba in spanish and Saura's adaptation of Blood Wedding. I have not read his poetry though.

>The practice seems to be that if a foreign film is very successful, American movie moguls will remake it with American box office favorites.

And unfortunately they almost always give it the Soderberg treatment (totally dumb it down and hip it up for mass appeal).

>The remake was not a bad film, but it completely lost the magic of the original.

More often they seem in the vein of the Breathless or Diaboliques remake, bad films that not only lose the magic of the original but don't even seem to understand the film they are remaking or why anyone wanted to see it in the first place.

>Objectively, I think Rashomon is his masterpiece.

It should be a great film, but the message is just too simplistic. It seems out to prove everyone doesn't tell the truth, duh, and only concludes with everyone lies.

>That's got subtitles. I hate subtitled movies

My parents crack me up. Neither of them will watch a subtitled movie because then you have to read it, but they won't watch anything but sports without closed captioning so they don't miss any of the lines.

>Critic Jonathan Rosenbaum also blames the poor marketing and distribution of foreign films in the U.S.

The amount of money spent promoting the films generally goes hand in hand with the reciepts because the media is too willing to take money and celeb guests for bestowing false hype and importance and the audience is sucker enough to buy into the you aren't cool unless you've seen this movie bit. Most of the foreign films have get little to no advertising budget (maybe if it's a wider distribution a couple spots will be purchased on Bravo, which seems to get worse by the day) and only play in a few theatres, so they are doomed to make next to nothing theatrically unless they get amazing word of mouth and perform so well in their few theatres that others decide they might be able to make some money off this film.

>It seems that most of the films on folks' lists are the ones available on DVD since repertory theatres disappeared . somewhere in the 80s.

Here are some great ones that aren't on DVD (at least R1)
La Ceremonie
Un coeur en Hiver
Double Vie de Véronique, La (The Double Life of Veronique)
Hitlerjunge Salomon (Europa Europa)
Monsieur Hire
Ete meurtrier, L' (One Deadly Summer)
Maman et la putain, La (The Mother and the Whore)
Les Biches
Ivanovo Detstvo (Ivan's Childhood)
Noz w wodzie (Knife in the Water)
Jeux interdits (Forbidden Games)
Umberto D
Stromboli
Paisa (Paisan)
Napoleon

>Passion of Joan of Arc(Dreyer) is devastating

I prefer Dreyer's Vampyr & Day of Wrath because they are far less clear cut. Joan has better imagery than Wrath, but Dreyer's understanding of the persecution is far greater and more multifaceted. In Joan he basically says she spiritual they dumb, but in Wrath he doesn't settle for an easiliy interpretted situation or simple notions of good and evil. It's not so much about right and wrong, but about all the characters having their reasons for acting as they do. It's much more terrifying when you can understand why characters could or do act in negative/selfish ways than just seeing a faceless mass torment an angel.

>Van Dormael's Toto the hero

I don't remember hearing much good about this film, but unlike the mediocre unoriginal predictable sugar coated Amelie which I heard only good things about, I was really impressed by it's originality, verve, and narrative structure. I thought the end was kinda lacking though. Leolo is a great film that is somewhat similar to this one IMO.

>The way things seem, it's like people are only aware of one Japanese filmmaker

I'm beginning to wonder if the average 12-year-old even knows other countries make films.

>Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee) - Beautiful cinematography and a superb emotional storyline.

This is a good film, but it just seems so overrated like people are under the delusion it's the first martial arts fantasy film or something equally ludicrous. Woo-ping is an amazing choreographer, but other than his work and the cinematography I find this rather lacking. Lee's films always get these reviews like they are so emotional and telling and I just find them to be closer to flat and empty. I think Woo-ping's Twin Warriors is better, it just kills Crouching Tiger in the crazy fight scenes. As far as a Crouching Tiger type film goes, I prefer the Bride with White Hair films because they are more artistic and tell a deeper more emotional story.

>If you liked RUN LOLA, RUN, I suggest you check out THE PRINCESS AND THE WARRIOR -- same director and lead actress.

I prefer Tykwer's Winter Sleepers. It's so beatifully photographed that I can forgive it's problems with character development and direction. The only thing is the film shares some similarity with Egoyan's great Sweet Hereafter and it generally doesn't match up well to it. Medem's Lovers of the Artic Circle is another good one that goes overboard when it comes to chance deciding everyone's fate.

>I'm curious what people here think of Peter Greenaway. The man makes my jaw drop with every new film. He has slowly gotten under my skin to the point where I'm spending a small fortune on materials relating to his art. Dare I say that he is one of the most important "image-makers" in the history of cinema?

Anyone that always takes chances, pushes the envelope, and doesn't require to be liked is likely to be worth watching, but Greenaway's films are about the most interesting contradictions out there. The thing is there's less and less people like Greenaway around because the ratings board is totally clueless and the distributors (outside of some minor labels) are afraid of offending anyone (which is why we never saw Baby of Macon). It's bad enough that the foreign films don't get a fair shake, if any at all, but hell Abel Ferrara can't even get his last 3 films into US theatres.

Mike
Raging Bull Movie Reviews

Sorry, In my opinion Greenaway is a pretentious hack. It's the old story of making films for the audience (since after all movies are viewed by others) vs. making a movie for yourself. In any other artistic medium the artist hopes for a positive response from his audience. I have never understood why it was acceptable for far too many "art house directors" to make unwatchable pretentious garbage and pass it off as film. By that standard, Tom Green's "Freddie Got Fingered" is a masterpiece. Greenaway elevates himself above Green only by keeping a straight face .

>>the mediocre unoriginal predictable sugar coated Amelie<<

I thought Amelie was good. A film need not be a negative, depressing drama about the suffering of the human condition to be a good film.

My favorite films are usually by directors whose primary concern is to adhere to a personal vision. They create images based on subjective aesthetic principles. Films calculated to satisfy an audience are often entertaining and nothing more. I value films that take stabs at greatness and strive for originality, even when they fail. Greenaway's art direction and cinematography are consistent sources of pleasure. I agree that Amelie is a good film. The amount of attention and praise bestowed upon it was undeserved though. Amelie is an entertaining,superbly edited feel-gooder predicated on romanticizing a Paris that no longer exists. A perfect introduction to European film for the novice and reluctant. I just wish CODE UNKNOWN or THE DREAMLIFE OF ANGELS or LA PROMESSE had had half of Amelie's advertising budget.

"RASHOMON seems out to prove everyone doesn't tell the truth, duh, and only concludes with everyone lies." (Raging Bull)
Your statement implies that cinema deserves to be taken seriously. What a film says or means is one of the important questions. The answers will be subjective and varied. I propose that RASHOMON has two primary ideas.
The portion of reality we actually perceive is "filtered" through memory, cognition, language, personality, etc. Of course we lie to others, and to ourselves. What Kurosawa shows is that we cannot avoid "lies" or "untruths" because Truth is beyond our grasp and ability. When Priest says "I have seen hundreds die like animals but this is terrible" he is referring to this uncertainty, this inherent "ignorance". The legal and theological implications are obvious.
There is a second event open to interpretation in Rashomon: the motivation of the person who abandons a baby. The film proposes that human suffering, which is a given, can only be abated through love and sacrifice. The wood dealer decides to adopt the baby, he walks away from Rashomon gate, baby in arms, looking up, a slight but honest smile on his face.End.

Thanks R.B. for your insights, particularly the detailed, thoughtful analysis of MONSIEUR HIRE.

Steve! You've broken my heart!

I understand what you're saying completely about Greenaway. But if I may, I'll try to explain why he ain't a hack. (Prtentious is another story-a newcomer to his films will almost instinctively believe this- I certainly did)

I've read 5 of his screenplays as well as the university texts "Being Naked Playing Dead" and "Museums and Moving Images". From this, I learned that he has very specific aims with the films he makes. He is bored with modern cinema, and he does NOT set out to make films for himself (another thing that's difficult for me to try to explain) I'll give it a stab all in point form.

-almost all of Greenaway's influence can be traced to his education in painting and the films Last Year at Marienbad and The Seventh Seal. He also feels that the greatest filmmaker ever is Eisenstein.

-He is almost pathologically obsessed with lists, maps, organizing schemes, logic-based theories, and numbers. His filmography displays this in abundance.

-His interviews read like university lectures. (Ebert was in awe when he met/talked to him) they are as entertaining as his films to me- He goes off on huge tangents about everything from darwin to Lynch's Blue Velvet.


-He made a short film called "revolution" in the 60's showing riots that were set to The Beatles' song "Revolution". To call him "unhip" would be wrong...

-All I can say to those who "can't watch" a Greenaway is "Look CLOSER" a la American Beauty.

I have tried and tried. I have seen all his stuff (except "The Draughtman's Contract") I just don't care for his work. I would agree with him that Eisenstien was great (for his era) and quite influential but all time? I would have to give the nod to Kurosawa or David Lean.

>>He is almost pathologically obsessed with lists, maps, organizing schemes, logic-based theories, and numbers. His filmography displays this in abundance.<<

Interesting from a biographic point of view, but hardly conducive to storytelling which is after all what movies are about.

>> (Ebert was in awe when he met/talked to him)<<

Ebert wrote "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" and listed "Babe II; Pig in the City" on his top ten list for 1998 so impressing him isn't going to cut it!

>>-All I can say to those who "can't watch" a Greenaway is "Look CLOSER" a la American Beauty.<<

Even under the closest scrutiny I find Greenaway's film to be overdone, pretentious and long-winded. I'll admit his compositions are usually exceptional.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by stevetseitz
storytelling which is after all what movies are about.

---

"I want to try to make a kind of film that doesn't carry the idea of a story like a novel. In my opinion, film has to be freed from literary moments. Literature is literature and that's okay, but film is not film yet. It is still a mixture of different arts, and generally has a story, and that is a mistake."
R.W. Fassbinder

Greenaway films are often lacking in drama, with shallow, perverse characters in grotesque situations. At his best though, in collaboration with Sacha Vierny, he's taken me closer to that "pure cinema" R.W. was talking about. On a sad note, Greenaway will never find a cinematographer like Vierny(R.I.P. 2001), a veteran of Resnais and Bunuel films, among others.

Quote:

---

Ebert wrote "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" and listed "Babe II; Pig in the City" on his top ten list for 1998 so impressing him isn't going to cut it!

---

I'll give you that one. Sometimes Ebert can be a little young in the head...

Finally someone who disagrees with me and doesn't lose his mind. I won't mention Greenaway in your presence again dear sir.