Printable View
I wouldn't say I don't like Genet, just that I'm not a fan. I never got into his books but as I said I read White's long biography --not Sartre's Saint Genet, though.
Interesting about Reygadas. He seems a courageous and original man. I hope people like Cuarón succeed in keeping him from being hushed up.
I sent you the email March 2 to your msn email address. Is it still good? I will send it again.
I'm glad to hear that, but I was almost sure that it must be very easy for a few to concoct this notion after witnessing a monk and a young boy. I mostly agree with the brief comments you've made. Although, I considered it even less ambiguous than you perhaps did. I saw a unique individual whose personal nature (or genetic make-up) prompted him to rebel against the ideologies he was growing up with. We also saw that he wasn't the most sober and articulate person either (the monk realized that from the very beginning) and he would've caused similar problems even if was living inside a Church or a Mosque or any other religious institution. Kim is a Christian himself so that probably drew some ire from the hard-core fundamentalists but the film ends up being pro-religious actually. If religion tied him (and us) from experiencing life with its ups and downs but when he was lost, it was faith that helped calm the burning fire inside him.Quote:
Originally posted by oscar jubis
I can see how Ki Duk could have been inspired by Bodhi Dharma although perhaps tales about monks and their pupils isolated from the world in lush settings abound in Eastern folklore. The main difference would be the amount of narrative detail and specificity in Ki-duk's compared to the langurous, sketchy, mystical Bodhi Dharma.
Originally posted by arsaib4
I saw a unique individual whose personal nature (or genetic make-up) prompted him to rebel against the ideologies he was growing up with.
This rebellion is taken to such extremes that he murders his wife. Part of the reason I saw the pupil as a representational character, as "everyman" is that: "the fact that the grownup acolyte is taken by three different actors means that all these experiences are universal" (Chris Knipp)
Ambiguity? What to make of the fact that sex or lust "cures" the teen girl but leads the pupil to murder? Rather novel, my experience is that it is the repression of the sexual instinct that's more likely to lead to aberrant, anti-social behavior. Was it Rosenbaum who referred to the auteur's sexual attitude as being priggish?
it was faith that helped calm the burning fire inside him.
Indeed. The ambivalence or ambiguity about religion's value comes from the fact that a Buddhist education couldn't keep him from becoming a murderer. Which leads me to conclude Kim Ki-duk has a deterministic/fatalistic view of human nature. (He was going to be a killer no matter what, because of his personal nature or genetic make-up).
Wednesday March 9th
Ahi Viene Martin Corona (1952) on dvd, rented from the public library, no english subs.
Watchable if unremarkable commercial film I rented because of 4 names:
Miguel Zacarias: Highly prolific writer/director/producer/mogul of Palestinian descent. One of the pillars of the Mexican film industry during its golden age.
Gabriel Figueroa: A great cinematographer. Mexico's best.
Pedro Infante: An iconic singer/actor. A Mexican site calls him "the most beloved human being in Mexican history".
Sarita Montiel: Extremely charismatic performer, successful in her native Spain, Mexico and Hollywood (Vera Cruz, Samuel Fuller's Run of the Arrow, Giant,etc.). Married Anthony Mann.
Charlotte et son Jules (1960)
Godard's 20-minute film was shot following Breathess. Stars Belmondo and Anne Colette. Recommended only to Godard completists. Included in a Korean import dvd I rented called "Their First Films" which collects shorts made by French New Wave directors. I'll comment later on some of them, including a great one from Resnais I want to watch again.
"Included in a Korean import dvd I rented called "Their First Films" which collects shorts made by French New Wave directors."
Some info on the DVD is available here.
Quote:
Originally posted by Oscar Jubis
The ambivalence or ambiguity about religion's value comes from the fact that a Buddhist education couldn't keep him from becoming a murderer. Which leads me to conclude Kim Ki-duk has a deterministic/fatalistic view of human nature. (He was going to be a killer no matter what, because of his personal nature or genetic make-up).
I don't think you have to have any particular view of human nature to observe that religious training has not prevented people from killing other people. And religion can have value, for ritual, for art, for moments of serenity, for transcendent experiences of a higher power, for the social structure it provides, without saving mankind from violence. Kim's film is poetic and visual and you can make what you want of it. In my case, I was ultimately unmoved, despite the beautiful scenery. Those who are swept away by it, find different things. It's religio-mystical, but not didactic, or for that matter even clear.
Never heard the term "Godard completists" before. Definitely more polite than "diehard fans"!
Momma taught me to be polite :)
Thursday March 10th
Indeed, few of the shorts on the disc "Their First Films" are actal debuts. What they all have in common, besudes their being French, is that they were all produced by Pierre Braunberger for his Les Films De La Pleiade. Mr. Braunberger produced some of Truffaut and Godard's early features, as well as Godard's favorite French film of the 40s and 50s: Jean Rouch's Moi, Un Noir, an undeniable masterpiece of experimental cinema. I watched the other 7 shorts on the disc today. Godard's and Leconte's are really not very interesting. The other six are very enjoyable, and three are notable: Jacques Rivette's Le Coup du Berger (The Shepherd's Move), the one totally fictional film in this bunch, Melville's 24 Hours in the Life of a Clown, and Le Chant du Styrene, directed by the great Alain Resnais. It's an industrial film in reverse, from shiny plastic objects made to behave as if they are alive, all the way back to petroleum oil and coal. It had to be in color to accentuate the pigmentation process that plastic goes through, with a serio-comic narration full of cultural references. Industrial film as tone poem, featuring the camera movements familiar to fans of Last Year at Marienbad.
Do you think any of these were censored? I notice the site arsaib4 linked to for "Their First Films" (http://www.koreandvds.com/dvddetail.html?id=14474) has a warning: "Titles produced in Korea are subject to government censorship when it involves nudity and violence. Although the censorship has been lessened over the years, frontal nudity and extreme violence(although rare) are forbidden. Please be careful especially when purchasing erotic movies. When you are worried about censored and deleted scenes of graphic violence and frontal nudity, do not buy from our site." Funny they should say that because I've seen some recent Korean movies that were very violent.
Nouvelle Vague 'completists' would certainly want to see Le Coup du Berger because the cast includes Godard, Rivette, Truffaut, Chabrol, and Jean-Claude Brialy of Le Beau Serge, Elevator to the Gallows, The Lovers, Les Cousins, and many others.
No, I don't think any of these shorts are censored. I have bought hundreds of dvds from Asia, half of which I sold. The only one that was censored was Breillat's Romance (the male's frontal nudity was digitaly censored).
Brialy plays a married woman's lover in Le Coup du Berger. He gives her a nice fur coat and together they concoct a plan to get her to wear it without the husband objecting. The plan backfires in a very interesting way. Godard and the other directors are guests are a cocktail party where the scheme unravels.
Sounds fun.
I was only half serious in asking if anything was censored. I don't know if one could necessarily know though, if one hasn't seen the film before. They might just clip something out, no? The digital coverup is a giveaway. They do that in Japanese porn.
Friday March 11th
The Red and The White (Hungary, USSR) on dvd
Miklos Jancso's 1967 war film was the first to get wide distribution in North America and one of his best. It's set in Central Russia following the revolution, during the civil war that broke out between the Soviet reds and the Counter-revolutionary whites. Foreigners fought on both sides, including many Hungarians. Even though the film was co-produced by the USSR, the film was banned by the Party. There are no winners and no heroes in The Red and the White. Jancso's characteristically long takes are evident here, although not to the extent of 1969's Winter Sirocco's 13 shots. The action moves from a monastery being used as a garrison, to a hospital on the banks of the Volga river, to a final battle on a hillside that evidences Jancso's masterful utilization of wide frames. The Red and the White conveys with great economy, almost entirely in visual terms, the absurdity of war and the randomness of violence. Jancso's violent scenes are devoid of the kinetic, visceral pleasures that mar and negate other supposedly anti-war films. I sat two feet from the screen in total darkness to attempt to recreate the theatrical experience, because this film deserves to be seen there. Tamos Somlo did the b & w photography. The disc is letterboxed and enhanced for 16x9 TVs, but the print used is quite beat up.
Saturday March 12th
It feels as if the whole world is conspiring to erase the memory of the best Argentine film director, well, the best from the 50s to the 70s. Leopoldo Torre Nilsson had worked as his father's assistant director until he turned 30 and met his second wife, novelist Beatriz Guido, and then embarked on a remarkable directorial career. Many of his best films were adaptations of his wife's novels: The House of the Angel, perhaps the best known. There's little mention of him on the web (nothing for instance, at sensesofcinema). Two of his films played at the Walter Reade in 2001 as part of a Leonardo Favio retro (Favio acted in 2 directed by L.T.N.) Facets Video released Martin Fierro, Painted Lips and The 7 Madmen on vhs in '96. I borrowed Martin Fierro (1968) from the library. It's based on the poem by Jose Hernandez about the miserable experiences of a gaucho in the pampas circa 1850. The film was released in widescreen (2.35:1) but the video is pan-and-scan. The film preserves the narration in verse of the epic poem, but the english subs don't (I thought Anthony Burgess deserved some kind of recognition for the subritles of Cyrano de Bergerac starring Depardieu). Torre-Nilsson's adaptation is faithful to the text, with no attempt to soften or simplify the personality of Martin Fierro, a not altogether sympathetic character_dour, humorless, and racist. I enjoyed the film very much and wish it was released again, along with the rest of Leopoldo Torre Nilsson's filmography. He needs to be rescued from collective neglect and amnesia.
There are 7.000 listings for Leopoldo Torre Nilsson's name (is it hyphenated or not? not clear) on Google (2,100 in English), not too strong a sign of an actual conspiracy. (I'm sure you mean a dearth of serious discussion or ciitical mentions by well known American writers, though. ) I've put Torre Nilsson on my Netflix-borrowing want list, though I haven't checked yet to see if any of his movies are actually available there. Three of his films are available for sale on tape here http://www.moviesunlimited.com/musit...NTINA&media=v. (not cheap though). I see Nilsson's Painted Lips was co-authored by Manuel Puig, famous here from his novels and the screen adaptation of Kiss of a Spider Woman with William Hurt.
Not clear why you mention Cyrano de Bergerac. Anthony Burgess -- a really prolific dude; I remember he once had to hide the fact that he'd written three novels in one year, because it made him look too facile -- is listed as doing a TV adapation of Cyrano in English, but subtitle-writing for the Depardieu version isn't mentioned on IMDb--or perhaps generally any subtitling of foreign films, another thing you can fault that website for. Authors of subtitles used to be more known especially in the Fifties days when almost every European movie credited the English subtitles to Herman G. Weinberg. I wondered how he could do it. Now subtitling is done by committee, it seems, here and there, and unnoticed. Weinberg does have an IMDb listing, but I'm sure it omits many of his subtitling efforts -- which include Japanese films. How could he do that? Probably a collaboration, under his name.
Needless to say for us foreign film fans subtitling is of great importance and we ought to pay more attention to it.
It's a big advantage to have DVD's where you can add or remove them, and access ones in various languages on the same copy. I find this useful in working on my French and Italian. Especially helpful for a language student: subtitles in the original language of the film for the hearing impaired, and computer software for DVD viewing that permits instant switching or removing of subtitles. I just watched Amelio's Cosi' ridevano (The Way They Laughed), which is in Sicilian dialect, with subtitles in standard Italian, which enabled me to follow the whole movie without having to resort to English.
*I started the post with: "It feels as if the whole world is conspiring...". Those 3 Torre Nilsson films available on vhs were released by Facets. They are not quite his best (yet any film he directed is at least "good") and I don't think any preserves the correct aspect ratio. I cannot recommend them as an introduction to LTN. BTW, he used both surnames to differentiate himself from his dad Leopoldo Torre Rios.
*I mentioned Cyrano as an example of a film in a foreign language with properly translated poetic text. I remember checking the final credits when I saw it in '91 to find out Burgess was the subtitler. Surprise, surprise...he is included in the film's credits at IMdb (full cast and crew).
*I liked your review of The Way We Laughed and I like that movie. I'm very curious about whether you will prefer Lamerica as I do (perhaps my favorite Italian film in decades).
Sunday March 13th
Jacques Doillon is known in America for Ponette, the only film he directed to receive wide distribution. Raja had an official US premiere in March 2004, but it appears to have had a commercial run only in NYC. It's been rescued from oblivion by the organization "Film Movement" as part of their monthly series of quality dvds. (I've posted about this org before, go to filmmovement.com if curious).
Raja is a 19 y.o. orphan living in Marrakesh who catches the eye of a middle-aged rich Frenchman while working in his garden. The melancholic Fred lives alone and seems adrift in his beautiful estate. Raja has a traumatic past and alternates between a friend's apartment and the room where her boyfriend-cum-pimp lives. Raja's relationship with the latter is rather vague and ambivalent, perhaps all her relationships with men are complicated by negative past experience. Her relationship with Fred is further complicated by disparities in culture, language, age and financial status. Actually, I don't recall another film that depicts with such honesty a more complex, hard-to-pin-down relationship as the Raja and Fred's. What each wants and how they go about getting it changes rather frequently. Yet the film never grows tiresome, it's extremely engaging, compelling even. The political subtext is obviously there, but never made explicit. Fred is played by veteran actor Pascal Greggory. Najat Banssalem won an award for Best New Actress at Cannes '04. Doillon's script and direction are truly special. I need to find room for Raja on my list of favorite foreign language films of 2004.
I lost my reply to your earlier post while editing it, perhaps because your second post popped on and displaced it. It doesn't matter. I definitely like Amelio's work, and if Lamarica -- and Stolen Children -- are better, I may prefer them to Le chiavi di casa and Cosi' ridevano. The latter has left a strong impression, as did Le chiavi di casa before it. There is another Torre Nillsen VHS on that website I cited, which is Chronicle of a Boy Alone http://www.moviesunlimited.com/musit...KKTFBBTBD1CQ5E but nothing about the aspect ratio of any of them or who produced the tapes in the US either.
So Film Movement is another or your finds. The only one of their films that I've seen is Eric Eason's Manito, which I saw in NYC in the hot summer of 2003 http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?t=129.
*Lamerica is a must see, Chris. Netflix has it. It draws a parallel between Albanians coming into Italy in the 90s and the Italians who emigrated to "La America" after WWII.
*Chronicle of a Boy Alone is excellent. It's the directorial debut of Leonardo Favio, who became a star as an actor in Torre Nilsson's classics The Kidnapper (1958) and Hand in the Trap (1961). Favio dedicated his debut to Torre Nilsson, but the latter was not involved in Chronicle in any capacity. It's interesting to note that Favio was a Peronista and Lope Nilsson hated the general with a passion.
*I didn't like Manito very much. Like you state in your review it is much inferior to other films with a similar theme such as Raising Victor Vargas.
So Chronicle of a Boy Alone was misidentified as Nilsson's on that website, which appears to be rather careless about its listings. Wish I had access to some of these S.A. films you've been recommending. I don't have my own Netflix subscription, but you may say I ought to. I've only seen so many DVD's and tapes the past two months because there's so little in theaters. I've been renting French films locally and rewatching my own tapes of Eric Rohmer films, which is very rewarding now that I'm having French tutoring. Saw Downfall tonight and posted a review of it in the Forums. It's the hot title in town now--you had to line up for it at Landmark's Clay Theater on Fillmore Street in San Francisco, where it's having its Bay Area premiere.
I will see all Amelio's films I can get hold of, eventually anyway.
Not all of Film Movement's selections are imperishable classics, but that's not their aim. I thought Manito was worth seeing, but indeed Raising Victor Vargas blows it out of the water.
Monday March 14th
Oscar Micheaux's Body and Soul (1925) on TCM
Paul Robeson made his film acting debut as an escaped felon who fools an entire community into thinking he is a preacher and as his virtuous twin brother. Body and Soul was condemned as "sacrilegeous and immoral" by the New York Censoring Board. Micheaux was forced to make extensive cuts to show it, from 9 reels to only five. The film was restored to 8 reels in 1998. This is the second Micheaux film I've seen this year (check Jan 3rd entry) and while the content is interesting and Robeson is quite a presence, this indie "race" film is technically crude, as evidenced by static camera, non-sensical crosscutting, and takes that run too long to maintain one's interest.
Miyamoto Musashi: Samurai 1 (1954) on Criterion dvd
Part one of the three part samurai epic directed by Hiroshi Inagaki and starring Toshiro Mifune as an orphaned rogue, a "force of nature" who barely escapes decapitation and is rehabilitated by a monk. Unlike Kurosawa's samurai films of the 50s, this one is in color.
Samurai 1 won an Oscar for best foreign film.
I love this trilogy.
Your journal is striking a nice template for my viewing choices over the next few months, oscar.
I'm just about settled in to my new digs and I'll be picking up a laptop soon so I can post whenever my little heart desires..
Originally posted by Johann
Samurai 1 won an Oscar for best foreign film.
I love this trilogy.
You are right! Just learned Samurai 1 was the last foreign film to be awarded an Oscar without getting nominated, in 1955. Oscars were awarded to a foreign language film at the discretion of the Honorary Awards Committee. In 1956, the Academy decided to give a foreign language Oscar every year, and to have members pick from five nominees, as continues to be the custom.
Your journal is striking a nice template for my viewing choices over the next few months, oscar.
I hope I'm giving enough info for you decide if a film I write about is one you'd like to watch. On top of my set is a disc awaiting viewing which I bought based on your posts: Greenaway's The Tulse Luper Suitcases: The Moab Story. I imported it from Spain. I know watching this information-heavy film at home is far from ideal, but what's the alternative? I also have the new film from Robert Lapage, La Face Cachee de la lune, which came out only in Canada.
I'm just about settled in to my new digs and I'll be picking up a laptop soon so I can post whenever my little heart desires..
Thanks for the post J. Wish you the best in your new digs.
Tuesday March 15th
Ken Loach's Ae Fond Kiss... on dvd
http://www.filmwurld.com/forums/show...=9483#post9483
I've watched every film directed by Francisco J. Lombardi since his adaptation of Mario Vargas Llosa's novel The City and The Dogs in 1985. He is a fictional filmmaker that incorporates non-fiction materials dealing with current political and social issues affecting Peru. Several of his films have received awards at film festivals worldwide. Besides the abovementioned, I particularly admire La Boca del Lobo (available on vhs as "The Lion's Den" and Fallen From Heaven (1991). His latest film is now available on dvd with English subs. It's called Ojos Que No Ven (What Your Eyes Don't See) and it deals with the corruption and repression pervasive during the presidency of Alberto Fujimori. It's a 2 1/2 hour movie featuring a cross-section of Peruvian society. It depicts how each character plays a part in the country's ills and how each individual is affected by the state of affairs. The film uses real footage taken from the televison news and builds stories around them. If you like John Sayles' novelistic approach to complex political issues then you'll like this movie. Ojos Que No Ven is a bit overlong_ one subplot in particular, involving a nerdy movie buff/law clerk infatuated with his landlady's daughter is silly and totally superfluous. Everything else is quite compelling and instructive.
If you like John Sayles' novelistic approach to complex political issues then you'll like this movie. Ojos Que No Ven is a bit overlong_
The two go together. Sayles is satisfying at times (The Brother from Another Planet, Hobres Armados, Matewan) but can also be a long-winded bore. It's good to have him around, though, for his progressive political position and his way of maintaining artistic independence for his own directorial efforts.
I'm actually a big fan of Lone Star, and City of Hope (1991) which Ojos Que No Ven resembles in both structure and content. I agree with his politics and I admire his ability to write in Spanish, especially when you take into account that he's not a native speaker.
Yes, his Spanish is impressive. I wonder how Sales learned it so well. I thought Hombres armados was really good. A young Mexican artist friend recommended it to me. I don't agree with you about Lone Star, but at least I watched it. City of Hope was okay. I have not watched his latest films.
Wednesday March 16th
Born into Brothels at SoBe Regal
http://www.filmwurld.com/forums/show...=9500#post9500
Written on the Wind at Cosford Cinema
Douglas Sirk's biggest hit as part of a 4 film retrospective of films the German director made for Universal Studios. George Zuckerman's brilliant script, Sirk's expressive and symbolic use of color and impeccable framing, great perfs by Rock Hudson, Robert Stack, Lauren Bacall, and Oscar winner Dorothy Malone add up to something special. Watch it at the theatre if you get a chance. I would certainly not be the first to conclude that Kyle and Marylee Hadley, at a certain level, represent the rotten core of the "American Dream" of wealth and conspicuous consumption, which doesn't mean they're unidimensional characters, or that you can't ignore the subtext and enjoy it at surface level.
Lapage's film played at the cinematheque but I didn't make it to the screening. I was told it sold out.
The Moab Story looks to be loaded with even more esoteric imagery than Greenaway's previous films.
Hope your prepared.
*wink*
Please post your thoughts- I haven't seen it yet and I'm curious about it.
I think you went a bit overboard on Born into Brothels. You might accentuate the positive a bit more, see what's good about it rather than just what it lacks. You wouldn't criticize My Architect for not being a complete survey of modern architecture, or To Be and to Have for not giving a full picture of modern education in France, would you?
*Will most definitely post comments about Greenaway's film.
Thursday March 17th
I'm glad to hear Robert Lepage's La Face Cachee de la Lune sold out at the Cinematheque, Johann. It's bound to generate more screenings, at least at such specialized theatres. For an artist known primarily for his theatrical works, Lepage is quite inventive in terms of the production of images. The Dark Side of the Moon (English title) is perhaps Lepage's most accesible film because it's funny. The fact that his five films have been recognized by the Canadian Academy, Lepage must have a trophy room full of Genies, has not resulted in any of them receiving wide distribution. I've also seen No and Le Confessional, which takes place in Montreal at the time when Hitchcock was there to shoot I Confess and stars Kristin Scott Thomas. I highly recommend it.
Dark Side of the Moon is a most cinematic adaptation of Lepage's play about two brothers who are opposites in terms of personality, outlook, etc. They feel compelled to reconcile following their mother's death. Both brothers are played by Lapage. It's his most autobiographical work, a FIPRESCI winner at Berlin 2004. I love the way Lepage uses match cuts to transistion from a scene featuring one brother to one featuring the other, and from the present to a flashback. Of course the Genie-awarded screenplay is witty and insightful, but I want to emphasize that Dark Side is a visual treat. Out on region #1 dvd, in French with English subs.
The Tarnished Angels at Cosford Cinema
Like Written on the Wind, this film stars Robert Stack, Rock Hudson and Dorothy Malone, and a script by George Zuckerman (adapting Faulkner's novel "Pylon"). The Tarnished Angels takes place in New Orleans during the Great Depression. WWI air ace Robert Shumann ekes out a living on the crash-and-burn stunt flying circuit, neglecting his wife and son to pursue his true love. When reporter Burke Devin shows up to write a story, he is repulsed by Robert's adrenaline-seeking and fascinated by his parachutist wife LaVerne. All the principals seem tragically trapped in the pursuit of dreams that have only brought anguish and despair. Please avoid the pan-and-scan vhs of this dynamic b&w Cinemascope drama. Amazing flying sequences and street shots of the French Quarter during Mardi Gras. Dave Kehr says it's better not to watch it than watch it at home, but if it's your only choice, TCM apparently shows it in the correct aspect ratio from time to time.
Chris,
With you, Schumann, the Academy, and 90% of critics praising and hailing Born Into Brothels, I couldn't help but express the disappointment and frustration I experienced watching it and thinking about it afterwards. I have to admit that I found it "worth watching", if only because it offers a glimpse into the lives of human beings who are often ignored in the industrialized world (love the scenes with kids talking about their lives). Unlike To Be and To Have, what's shown here raises issues the documentarians refuse to tackle or explore. Granted, Born into Brothels is not nearly as innocuous as Oliver Stone's Comandante. Still, can a documentary be "miramaxical"?
Friday March 18th
In a cruel way, it's fitting that End of the Century: The Story of the Ramones, never played in more than ten screens at a time during its limited 2004 release. The Ramones, the most influential rock band since the Beatles, never had a Top 10 hit in a career spanning 21 years. The movement they created, call it punk rock if you will, got swept under the carpet by the mainstream media. Outside of their native NYC, their records got played only in college stations and low power clandestine outfits. In the mid 70s, the Ramones injected rock with much needed humor, power and speed. It can be argued that they invented punk rock, which basically means they re-invented rock 'n roll. Their London gig in '75 is considered by many to have singlehandedly inspired the formation of dozens of bands there, including the Sex Pistols and The Clash. It's the Pistols that got the headlines with their antics_the doc makes the case that the US mainstream media got scared of punk rock in general after the first Pistols tour here, resulting in lack of widespread exposure for the Ramones and the Clash.
The first half of this film documents expertly the emergence of punk rock as a subculture and the Ramones' development as a unit made up of most disparate parts. In retrospect, it seems the band needed to adopt a uniform, a logo and a common surname to foster cohesion, to have symbols to remind them of who they were as a unit. Three of the four (or five when drummer Tommy decided to write and produce and hired Marky to play drums for him) have personalities so distinctive it's a miracle they stuck it out for so long. Joey has to be the ugliest, geekiest front man in rock history. Jewish, ultra-liberal, extremy shy, life-long victim of obsessive-compulsive disorder, in love with luv, meets the girl of his dreams...and Johnny steals her. Johnny was a bully, control-freak, self-described right wing nut, who insisted on making the decisions. And then there was DeeDee, a wacko, clownish, heroin addict who used to turn tricks on 53rd and Third and was probably the band's best songwriter.
The second half of the doc transcends the rockumentary genre by exploring their personalities and group dynamics, and how their love of music and their rabid fans was stronger than the contempt, even hate, they felt for each other (During their induction into the Rock'nRoll Hall of Fame, Dee thanked himself, Johnny thanked Bush, and neither thanked Joey, who had just died of lymphatic cancer). I approached this film with trepidation because I'm one of those rabid fans. This film collects a variety of relevant material from a multiplicity of sources and tells their story very well. It adds more recent interviews that shed light into the past. I thought I would find a lot of it redundant, but I have to admit I learned a lot and gained a fresh perspective on the Ramones and their moment in history.
Sittin' here in Queens
Eatin' refried beans
We're in all the magazines
gulpin' down Thorazines
We ain't got no friends
our troubles never end
No Christmas cards to send
Daddy likes men
We're a happy family
Me, Mom and Daddy
Daddy's tellin' lies
Baby's eatin' flies
Mommy's on the pills
Baby's got the chills
We're friends with the president
We're friends with the pope
We' re all makin' a fortune
sellin' Daddy's dope
We're a happy family
Me, Mom and Daddy
Must have been a nice way to spend Friday for you. Funny I missed it -- it was here, at least for a while -- it's just that they never seemed as sexy to me as the Chili Peppers or Stones or even Metallica, et al. If you'd hyped it last year I'd have gone--I usually catch just about any music documentaries from Neil Young to Yo Yo Ma.
Since you're such a "rabid fan" how come you didn't go out of your way to see it yourself last year -- a pilgrimage to whatever town had it closest to Miami? It seems cruel that you were prevented from doing so. Apparently there are some limitations on your rabidness -- you're not a completely crazed Ramone-head -- though it does show in the fact that you do go a little overboard on some of your claims for the band.
But I'm willing to believe you on most of what you say, if it was just tempered a tiny bit. I wish you had said something more about the filmmakers, though -- whom you don't even seem to mention or credit specifically -- their history, their personal relation to the material, why the film didn't go wider in distribution, etc. Please tell more.
Here in Ottawa on Rideau Street there's a record store called VERTIGO RECORDS, and they have a huge poster of Joey Ramone, with a weird handmade action figure of Joey "at the mic" in front of it, and in big, black bold letters it says:
There are many legends in rock and roll, who push the boundaries, who make an impact.
MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE STILL OWE JOEY MONEY
Originally posted by Chris Knipp
Must have been a nice way to spend Friday for you.
Home with the chills and the pills, probably for the whole weekend. Will try to get to a theatre if the fever goes down. Glad I got out to see Brothels and two Sirks before it hit.
it's just that they never seemed as sexy to me as the Chili Peppers or Stones or even Metallica
If you're looking for "sexy", stay away from punk rock. It's partly a reaction against just that.
It seems cruel that you were prevented from doing so.
Unlike smaller cities like Cleveland, Seattle and Austin, Miami is most definitely not a rock town. It's Latin, club music (with a heavy Euro influence), and hip hop that predominate. Because of geography, demographics and cultural issues, Miami is closer (figuratively) to America Latina and Europa than to the rest of the USA. Mostly, it's the rock "dinosaurs" who bring their live sets here. But the Ramones came five times to delight a thousand or so local kids like myself who loved them back. The memories of those five shows are deeply sustaining. No doc can measure up.
Apparently there are some limitations on your rabidness -- you're not a completely crazed Ramone-head
I guess I'm not a completely crazed anything-head. I resist adulation and fandom as much as I can. I try to maintain a critical stance regarding any record or film no matter who is the artist. But it's hard sometimes. The Ramones stood for the celebration of the ugly and geeky inside everyone and for a DIY (do it yourself) aesthetic that resulted in the formation of tons of bands, little mags, and indie record labels virtually overnight. They inspire worship and idolatry for many reasons, including their love of the music and their fans which resulted in constant touring.
you do go a little overboard on some of your claims for the band.
Given who I am, I'm more inclined to idolize Talking Heads because of their art-school persona, or The Clash because of their proletarian politics (of course it's a given I think their music is special). But I've never read any rock criticism that denies The Ramones' position as at least the catalysts of a whole movement. They sort of have influences and antecedents in The Stooges, the New York Dolls, and Lou Reed, but play their debut album and what you hear seems to have been made on a planet of their own. So radically different, so contrarian to what was popular in the mid 70s. I have to recognize that that moment in history may not be accessible with the same meaning and intensity to those who were not teens at that time. I also recognize Loud 'n Fast (and lyrics like the one I posted) is not everyone's idea of good music.
I wish you had said something more about the filmmakers, though
Michael Gramglia and Jim Fields have no previous filmmaking experience (that I know of). They practically did everything themselves in true punk spirit. But don't be afraid, the final product looks quite professional and well made.
Thanks Chris and Johann for your responses and your interest. Sometimes it's hard to gauge how much or how little I should write about anything. I think it's good to be brief and wait for questions and comments, and proceed from there. I also have to strike a balance bet. time at the computer and time watching film. After the post I watched yet another film introduced to me by my Canadian pal. Comments about Valerie and Her Week of Wonders coming up.
No doubt you're right that it is, but you're being a little naive in saying this because people are going to want to sleep with any lead singer of whatever genre or sex and any loud band with young musicians is going to be a turn-on to its fans. People are also attracted to self-destruction and violence, the Sid Vicious type. Or the pathos and doom type, like Trent Reznor or Kurt Cobain. It doesn't have to be conventionally sexy or healthy. It certainly doesn't have to be healthy.Quote:
If you're looking for "sexy", stay away from punk rock. It's partly a reaction against just that.
The Clash, the Talking Heads; what about the Smiths? I was wondering because my socialist boyfriend who liked the Clash also listened a lot to them.
I was thinking of the New York Dolls myself when I was reading your post about this movie on the Ramones. I've had one of the Dolls albums since the late Seventies and on the cover they're very sexy in their andrygenous pretty looks and provocative tight pants with bulging crotches. The Ramomes didn't make it in the looks department but they didn't give up tight pants for a neutral art school look like the Talking Heads.
I can see how Miami would let Latin music overwhelm rock.
I actually attended an early Talking Heads concert in San Francisco in the early Eighties when they opened for Lou Reed. I was lured there by a close artist friend who was the mother of Peter Kraemer of Sopwith Camel. Very "art school," as you say. I was left pretty cold but I knew "Take a Walk on the Wild Side" very well and Lou Reed was a cult figure by then even to me. Meanwhile, The Basketball Diaries was out in paperback and Jim Carroll was in the city singing his songs and reading poems.
Yes you do and so do we all but time spend at the computer (including review writing time) considerably enriches and even motivates my watching time now.Quote:
I also have to strike a balance bet. time at the computer and time watching film.
Sorry you've got chills and pills and hope you get better soon.
Funny you mention Valerie just now oscar.
The best video store in this city has a vhs (duplicate) copy and I was going to make you a tape.
Did you buy the DVD?
I rented Valerie from Nicheflix and saw it twice today. Then Chelsea started watching it and I sat with her for some of it. I think its otherworldly images are permanently imprinted on my memory bank thus I don't plan to buy it. Thanks for the generous impulse to make me a copy Johann. Will write a bit about it later and provide a link to your excellent post.
Sat. March 19th
Jaromil Jires' Valerie and her Week of Wonders on region 1 dvd (Kino). I learned about this film from Johann:http://www.filmwurld.com/forums/show...=4102#post4102 Mr. Jires' The Joke is one of my favorite Czech films of all time so I was looking forward to Valerie. It's an altogether different film that speaks volumes about the director's range. It's basically about the dreams/fantasies of a girl during her first menses. It's as if her whole conscious and unconscious had been emptied out and turned into beautifully rendered images. It's a most inter-textual work that mixes medieval mythology, Freudianism, classic fairy tales (Perrault, Grimm), vampire legends, anti-clericalism,etc into a non-linear narrative in which identity and reality are highly fluid concepts. This gumbo is anchored in the character of Valerie, a 13 year old awakening to sensuality and forced to do figurative battle with repressive forces, most prominently the family and the Catholic church. Valerie is a feast for art lovers in general and surrealists in particular. Valerie is not a film for those looking for a clear, linear narrative, and has the potential to offend (an IMdb comment or two use the word "pedophilia", it's definitely anti-clerical and some may argue it's anti-Christian and anti-family but I don't).
Thanks to the British Film Institute for this dvd release of Otto Preminger's Fallen Angel (1945), his follow-up to the better known but not necessarily better Laura. The first half of Preminger's career is extremely consistent at a high level of quality. Most of his films from the 40s and 50s share thematic (love triangles, deception, innocent being framed) and stylistic elements (action largely centered in a few sets, fluid camera work, mostly medium shots no close-ups, no reaction shots). I predict that if you like one of these you'll like the others: Laura, Fallen Angel, Where the Sidewalk Ends, Daisy Kenyon, Whirpool and Angel Face. There are enough distinctions among them to watch them all. Preminger's harmony of form and content, mobile camera and objective detachment make him one of my favorite directors of Hollywood's golden age.
In response to CK's earlier post:
*The Smiths were Morrisey and he got better when he went solo. Some adore his witty hypersensitivity. I like it.
*If you have one Dolls album, you have half their official recording output. Some people may actually call them punk because they played relatively fast and wrote about "pills" and "trash". For me, they are simply an amazing, awe-inspiring rock band that came together when glam was in vogue. Those 22 songs they recorded are explosive, brilliant,...If you value virtuosity there's no doubt that David Johansen is a better singer than Joey Ramone or Joe Strummer (The Clash), or just about anybody. And Johnny Thunders was an extremely talented guitarrist who refused to show off (I hate long solos except from geniuses like Hendrix, Verlaine,Clapton).
*Jim Carroll can write but can't sing.
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my relatively clueless music notes, Oscar.
I see you know a lot about this stuff. True enough Jim Carroll wasn't much of a singer. I'm impressed by what you say about the Dolls. I wonder if I can find that album....I had no idea.I take it you have no special interest in the Smiths as such.
Sorry I now nothing about Jires or Valerie--another one to get to know...
Speaking of the BFI I'm reading in the BFI-sponsored book on Wong Kar Wai. "In," because I don't plan to read it through, but just consult the chapter for each film as I re-see the films.
Watched Wong's As Tears Go By, which was the first one I ever saw of his in a theater, yesterday in a new DVD from Korea I bought from HKFlix. It seems pretty conventional to me, though it has visual charms, some "classic" Wong sets to be used in some version into the future, and for Wong fans it is essential to study it because the roots of his later ideas are largely there hidden in the conventional material, as well as some of the great stars. Maggie Cheung in this one--you wonder what all the fuss is about, from the way she was then. She has certainly acquired immense glamour charm and sex appeal since the little blank eyed girl she was then. Andy Lau was very young and kind of cool looking. The gangsters' bug-eyed mugging is totally unreal and rather annoying at times. The subtitles in this KOrean copy are terrible. Unlike the earlier HongKong Wong tapes, you can read them, but they make little sense, go by too fast, and there is a mistake in English grammar and idiom in practially every line or phrase. You really can make only minimal sense of much of the dialogue as a result. Pathetic. I should have gotten a better DVD version, assuming there is one. I may write more about this somewhat forgotten Wong Kar Wai film later. Perhaps interesting to contrast it with 2046.