tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-77964593484962288782024-03-15T20:12:48.137-05:00CineVerseCineVerse is Oak Lawn's free weekly film discussion group for movie loversErikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comBlogger1583125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-77372554873951051522024-03-14T01:40:00.001-05:002024-03-14T01:40:51.140-05:00Cineversary podcast celebrates diamond anniversary of The Third Man<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi25DVLTP6uigH0q3ugo8XRMMXNZg4PQpm0cIwbfAUdDGmwTeOUL5-THgMhsmuUfDFDa0zOW2zDq8Nn0EarZBIFSi6tiuEShRURaqrQRDczOD0BIH8jso8GxZiI-BcIWxp4ACvEoasTVUfedVm5qdEJJ1lXfWtzAyvWeQ38sA5DE_bVu_7z7UZXccV4YBJ5/s1423/Picture1.png" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1423" data-original-width="667" height="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi25DVLTP6uigH0q3ugo8XRMMXNZg4PQpm0cIwbfAUdDGmwTeOUL5-THgMhsmuUfDFDa0zOW2zDq8Nn0EarZBIFSi6tiuEShRURaqrQRDczOD0BIH8jso8GxZiI-BcIWxp4ACvEoasTVUfedVm5qdEJJ1lXfWtzAyvWeQ38sA5DE_bVu_7z7UZXccV4YBJ5/w375-h800/Picture1.png" width="375" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">David Thomson and Charles Drazin</td></tr></tbody></table>In Cineversary podcast episode #68, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> celebrates the diamond anniversary of Carol Reed’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041959/">The Third Man</a> with two outstanding guests: <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/authors/31003/david-thomson/">David Thomson</a>, renowned film critic, cinema historian, and author of The Fatal Alliance: A Century of War on Film; and <a href="https://www.charlesdrazin.com/">Charles Drazin</a>, film historian and author of In Search of The Third Man. Together, they scour the streets and sewers of Vienna on the trail of Harry Lime and the truths behind this now 75-year-old masterwork.<br /><br />To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/68-The-Third-Man-75th-anniversary-with-David-Thomson-and-Charles-Drazin-e2h266k"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here </span></b></a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.<br /><br />Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>. <div> </div><div>
<iframe frameborder="0" height="102px" scrolling="no" src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/68-The-Third-Man-75th-anniversary-with-David-Thomson-and-Charles-Drazin-e2h266k" width="600px"></iframe></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-6327779760145680472024-03-05T17:10:00.002-06:002024-03-06T14:26:26.456-06:00Dear Zachary: Your movie is transfixing but devastating<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifK5zjRh0HJ3HZOUMxnMBQX9WNMJFUsIwws44HAQtOG3ckLioaZXp60Bh2WDXwMni1if2gW1HAjRz6IuZgW1VdKg8C14UU_byrjqznElHVvbgx4fhJhaQozxYVZaFPZps8MDJ8ndXkiAbj_tkArA1vk9daMB8LzktXVsAKPpkQcScDb22HSqp7ztwF7MKY/s744/Screen%20Shot%2003-05-24%20at%2005.07%20PM.PNG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="744" data-original-width="550" height="579" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifK5zjRh0HJ3HZOUMxnMBQX9WNMJFUsIwws44HAQtOG3ckLioaZXp60Bh2WDXwMni1if2gW1HAjRz6IuZgW1VdKg8C14UU_byrjqznElHVvbgx4fhJhaQozxYVZaFPZps8MDJ8ndXkiAbj_tkArA1vk9daMB8LzktXVsAKPpkQcScDb22HSqp7ztwF7MKY/w429-h579/Screen%20Shot%2003-05-24%20at%2005.07%20PM.PNG" width="429" /></a></div>Nothing can quite prepare you for the emotional rollercoaster ride that director Kurt Kuenne takes you on in his 2008 documentary Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father, a film that asks a lot of its audience. Kuenne recounts the tragic story of Andrew Bagby, a young doctor murdered in 2001 by his ex-girlfriend, Shirley Turner. The filmmaker, who shared a longstanding friendship with Bagby since childhood, undertook the project both as a heartfelt tribute and a means to document Bagby's life for his unborn son, Zachary. Dear Zachary stands out as an expressively charged work, guiding audiences through the highs and lows of Bagby's life, his untimely death, and (SPOILERS AHEAD) the subsequent legal proceedings involving his grieving parents David and Kathleen and the titular grandson they seek custody of (fascinatingly, the film is not so much about Andrew or Zachary as it is about these grandparents). Kuenne lends exceptional authenticity and depth to the narrative, and his emotional investment is palpable throughout the movie. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkeJY2nzwb7vdm06RFg?e=qI8aVX">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><br />Dear Zachary doesn’t even pretend to be objective. This is more of a passionate polemic or video as personal essay than a documentary. Kuenne, who also narrated, shot, edited, scored, and co-produced, has an understandably biased agenda here: To pay proper homage to his late friend, explain to Andrew’s son and survivors why Andrew was so loved and special, and bring needed attention to the injustice behind Andrew’s murder and the legal system that allowed Shirley Turner to kill two innocent human beings—one a defenseless child. In this way, it transcends its role as a true crime doc by serving as a form of advocacy, particularly addressing the shortcomings of the legal system in protecting victims and preventing similar tragedies. We hear Kuenne’s narrator voice get choked up in some scenes, revealing how sincerely invested the artist is emotionally in his subject. <br /><br />In defense of the documentarian here, he never originally intended this to be released commercially to the public. It was to be a private video given to Zachary and his family and friends. The director donated all profits from the movie to scholarships named after Andrew and Zachary. <br /><br />What distinguishes Dear Zachary as a doc? Kuenne employs a fairly rapid style of editing, using archival home video snippets, current-day interviews and visitation footage, and photographs to tell this story at a relatively swift pace, often speaking quickly and juxtaposing images speedily. Reviewer Brian Orndorf <a href="https://www.brianorndorf.com/2008/10/film-review-dear-zachary-a-letter-to-a-son-about-his-father.html">wrote</a>: “Kuenne’s intense study of the events is impressive, using furious editing and speed reading to pack a hornet’s nest of holdups and procedural steps into the narrative. The effect is chaotic (think “Spun” for editorial comparison), whirling the viewer around, hoping to impart the tumultuous sensations that haunted the Bagbys, leaving “Dear Zachary” undeniably compelling, but also faintly pushy, trying much too hard to unsettle the viewer with visual gimmicks when the stark reality of Turner’s twisted ways and the Bagbys’ fury is more than enough to brand itself on the heart and mind.” <br /><br />Arguably, Kuenne didn’t need to lace the film with his highly emotive piano score, which can come across as manipulatively maudlin. The images and words are powerful and persuasive enough to wring every emotion possible out of the viewer. <br /><br />Dear Zachary stresses perseverance through the power of love. David and Kathleen have to put aside their hatred and loathing of Shirley, the murderer of their son, to have visitations with their grandson. They stand as the ultimate role models of grace and dignity under pressure, teaching viewers that love and family bonds are bigger priorities than even justice. <br /><br />This is also a painful dissertation on the profound unfairness of life. One tragedy as a subject matter is enough to warrant a fascinating documentary, but two awful human catastrophes compound the misery exponentially and utterly unfairly. Just when you think the horrible circumstances the Bagby family has to endure can’t get any worse or more cosmically cruel, it gets much worse. <br /><br />On a brighter note, Kuenne’s passion project reminds us that dead loved ones live on so long as we cherish and remember them. Dear Zachary pays tribute to Andrew and the young son he never knew, but the candid interviews with relatives and friends of the Bagby family—as well as David and Kathleen’s efforts as political activists to change the flawed legal system around bail and the safety of children in custody—reveal that they will never be forgotten. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Documentaries that set out following one trajectory but eventually change course and focus as filming progresses, such as The Queen of Versailles, Capturing the Friedmans, Gimme Shelter, and Vernon, Florida </li><li>The Thin Blue Line</li><li>My Brother Jordan</li><li>The Imposter</li><li>Tell Me Who I Am</li><li>Making a Murderer</li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other docs, shorts, and films by Kurt Kuenne </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Drive-in Movie Memories </li><li>Validation </li><li>Shuffle</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-69146343362611754852024-02-27T19:37:00.002-06:002024-02-27T19:40:25.367-06:00It's alright ma, I'm only bleeding (through the floor)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifhWDI6mP8QDJiWxdeNDJVqlXcf4N6pk8oUC0m15isStKzc86vp4Cd1KWBCa3dz-l_Y5OvFaZgNMEwcSNBrBNpFRRSFpodn6E-jYx6yiirFy8GjcxQhqvF33BNWP9cLYPywQN9CSLAdncRxAcxpXjtr_Qwd6DCdjb-1WSKIeO7IHd9Z_VecofK4thATCMy/s773/Screen%20Shot%2002-27-24%20at%2007.18%20PM.PNG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="773" data-original-width="527" height="642" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifhWDI6mP8QDJiWxdeNDJVqlXcf4N6pk8oUC0m15isStKzc86vp4Cd1KWBCa3dz-l_Y5OvFaZgNMEwcSNBrBNpFRRSFpodn6E-jYx6yiirFy8GjcxQhqvF33BNWP9cLYPywQN9CSLAdncRxAcxpXjtr_Qwd6DCdjb-1WSKIeO7IHd9Z_VecofK4thATCMy/w437-h642/Screen%20Shot%2002-27-24%20at%2007.18%20PM.PNG" width="437" /></a></div>In 2017, Darren Aronofsky opened a disturbing Pandora’s box he called mother!, a psychological and surreal horror film that delves into the life of a young woman (Jennifer Lawrence), residing with her husband (Javier Bardem) in a rural and secluded mansion. Their peaceful existence takes a tumultuous turn when an enigmatic couple, embodied by Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer, unexpectedly enters their lives. As tensions mount and the intrusive behavior of the visitors escalates, the woman's once-serene life descends into chaos. Complementing the leads are memorable supporting performances from Domhnall Gleeson, Brian Gleeson, and Kristen Wiig. <br /><br />The movie's provocative and polarizing nature has further contributed to its enduring reputation. While some viewers admire its audaciousness and thematic complexity, others find it polarizing, viewing it as either pretentious or disturbing. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkeFn14JPR_H0LTXFIQ?e=tVFunn">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><br />Aronofsky employs intense visuals to instill a pervasive sense of unease and tension throughout the film. But it’s a hard work to take literally, often employing dream logic and fantastical imagery (like the supernatural visions the poet’s wife sees throughout the house). Instead, it plays better as an allegory or parable for some greater lesson. After all, it’s pretty doubtful the director would subject his audience to (SPOILER ALERT) a literal killing and cannibalistic eating of a newborn baby. <br /><br />Among the clues that this is a nightmarish cinematic metaphor removed from the real world? Consider how blood can dissolve wood and stone, the wife’s ability to sense a diseased heart hidden in the home upon touching the walls, the ridiculous escalation of intruders, and how the crowd so quickly devolves into brutality and aberrant behavior. Interestingly, the characters are never named. Speaking of characters, the house itself qualifies as one, often exhibiting human traits like that obscured cardiac organ or the bleeding floor as well as the exaggerated sound effects that enhance the domicile’s aliveness. The unnerving sound design, in fact, substitutes for a proper musical score. <br /><br />The filmmaking choices ramp up the tension and claustrophobic elements of the misc en scene, as <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/mother-2017">noticed</a> by critic Brian Tallerico: “<i>Aronofsky shoots the film with a stunning degree of close-up. We are on top of Lawrence and Bardem for most of the film, which not only amplifies the claustrophobia but allows Aronofsky and Libatique to play with a limited perspective. We stay close on Mother, and can barely tell what’s happening behind her or to the sides. The lack of establishing shots keeps us off the game when it comes to a typical horror experience. We often spend horror films looking for answers—Who's the killer? Who's going to die? Who's going to live? "mother!" changes the genre rules. It thrives on horror of confusion, which is the main currency of the film.” BFI reviewer Nick Pinkerton <a href="https://www2.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/reviews-recommendations/mother-darren-aronofsky-jennifer-lawrence-symphony-domestic-disquiet">observed</a>: “Save for two bookending scenes, the narrative is entirely filtered through her eyes; she is very often tracked in moving, choreographed closeups which recall Aronofsky’s treatment of Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler; and more than once the camera’s point-of-view is aligned intimately with her own, as when she looks down in the shower at the swell of her pregnant stomach.</i>” <br /><br />Major themes afoot in mother! include, of course, the abuse and destruction of the planet. The film can serve as an effective allegory for, as Jennifer Lawrence stated, “<i>the rape and torment of Mother Earth… I represent Mother Earth</i>.” <br /><br />Mankind’s yearning to connect to an often uncaring and absent creator deity is also explored herein, as personified by the unnamed poet, who frequently abandons his wife and leaves her vulnerable. <br /><br />Additionally, the film plays as a biblical metaphor, representing the Old Testament and New Testament. Lawrence further said: “<i>Javier, whose character is a poet, represents a form of God, a creator; Michelle Pfeiffer is in Eve to Ed Harris’s Adam, there’s Cain and Able, and the setting sometimes resembles the Garden of Eden</i>.” The poet’s wife gives birth to a Christlike messiah, who is literally consumed by the spiritually ravenous throng in a communion-like ritual. <br /><br />Matt Goldberg, writer with Collider, <a href="https://collider.com/mother-movie-explained/">wrote</a>: “<i>The movie is about the relationship between God, Mother Earth, the environment, and humanity, with Aronofsky coming down on the side of humanity being a plague upon the Earth…When (Ed Harris is) puking in the bathroom, we quickly see an injury right where his rib would be. In the next scene, his wife, representing Eve, shows up. They’re allowed to wander the house but are told specifically not to go into the poet’s office, but they do so anyway and Eve accidentally breaks the fire crystal. They’re then exiled and soon begin having sex elsewhere in the house, thus representing original sin and man’s fall from grace after eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden…The wake then becomes a chaotic party where, after numerous protestations to not sit on an un-braced sink, the sink becomes unmoored from the wall and water pours into the house. Thus we have humanity’s downfall following the slaying of Abel and eventually the flood…the Earth and humanity will die and at best God will simply do everything all over again because he needs to create and desires love from his creations</i>.” <br /><br />Mother! reminds us, too, of the threat of a patriarchal-dominated society and male ambitions to women and families, who are frequently ignored, neglected, minimized, and abused. Case in point: The poet is a powerful and creative man but he takes his wife and other female partners for granted, demanding their love and adoration without reciprocating it equally. Furthermore, it’s a film about the dangers of religious fanaticism, the cult of personality, entrusting your faith in an imperfect human being or belief system, and social media—with the often rude, imposing, possessive, and outspoken home intruders symbolizing the nameless followers and comment critics who populate social media platforms, chatrooms, and comment fields. <br /><br />This movie is also a rumination on the unbalanced relationship between a vampiric artist and his exploited muse, or how the artist often sucks dry the vitality of his inspiration. Critics have compared the poet to a kind of Bluebeard figure who cycles through one female muse victim after another. mother! has also been referred to as a “self-criticism” narrative in which the artist (Aronofsky) indicts himself and his self-indulgent creative instincts, illustrating the destructive nature of artistry and creativity. The poet has to “burn down” his inspirations and create a lot of waste to produce a relatively small but beautiful jewel. Ponder that Aronofsky was dating Lawrence at the time of this production.<div> <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The Apartment trilogy by Polanski, including Repulsion, Rosemary’s Baby, and The Tenant </li><li>Allegorical thrillers like The Neon Demon, The House That Jack Built, The Babadook, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, and Don’t Look Up </li><li>Home invasion horrors like Funny Games and The Invitation </li><li>Suspiria (2018)</li><li>Antichrist</li><li>Possession</li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Darren Aronofsky</h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Requiem for a Dream</li><li>The Wrestler</li><li>Black Swan</li><li>Noah</li><li>The Whale</li><li>Postcard from Earth</li></ul></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-53428418367595696572024-02-20T17:33:00.000-06:002024-02-20T17:33:17.582-06:00Universal thumbs up for It Happened One Night<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnDWhqaEOTwnHEQaPLCWO5Ro-3VyAAuTHN9SqKsk5CXUksMwaQJWW8RYjfykIMGCoLQeuvi1Q-Hw-nvXsAYvM9t5n7NzGAlrluxVfo6VMmmKVe1iQmwnRP7SM23aEzHl9xC_vLS0ylOqYHWsCGMMXUuDeKV-fL0jxnPBwyhYGVz_Z1reGv896aYYGXg3n5/s1280/FDD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnDWhqaEOTwnHEQaPLCWO5Ro-3VyAAuTHN9SqKsk5CXUksMwaQJWW8RYjfykIMGCoLQeuvi1Q-Hw-nvXsAYvM9t5n7NzGAlrluxVfo6VMmmKVe1iQmwnRP7SM23aEzHl9xC_vLS0ylOqYHWsCGMMXUuDeKV-fL0jxnPBwyhYGVz_Z1reGv896aYYGXg3n5/w640-h360/FDD.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />They don’t come much more timeless or beloved than It Happened One Night, directed by Frank Capra, produced by Harry Cohn for Columbia Pictures, and released in 1934—90 years ago this week. The film follows the escapades of Ellie Andrews, a wealthy socialite portrayed by Claudette Colbert, who flees from her domineering father to elope with a fortune-seeking playboy. Along her journey, she encounters Peter Warne, a recently fired newspaper journalist played by Clark Gable. Recognizing Ellie, Peter offers assistance in exchange for an exclusive story, leading to a mismatched duo embarking on a cross-country adventure filled with comedic mishaps and burgeoning affection. <br /><br />Set against the backdrop of the Great Depression, the film was crafted during a challenging era for Columbia Pictures, a minor studio competing with Hollywood giants like MGM and Paramount. Despite initial reluctance from Capra, who ultimately secured creative control, the production encountered obstacles including budget constraints and artistic disagreements. Nevertheless, It Happened One Night triumphed as both a critical and commercial success. The memorable performances of Colbert and Gable, coupled with their on-screen chemistry and impeccable comedic timing, solidified the film's enduring popularity. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkeEOFsi6rCU9-oRFRA?e=ug7qPR">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. For the latest Cineversary podcast episode celebrating It Happened One Night’s 90th anniversary, click </span><a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/67-It-Happened-One-Night-90th-anniversary-with-Joseph-McBride-e2fog7b">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><br />This picture remains evergreen for delving into topics such as class privilege, socioeconomic disparities, and the universal quest for happiness—messages that particularly struck a chord with audiences of this hardscrabble era. Its examination of these themes, presented with both levity and depth, imbued the film with substance and raised it above the rank of frivolous entertainment expected from a romantic comedy for 1934. <br /><br />Ponder that this is likely the best comedy that Gable and Colbert, individually, have ever starred in and quite possibly their finest performances, as evidenced by the fact that It Happened One Night is the only film each ever won an acting Oscar for. Although it was already his 13th directed film in the sound era, It Happened One Night is also the feature that made the world take notice of Capra, his first in a successful run of crowd-pleasing movies that the filmmaker crafted in the 1930s for Columbia. <br /><br />Moreover, the film is an important early benchmark in the screwball comedy subgenre. Three-Cornered Moon (1933), also starring Colbert, and Bombshell (1933) with Jean Harlow are often credited as the first screwball comedies, but this is the work that likely helped put screwballs on the map thanks to its superior quality compared to those earlier pictures, its immense popularity at the box-office in 1934, and its enduring legacy. It helped introduce several key characteristics of the screwball comedy, a subgenre known for: <br /><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Farcical stories and situations—where the film pokes fun at stereotypical characters, such as filthy rich fathers and spoiled rotten daughters (case in point: My Man Godfrey)</li><li>Themes highlighting the differences between upper and lower socioeconomic classes, with many of the settings taking place among the high society but involving a likable male love interest from the other side of the tracks (see Mr. Deeds Goes to Town)</li><li>A plot centered on courtship and marriage (The Philadelphia Story) or remarriage (The Awful Truth)</li><li>Often a strong-willed, determined, and sometimes tomboyish female lead, commonly depicted as stronger and even smarter than her male counterpart (Bringing Up Baby, The Lady Eve)</li><li>Fast pacing in the humor and repartee, direction, editing, and dialogue delivery (His Girl Friday)</li><li>Physical humor, including slapstick (Bringing Up Baby), pratfalls (The Lady Eve), and sight gags (To Be Or Not To Be), are often used to elicit major laughs and make dignified characters look ridiculous.</li><li>Quirky and colorful side characters also populate these stories, as evidenced by Shapely, Danker the singing thief, and the various motel owners in this film.</li><li>A story involving mistaken identity, misunderstanding, keeping of an important secret, occasionally involving cross-dressing or masquerading (Some Like it Hot and Bringing Up Baby)</li><li>A classic battle of the sexes between a man and a woman, with the male lead’s masculinity often challenged by a strong female love interest (The Awful Truth)</li><li>Colorful supporting characters with quirky personalities.</li></ul></div>It Happened One Night helped advance several of these elements in the subgenre, such as silly characters, eccentric scenarios, and a comedic battle of the sexes theme. Its seamless fusion of humor and romance, as well as its contrast between the haves and the have-nots, established a blueprint that numerous films would emulate in subsequent years, including My Man Godfrey, Sullivan’s Travels, The Lady Eve, The Palm Beach Story, and many others. Film scholar Molly Haskell remarked: <i>“Films before (It Happened One Night), the romantic comedies, they really hadn’t been silly…here, (the leads) could be silly and also be incredibly romantic.”</i><div><br /></div><div>This isn’t a wall-to-wall screwball, but certain scenes and situations employ the zaniness and physical chaos endemic of classic screwballs, such as when Peter and Ellie pretend they're married in front of the detectives, when he gives her the “piggyback” ride, and the hitchhiking sequence. <br /><br />Aside from being a screwball influence, It Happened One Night made history by becoming the inaugural film to secure victories in all five primary categories at the Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Director (Frank Capra), Best Actor (Clark Gable), Best Actress (Claudette Colbert), and Best Adapted Screenplay (Robert Riskin). This marked a significant milestone in Oscar history, establishing the film as a trailblazer in the annals of cinema. Consider that after It Happened One Night, only two other films have won all five of these major awards: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975), and The Silence of the Lambs (1991). <br /><br />Furthermore, it’s been recognized as among the first Hollywood films to portray a wealthy character undergoing a dramatic reversal of fortune and being romantically involved with an individual from a lower socioeconomic background. This narrative decision allowed the movie to delve into themes of class and privilege in a manner that was innovative for a film set in and released during the Great Depression. <br /><br />Additionally, It Happened One Night set new standards and expectations for on-screen romantic relationships. The palpable chemistry between Gable and Colbert elevated the film beyond conventional romantic comedies. Their natural banter and flirtatious exchanges set a precedent for on-screen chemistry that would influence numerous romantic films to come.<i> “It Happened One Night has had an immeasurable effect on the romantic comedy genre, which has paid homage to and spoofed Capra’s picture countless times,” </i>Deep Focus Review essayist Brian Eggert <a href="https://www.deepfocusreview.com/definitives/it-happened-one-night/">wrote</a>. <i>“Whenever a character uses their sex appeal to stop a passing car, whenever a sheet separates a room, whenever life on the road provides a life-altering experience, whenever a bride changes her mind at the last minute, and whenever two bickering adults fall in love, It Happened One Night is among the influences.” </i><br /><br />Capra’s work was groundbreaking for its realistic portrayal of downtrodden settings, which was rare for Hollywood films of that time. Scenes depicting dirty country roads, bus stations, outdoor shows, and a run-down countryside, along with characters eating raw carrots and meager breakfasts, offered a stark contrast to the glamorous escapism typically associated with Hollywood productions. <br /><br />The movie left a lasting cultural imprint, shaping not just future romcoms and screwballs but also popular characters and trends. Recall that Gable eats a carrot and is called “Doc” by Shapely, the rider on the bus, who is later frightened by the mention of a personality named “Bugs Dooley”: This movie is credited with inspiring animator Friz Freling in the creation of cartoon character Bugs Bunny. Additionally, rumor has it that sales of men’s undershirts tanked after Gable was shown taking off his shirt to reveal a bare chest; the film may have also popularized hitchhiking. <br /><br />As proof of how beloved this film and its narrative was and is, consider the numerous remakes in its wake: Even Knew Her Apples (1945); You Can’t Run Away From It (1956); and several adaptations made in India between 1956 and 2007. It’s been spoofed and referenced, as well, in movies like Laurel and Hardy’s Way Out West (1937), Mel Brooks’ Spaceballs (1987), and Bandits (2001). <br /><br />This pre-code film was provocative in its time, too. For instance, the "Walls of Jericho" scenes were considered risqué in 1934 for their suggestion of an unmarried man and woman sleeping in the same room together, for Gable taking off his shirt, and for Cobert wearing a revealing undergarment. In her Criterion Collection essay, Farran Smith Nehme <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/3369-it-happened-one-night-all-aboard">wrote</a>: <i>“What takes this setup from the cute to the ravishing is what happens when the lights are shut off and the full beauty of Joseph Walker’s cinematography takes hold. The rain outside makes the windows sparkle, and the light from them outlines Colbert’s form as she stands there in her slip, trying to calm her nerves. It’s a shot that, at the time, could have revealed more of Colbert’s state of undress, and indeed that’s how Capra had planned it. But Colbert objected, and Capra later said the scene was sexier in the near dark. It Happened One Night made the sexual longing unmistakable, but did it in a way that showed future filmmakers how to stay on the right side of the censors.” </i><br /><br />Also, the film includes numerous instances of sexual suggestiveness, such as Colbert showing off her legs and fellow bus rider Shapely’s lines like “When a cold mama gets hot, boy, she sizzles,” and “Shapley’s the name and that’s how I like ’em.” Eggert continued: <i>“Ellie…has a voracious appetite. Literary and early Hollywood symbolism often treated hunger as a shorthand analogy for sexual appetite, and It Happened One Night features no end of references to food and hunger…Coming from the vacuous high society, she finds herself drawn to Peter in all his earthiness—epitomized by his fondness for that most phallic of vegetable roots, the raw carrot. When, out of desperate hunger, Ellie resolves to try a bite, she realizes that raw carrots aren’t so bad, after all.” </i><br /><br />Amazingly, we never even see Peter and Ellie kiss, nor does Capra give us a payoff romantic embrace at the conclusion—merely a clever shot of the Wall of Jericho blanket tumbling down, a cinematically potent suggestive image. <br /><br /></div><div>Capra's films often explore populist values and depict the struggle of the everyday common man against the machinery of politics, commerce, and corruption. They frequently portray rugged individualism as a myth or fairy tale created to maintain the illusion of democracy, as seen in works like Meet John Doe and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Capra's characters are often conflicted by alternating realities, exemplified by George Bailey's internal struggle in It's a Wonderful Life as he grapples with his desires for personal fulfillment and societal responsibilities. Strong and charismatic female leads are also a hallmark of Capra's films, with actresses like Jean Arthur, Barbara Stanwyck, and Claudette Colbert taking on memorable roles in movies such as Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, Meet John Doe, and It Happened One Night. <br /><br />Several of Capra’s scenes in the film serve as poignant reminders of the Great Depression setting. For instance, the scene where bus passengers engage in a spontaneous singalong symbolizes a moment of hope and unity amidst adversity, allowing them to momentarily forget their personal struggles and come together as a community. Additionally, the sequence where characters selflessly give their last dollars to a hungry woman and child highlights the widespread economic hardship faced by many during this era. Furthermore, the scene where Ellie impulsively dumps a perfectly good meal on the floor reflects a sense of hubris and extravagance that contrasts starkly with the prevailing economic conditions of the Great Depression. We also observe Peter gesturing friendly waves to drifters riding the rails. <br /><br />Indeed, class disparities are front and center in It Happened One Night. At the heart of the film lies the juxtaposition between Ellie, an affluent, sheltered heiress, and Peter, a rugged reporter. Their interactions serve as a lens through which the movie delves into societal class distinctions, challenging preconceived notions linked to affluence and privilege. This is also a narrative about the battle between two Kings: King Wesley and Peter, who is nicknamed “King” by his fellow inebriated reporters in the scene when he is introduced. The former is a King whose class, fame, wealth, and privilege make him a fitting suitor to an heiress, while the latter is a king with a lowercase "k" who, despite his lower socioeconomic status, rules Ellie’s heart. <br /><br />Other themes explored include self-reliance, autonomy, self-discovery, and the importance of thinking for oneself and pursuing one's true passions. Ellie and Peter each pursue independence and freedom in distinct manners. Ellie flees from her domineering father to pursue her marital desires, while Peter, a tenacious and self-reliant journalist, seeks autonomy through his career. Their joint odyssey facilitates a deeper understanding of their individual aspirations and desires. Ellie and Peter both undergo significant personal growth and exploration throughout the narrative. Ellie learns to assert her independence and agency, while Peter cultivates empathy and compassion. Their collaborative journey serves as a catalyst for uncovering pivotal truths about themselves and their intrinsic values. <br /><br />Recall how Peter lectures Ellie on how to properly dunk a donut, ride piggyback, and hitchhike. This becomes a running gag in which Peter asserts his assumed authority on these subjects until the student becomes the teacher in the hitchhiking sequence, which demonstrates that, like her, he’s learning important lessons in this journey—including the lesson that Ellie isn’t the dizzy dame or helpless brat that he imagines her to be. <br /><br />This is certainly a “money can’t buy you love” tale. The film espouses that wealth and material possessions are insufficient for securing love or happiness, highlighting the significance of true affection and mutual respect. The movie conveys a message that love can serve as a great equalizer among different classes, suggesting that interpersonal relationships have the potential to transcend socioeconomic barriers. </div><div><br /></div><div>However, this message may be diluted when tracing the trajectory of Ellie's character arc, which ultimately challenges the notion of female empowerment and independence. While initially depicted as a strong-willed and intelligent woman resistant to patriarchal control, Ellie's reliance on Peter for protection and eventual acceptance of her father's wishes arguably undermine her agency and autonomy. Moreover, her ignorance regarding financial matters and her inability to fend for herself highlight the constraints imposed on her by societal expectations and gender norms. Thus, while the film may celebrate the spirit of the common man in certain respects, it reinforces traditional gender roles and power dynamics for the time. <br /><br /><a href="https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/it-happened-one-night/">Per</a> Slant Magazine critic Chris Cabin: <i>“If the film ultimately idealizes the morals of the middle class in terms of usable intellect and responsibility, the narrative builds off the friction between entitlement and self-reliance, both between the two leads and within Ellie. The filmmakers all but underline this early on when Warne’s colleagues christen him “King,” just like Ellie’s other suitor—one given as a sign of a family’s wealth and heritage, the other gifted by the common man for an act of careless, bemused defiance.” </i><br /><br />It Happened One Night has a few greatest gifts it continues to bestow with every rewatch. First is its ability to make us believe in the spontaneity of love and how it can happen unexpectedly. Gift #2 is its reinforcement of the often implausible notion that opposites can attract. And gift #3 is its remarkable power to increasingly care about and root for two characters who often aren’t very likable or relatable—especially 90 years later when the dated gender politics and patriarchal values of this film can uncomfortably stand out. <span class="fullpost">
</span></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-55231065005578156292024-02-18T16:28:00.002-06:002024-02-18T16:28:48.703-06:00The power of persuasion<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVYC2dreNfl7A_FpsBk9zx2YX3WPzfap8_1CL6vpIj0QNxg6L5eZ_kM8U1TW2iHT85AOozPihkO11x1Hjxef4kYpATSgs2Lzlr4Q3CPS1ftqu2pZ5ofI4IbxbJTx6EFy4Uqk4c0ah9aLpuGS7j1S1HC6hscl12BsBvCHH0Ol1k1_NqL1fb9oR09vqc79ya/s756/Screen%20Shot%2002-18-24%20at%2004.25%20PM.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="756" data-original-width="525" height="539" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVYC2dreNfl7A_FpsBk9zx2YX3WPzfap8_1CL6vpIj0QNxg6L5eZ_kM8U1TW2iHT85AOozPihkO11x1Hjxef4kYpATSgs2Lzlr4Q3CPS1ftqu2pZ5ofI4IbxbJTx6EFy4Uqk4c0ah9aLpuGS7j1S1HC6hscl12BsBvCHH0Ol1k1_NqL1fb9oR09vqc79ya/w374-h539/Screen%20Shot%2002-18-24%20at%2004.25%20PM.PNG" width="374" /></a></div>Fair warning: The 2014 film Diplomacy, a French historical drama helmed by director Volker Schlöndorff and adapted from Cyril Gély's play of the same title, is one of those “based loosely on historical events” dramatizations that can infuriate scholars and historians. Nevertheless, even if it fudges the facts, it’s a compelling drama that unfolds against the backdrop of Nazi-occupied Paris in 1944, chronicling the efforts of Swedish diplomat Raoul Nordling, portrayed by André Dussollier, to dissuade General Dietrich von Choltitz—the German military governor of Paris, played by Niels Arestrup—from executing Adolf Hitler's directive to annihilate Paris before the Allies' arrival. <br /><br />Dussollier and Arestrup deliver arresting performances, infusing their characters with depth and authenticity, while Schlöndorff's direction and the film's cinematography capture the tension and complexities of the narrative, effectively portraying the intricate negotiations and ethical dilemmas faced by the protagonists. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i style="font-weight: normal;">To hear a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this movie, conducted earlier this month, click </i><i><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkeBu3if8DTUXde2LrQ?e=uqdbCx">here</a></i><i style="font-weight: normal;">. </i></span></h4><br />What’s interesting about Diplomacy is that it’s an antiwar movie stripped to bare essentials, featuring only two main characters, filmed primarily in a single room, depicting very little actual combat and not featuring any personalities from or scenes involving the other warring side. This is the rare war film less about action than about words. In their essay for Offscreen.com, George Lellis and Hans-Bernhard Moeller <a href="https://offscreen.com/view/volker-schlondorff-diplomatie">wrote</a>: <i>“It is easy to dramatize war, but much harder to dramatize peace. In Diplomatie, Gély and Schlöndorff have pulled off the trick of making anti-war works because they have provided a largely non-violent resolution to the conflict at hand. The superiority of the choice of non-violence over destruction is reinforced by a closing caption that tells us that Choltitz’s wife and children went unharmed, putting to rest Choltitz’s fears that if he disobeyed orders his family would be killed… Diplomacy thus deemphasizes spectacle in favor of talk, drawing one’s attention to the subtleties of dialogue and performance.” </i><br /><br />Interestingly, the filmmakers use archival black-and-white footage of, first, the destruction of Warsaw to quickly demonstrate how ruthless and mighty the Nazis are at destroying a city, and second the encroachment of the Allies into Paris and the street combat involving the French resistance, to lend the film a sheen of verisimilitude. <br /><br />Although the outcome is anticlimactic, considering that we know Paris wasn’t decimated, Schlöndorff and company effectively tighten the knot and create riveting suspense toward the conclusion as we await the general’s decision and observe the fictional close call among the soldiers preparing to detonate the explosives. Nordling and Choltitz go toe-to-toe with intriguing contentions for why the city should be spared or not, with the diplomat increasingly serving as the general’s conscience as the film progresses and penetrating the Nazi commander’s thick armor of resolve and self-imposed ethical immunity. By administering Choltitz’s medicine in time—therefore resisting the urge to let him die—and by responding “I don’t know” when the general asks him what he would do in his place, Nordling earns his trust, respect, and convincible ear. <br /><br />Indeed, Diplomacy serves as a memorable lesson on empathy, or putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. When Choltitz asks Nordling what he would do in his place, he’s posing the question to the audience, too. While it’s easy to argue logically that saving over a million French lives would outweigh saving your wife and children, the reality is that, if the decision were up to you it might not be so easy to make. <br /><br />The moral conflict at the heart of the tale is palpable: If you are sworn to obey orders and do what’s best for your soldiers and your country, should you disobey those orders if they come from a leader you no longer trust and from a motive of senseless violence and brutality? <br /><br />Here, we also have a classic battle of wills. This story pits one man—a neutral diplomat with cunning and persuadable powers—against a grizzled military leader who holds the fate of a major city and future postwar world order in his hands. The stakes are incredibly high, and both men prove that they can cogently rationalize their arguments and weigh the pros and cons of the impending decision. Although the general appears unyielding and determined earlier in the film, we see cracks emerge in his stony façade as well as physical and moral vulnerability. <br /><br />Diplomacy further posits that the fate of nations and the outcome of major historical events often hinge on the mere choice of one flawed human being. Although this 11th-hour meeting between Choltitz and Nordling is a dramatic fabrication, it demonstrates how the decision one person can make in human history can be incredibly impactful. Director Volker Schlondorff said in an interview: <i>“War places men in extreme situations and brings out the best and worst in humanity. These days a conflict between France and Germany is so unthinkable that I found it interesting to recall the past relationships between our two countries. If, God forbid, Paris had been razed, I doubt that the Franco-German bond would have formed or that Europe would have pulled through.” </i><br /><br />This film also shows how words can sometimes be more powerful than weapons, and how healthy human dialogue and well-timed, carefully articulated arguments can defuse even the most volatile of situations.<i> “The movie presents an argument between civilization and barbarism, between the pleasure principle and the death instinct,” <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/27/war-almost">wrote</a> New Yorker critic David Denby. “But the filmmakers mostly avoid high-flown rhetoric in favor of the intensely practical give-and-take of negotiation. Schlöndorff…makes a case that diplomacy can solve the most intricately knotted problems.” </i><br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Is Paris Burning </li><li>The Devil’s General </li><li>Winterspelt </li><li>Frost/Nixon </li><li>Downfall </li><li>Conspiracy </li><li>Thirteen Days </li><li>Shake Hands With the Devil </li><li>Fail Safe </li><li>12 Angry Men </li><li>Secret Honor </li><li>Missing </li><li>Films with narratives restricted by limited locations, like Rope, Rear Window, and Sleuth </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Volker Schlondorff </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The Tin Drum </li><li>Death of a Salesman (TV) </li><li>Enigma (TV)</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-64608308265284818192024-02-14T00:12:00.004-06:002024-02-14T00:14:30.030-06:00Cineversary podcast sends valentine to It Happened One Night for its 90th birthday<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrzhHQ4mgLeKImSsu5McRWje81-Gi0DrqIgRuCTxDXOEtgyQ3Jy3ScBl4Mycd_pfULMUrwJov74Tk8nF8ZhJPOU8hnZ3r2s0FQG0ek2VTXIvx64i52gQAdTGRi3_-zANfKj7gZTaRU9Cp3LwzWC69UzZlT0cmRDU8214s6_U6TubgdP7X4dSnKygvnCknE/s1088/Picture1.png" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1088" data-original-width="522" height="766" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrzhHQ4mgLeKImSsu5McRWje81-Gi0DrqIgRuCTxDXOEtgyQ3Jy3ScBl4Mycd_pfULMUrwJov74Tk8nF8ZhJPOU8hnZ3r2s0FQG0ek2VTXIvx64i52gQAdTGRi3_-zANfKj7gZTaRU9Cp3LwzWC69UzZlT0cmRDU8214s6_U6TubgdP7X4dSnKygvnCknE/w369-h766/Picture1.png" width="369" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Joseph McBride</td></tr></tbody></table>In Cineversary podcast episode #67, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> and guest <a href="https://cinema.sfsu.edu/archive/people/faculty/joseph-mcbride.html">Joseph McBride</a>, a film professor at San Francisco State University and author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/FRANKLY-UNMASKING-FRANK-Joseph-McBride/dp/1949950476">Frankly: Unmasking Frank Capra</a>, send a valentine to It Happened One Night, directed by Frank Capra, which celebrates a 90th birthday this month. Erik and Joseph hitchhike across Hollywood history to examine how this granddaddy of the romcom and screwball comedy remains a classic, its influence on later films, what it reveals about Capra, and much more.<div><br /></div><div>To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/67-It-Happened-One-Night-90th-anniversary-with-Joseph-McBride-e2fog7b"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here </span></b></a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>.</div><div><br /></div>
<iframe src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/67-It-Happened-One-Night-90th-anniversary-with-Joseph-McBride-e2fog7b/a-aav9qrn" height="102px" width="600px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-4377261261245143032024-02-07T14:59:00.001-06:002024-02-07T14:59:56.731-06:00Talking Reds<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9qz__KYCAG_OKZZFdC7AGi-Zbxu0KyeKHb_gCPYYKiRRae8HAh1lbOsOT5XM6hR3wbQZRG6g5FQ1PJWxPYbio87Y_lxKpPAzd12tN48Tp-UGKkAF5ahst9IVpwtuBjLpAQg75fVOFuEpIih7HiPy9Jl1U14O4NglVgHtVw0-6-ugcx03O0N-ZMW2fF7NV/s750/Screen%20Shot%2002-07-24%20at%2002.51%20PM.PNG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="750" data-original-width="555" height="548" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9qz__KYCAG_OKZZFdC7AGi-Zbxu0KyeKHb_gCPYYKiRRae8HAh1lbOsOT5XM6hR3wbQZRG6g5FQ1PJWxPYbio87Y_lxKpPAzd12tN48Tp-UGKkAF5ahst9IVpwtuBjLpAQg75fVOFuEpIih7HiPy9Jl1U14O4NglVgHtVw0-6-ugcx03O0N-ZMW2fF7NV/w406-h548/Screen%20Shot%2002-07-24%20at%2002.51%20PM.PNG" width="406" /></a></div>Released in 1981, Reds is one of those “they don’t make ’em like that anymore” historical epics popularized in the 1950s and 1960s. Directed and co-written by Warren Beatty and featuring a star-studded cast including Beatty, Diane Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Edward Herrmann, Maureen Stapleton, and others, the film tells of the life and endeavors of John Reed—a journalist, activist, and author renowned for documenting the Russian Revolution in his seminal book Ten Days That Shook the World. The narrative follows Reed's radical journalistic pursuits and his immersion into socialist politics, culminating in his voyage to Russia to witness and report on the October Revolution of 1917, and delves into Reed's intimate relationship with fellow activist Louise Bryant, portrayed by Diane Keaton. Spanning several years in the early 20th Century and encapsulating significant historical events, Reds stands as a sprawling drama renowned for its grand scope and ambitious storytelling. The movie earned Beatty considerable accolades, including an Academy Award for Best Director. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkd90jQIjM8MmHwoCkw?e=V1egLU">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><br />Perhaps the most amazing thing about Reds is the fact that it was made at all, especially at a time when Reagan had come to power, the Soviet Union was still America’s bitter enemy, and Hollywood was dubious about funding bloated and costly passion projects epics like Heaven’s Gate and Apocalypse Now. Beatty’s considerable clout and unswerving belief in this film are primarily responsible for how it came to be made. Consider that Reds is one of the last movies with an intermission, and one of the last of the big-budget, three-hour-plus epics of the previous century, a type of movie that had gone out of fashion years earlier. <br /><br />It’s also a genre mashup: a romance, a biopic, a period piece, and even a documentary thanks to its inclusion of “witnesses”—real-life talking heads who serve as a kind of Greek chorus, offering commentary on the characters and providing contextual counterpoints to the dramatizations we see. It’s been credited, in fact, as one of the best modern docudramas for this reason. <br /><br />Beatty’s directorial choices are interesting: He weaves in the testimonies of these witnesses throughout the film, having them serve almost as introducers of new chapters within the narrative; yet, he never names them. Beatty also has a penchant for abruptly cutting away from a shot or scene, often refusing to provide closure to a particular sequence—such as when Reed runs from the train away from enemy fire. And rather than provide a soup-to-nuts account of Reed’s major life highlights, we are often given snapshots and brief snatches of an event, speech, or occurrence. <br /><br />The film is divided into two sections, cleaved by the intermission. Part one plays more like a honeymoon and often ecstatic romantic and political coupling of characters, ending with exhilaration—for Reed and Bryant—of the Russian Revolution. Part two depicts trouble in paradise, as we witness arguments between Reed and Bryant and Reed and his fellow socialists, and observe the fraying of the optimism and idealism of Reed and other true believers who learn the hard way that communism has consequences. <br /><br />Fortunately, Beatty navigates these controversial political waters deftly, being careful not to over-romanticize the allure of socialism/communism, presenting its promises and pitfalls in fairly equal measure. He embodies Reed as a flawed human being, as well. <br /><br />At its core, Reds is a study of a personal relationship under pressure, and therefore, is regarded by many as more of a love story than a historical/political drama. Fascinatingly, Beatty and Keaton were a romantic couple during this production, and the filming put a major strain on their relationship. <br /><br />That element of private tension, manifested in the performances, speaks to one of the film’s key themes: the toll a public/professional life takes on your private affairs. Reds is also about the risks and rewards of passionate idealism and commitment to a political cause. This biopic of Reed depicts his spirited support of communism and the lengths to which he was willing to advance it, ultimately dying young as a consequence of his tireless work ethic. <br /><br />Perhaps most importantly, Reds is a treatise on how love grows and matures with time. Reed and Bryant’s on-again/off-again romance and eventual marriage are continually tested, but their unshakable love and bonds of affection prove stronger as the story proceeds to its climax. Even though Bryant has an affair with playwright Eugene O’Neill, she returns to Reed and stays faithful to him following the end of the tryst. <br /><br />Reds espouses a carpe diem manifesto, as well, stressing the importance of seizing the moment and recognizing a seismic but fleeting event in history that you can be a part of by acting quickly, decisively, and intrepidly. <br /><br />Reds also stands as a cautionary tale about disillusionment and the consequences of overinvesting in an unproven system of beliefs and unvetted political cause. Emma Goldman, Louise Bryant, and, to a lesser extent diehard believer Reed eventually realize that the idealistic Bolshevik revolution in Russia and its high aims have been co-opted by a relatively small group of soulless communist bureaucrats who defend their denial of human rights as good for the party. Goldman says: “Anyone even vaguely suspected of being a counter-revolutionary can be taken out and shot without a trial. Where does that end? Is any nightmare justifiable in the name of defense against counter-revolution? Nothing works. Four million people died last year. Not from fighting a war. They died from starvation and typhus in a militaristic police state that suppresses freedom and human rights.” Reed responds: “It’s not happening the way we thought it would.” <div><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Historical epics like Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago, Gone With the Wind, Gandhi, and The Last Emperor </li><li>Controversial big-budget Hollywood risks like Heaven’s Gate and Apocalypse Now </li><li>Films about journalists or writers covering wars, revolutions, and social upheavals like The Year of Living Dangerously, The Killing Fields, Salvador, and Hemingway & Gellhorn </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films directed by Warren Beatty </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Heaven Can Wait (co-directed) </li><li>Dick Tracy </li><li>Bulworth </li><li>Rules Don’t Apply</li></ul></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-50995064803594135162024-02-02T16:13:00.001-06:002024-02-02T16:13:41.701-06:00Child is mother to the woman<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7DIL0KWaQ0EBfSig0x7RJpno9KseUI2oHANOuX68-YgA-P7JawuFzzKGKk6GT4XuNy30NfskeEt1_rpqUwEY6VR-Bks_5E3YqlpUCPbPttXMmlwJ1khziWjVmOykwrsK6B1SBQMcWVDcegNxXAKj_OM5NCoSq9JM5xoBAJ6cq6g65uge5k0HDxQ9svsbK/s747/Screen%20Shot%2002-02-24%20at%2004.11%20PM.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="747" data-original-width="528" height="551" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7DIL0KWaQ0EBfSig0x7RJpno9KseUI2oHANOuX68-YgA-P7JawuFzzKGKk6GT4XuNy30NfskeEt1_rpqUwEY6VR-Bks_5E3YqlpUCPbPttXMmlwJ1khziWjVmOykwrsK6B1SBQMcWVDcegNxXAKj_OM5NCoSq9JM5xoBAJ6cq6g65uge5k0HDxQ9svsbK/w389-h551/Screen%20Shot%2002-02-24%20at%2004.11%20PM.PNG" width="389" /></a></div>Céline Sciamma, acclaimed director of Portrait of a Lady on Fire, followed up that critical darling with another standout French work, Petite Maman (2021), which means “little mom.” Starring wonderfully precocious twin sister actresses, the movie has received acclaim for its emotional richness, subtle storytelling, and examination of intricate themes. Sciamma's skilled direction, along with compelling performances and a heartfelt narrative, has earned it kudos as a memorable cinematic text that connects with audiences through its genuine and poignant depiction of relationships. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>Click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkd9FzODBnkNAH-R39Q?e=s5fBer"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></a> to listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week. </i></span></h4><br />Among the distinctive, memorable, and surprising facets of Petite Maman is the fact that this could very well be a science fiction film. It’s easy to assume that eight-year-old Nelly is a lonely but intensely creative and imaginative kid who fantasizes these encounters with her mother, who has suddenly appeared as a playmate of the same age. But consider that we see her father interact with and acknowledge young Marion, and he allows Nelly to stay one more day at the house after agreeing to let the girls enjoy a sleepover. Also, recall that young Marion tells Nelly “I’m already thinking about you”; at the film’s conclusion, Nelly and Marion call each other by their real names and there seems to be an innate understanding by the characters, and the audience, that adult Marion has been positively affected by Nelly’s time travel experience. <br /><br />The casual but direct way that the filmmakers suddenly introduce the notion of time travel and fantasy, without explaining how or why it’s happening, is remarkable. Without exposition, we and Nelly are unexpectedly thrust into the past, and visual cues—like the grandmother’s wallpaper and bathroom tile—inform us, without fanfare, that a magically impossible journey is occurring. <br /><br />Regardless of how fantastically you interpret the story, this is one of the best family films and movies about childhood released in the 21st Century, a work that can appeal to any age but that can prove particularly relevant to adults who need to be reminded of the wonders and mysteries of childhood and what we can learn from our youthful pasts. “(Petite Maman) immerses us into the world of childhood where magic and dreams and the impossible are all still possible, before the world has beaten it out of us. It evokes the ethos of Supertramp’s 1979 “The Logical Song,” which is all about how the world doesn’t just expect, but demands that everything that is wonderful about childhood be left behind in favor of rigor and logic…(it) celebrates that space where everything is still wonderful, a miracle, beautiful, and magical,” <a href="https://www.qnetwork.com/review/4625">said</a> critic James Kendrick. <br /><br />Fortunately, Sciamma isn’t sentimentally coercive. The picture doesn’t constantly shift into heartstrings overdrive mode by slathering on mawkish moments or excessively tender scenes designed to make our eyes moist. There isn’t even a score. “Petite Maman is full of scenes…that aim for a casual nonchalance that allows the viewer to absorb them without a telegraphed emotion,” RogerEbert.com reviewer Odie Henderson <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/petite-maman-movie-review-2022">wrote</a>. “It allows you to fill in the blanks.” <br /><br />Consider how Petite Maman is similarly structured to Sciamma’s earlier Portrait of a Lady on Fire. NPR critic Justin Chang astutely <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/04/29/1095043071/petite-maman-review#:~:text=The%20title%20Petite%20Maman%20%E2%80%94%20which,strange%20about%20them%20at%20all.">observed</a> that, “In both films, two female characters are granted a brief, even utopian retreat from the outside world and something mysterious and beautiful transpires.” <br /><br />There are also hints that this is a narrative about nonconforming gender expression in a child. Remember that Nelly knows the location of her grandmother’s hidden closet, a word that carries all manner of connotations today, and that she asks her grandmother for help tying her necktie, an article of clothing normally associated with males. <br /><br />“Child is father to the man,” poet William Wordsmith wrote, or in this case “mother to the woman.” Petite Maman demonstrates how our personality is significantly shaped by the behaviors and activities during our childhood, but it also suggests that we can live better as adults by remembering the truths we learned as kids. <br /><br />Moreso than any other film in recent memory, this work explores how temporal perceptions change as we age. As children, time seems to crawl, but we also have more time to explore the world and our own imaginations. As adults, time goes by increasingly faster and we are continually reminded of the inevitability of death when our parents pass and our own mortality when our offspring mature. Petite Maman reminds us to slow down and recall periods in our youth when we were afforded the luxury of extra time—not only to dream and play but to sort and comprehend a gigantic world that shrinks with advancing years. <br /><br />The filmmakers are also nudging us to trust our offspring and our own inner child. By reconnecting with our past younger selves and cherishing our formative memories, we can learn to better cope with the stress and challenges of adulthood. Additionally, Petite Maman encourages us to form stronger bonds of affection, understanding, and respect with our sons and daughters, especially when they are young, tender, and impressionable, and to remember that nurturing can go both ways in a healthy parent-child relationship: Ponder how Nelly feeds her mother and hugs her from behind in the car. “Petite maman races us into the future that is the “path behind” us, an ancestral reminder to do, together, what makes us feel happy; to say goodbye to the straight time that commands us to abandon childhood. To see it again,” Criterion Collection essayist So Mayer <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/8153-petite-maman-au-revoir-lenfance">wrote</a>. <br /><br />Perhaps most importantly, this film is a portrait of grief and how a child tries to cope with the loss of a loved one. Nelly feels guilty for not properly saying goodbye to her now-deceased grandmother. But by traveling back in time, or fantasizing, she can both reconnect with her grandmother and forge a deeper, more lasting rapport with her mother. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Curse of the Cat People </li><li>The Five Devils </li><li>The Quiet Girl </li><li>Ponette </li><li>The Florida Project </li><li>My Neighbor Totoro </li><li>A Little Princess </li><li>The Red Balloon </li><li>Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close </li><li>The Spirit of the Beehive </li><li>Pan’s Labyrinth </li><li>Where the Wild Things Are </li></ul><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Céline Sciamma </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Portrait of a Lady on Fire </li><li>Girlhood </li><li>Tomboy </li><li>Water Lilies</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-92051170855420572342024-01-23T19:56:00.006-06:002024-01-23T19:57:40.549-06:00A gem of a jailbreak flick<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpaW4TILpy5y9weOrohJDfUS6EjW4XdpnLHBt5StUVtMcIpZ8VzYPnRpQWe9uFEapi70SgSHBugO5gGZy9C4n8H10I1HK9Va6mJFI8iFBa2DwLS2rTmYrG5plvxUbOreZug7Ztu36hs0pbW4VxiO_T7KimioKRITCUmqdc-sNZUpnQwoQUXY2WAV8lyzSG/s1600/s-l1600.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1211" data-original-width="1600" height="484" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpaW4TILpy5y9weOrohJDfUS6EjW4XdpnLHBt5StUVtMcIpZ8VzYPnRpQWe9uFEapi70SgSHBugO5gGZy9C4n8H10I1HK9Va6mJFI8iFBa2DwLS2rTmYrG5plvxUbOreZug7Ztu36hs0pbW4VxiO_T7KimioKRITCUmqdc-sNZUpnQwoQUXY2WAV8lyzSG/w640-h484/s-l1600.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />Released in 1963, The Great Escape abides as a timeless war film directed by John Sturges and produced by United Artists. Centered around a group of Allied prisoners of war during World War II, the film depicts their daring escape plan from a German POW camp, based on the actual mass escape from Stalag Luft III in 1944. Boasting a cast of renowned actors such as Steve McQueen, James Garner, Richard Attenborough, Charles Bronson, and others, the picture is renowned for its iconic scenes, notably Steve McQueen's motorcycle chase, etching itself as one of the most memorable action sequences in cinematic history. The Great Escape also resonates with viewers worldwide thanks to its evergreen themes of resilience, determination, and camaraderie among the prisoners. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkd40L_nZYfKE9hPB7g?e=GiTSSl" style="font-weight: normal;">here</a>. </i></span></h4><br />The Great Escape offers an interesting compare and contrast from other war films, prison movies, and POW dramatizations. Many such works emphasize more explosive action, macho bravado, and impressive set pieces, as evidenced in The Guns of Navarone, Von Ryan’s Express, The Dirty Dozen, and Kelly’s Heroes. The Great Escape is arguably a more entertaining and emotional outing. For proof, consider how the filmmakers use sentiment, suspense, intrigue, tragedy, and light comedy to take our feelings on a roller coaster ride. <br /><br />Criterion Collection essayist Sheila O’Malley <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/6941-the-great-escape-not-caught">touched on this approach</a>: <i>“The film is about a serious subject, told without self-seriousness. Because of this, it doesn’t date at all. It’s an ode to ingenuity and cooperation. Sturges was not at all a member of the counterculture, but The Great Escape’s spirit is pure up-yours antiestablishment, making it a forerunner of M*A*S*H, to Kelly’s Heroes, to The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming, to all the deconstructing, demythologizing war films to come.”</i><div><div><br />Moreover, The Great Escape is, along with several of these comparative films, a fantastic ensemble piece with colorful and arresting characters and action-oriented actors popular in their day among male audiences. Interestingly, although he is top-billed, McQueen is on screen for a relatively small amount of time (mostly in the second half), which signifies that this is more of a group effort by the actors. Still, this is probably the best movie and role of McQueen’s career. </div><div><br /></div><div><i>“The Great Escape popularized the prison movie trope of an ensemble defined by emblematic handles. James Garner’s resourceful American who can acquire any number of forbidden goods goes by 'The Scrounger.' Donald Pleasance is 'The Forger,' despite his increasing blindness. Bronson’s claustrophobic digger is called 'Tunnel King'…The list goes on,”</i> <a href="https://deepfocusreview.com/reviews/the-great-escape/">wrote</a> Deep Focus Review critic Brian Eggert. <br /><br />This is less a picture about “the madness of war,” like Bridge on the River Kwai, than an inspirational somewhat true account of collective sacrifice. Kwai is also more of a battle of wills tale pitting one commanding officer—Alec Guinness—against his enemy counterpart. Additionally, in this story, the POWs are all honorable, trustworthy men; in Stalag 17, a major subplot is the presence of a mole/secret agent among the prisoners. <br /><br />Some, like DVD Savant Glenn Erickson, <a href="https://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s4170esca.html">posit</a> that this is more of a caper/heist movie than a war film or prison escape picture. <i>“The schemes, dodges, and con games used by the prisoners to carry out a huge tunneling operation are a caper far more elaborate than a bank job. They're also entertaining, funny, and credible,”</i> Erickson wrote.</div><div><br />Although this is set during World War II and the Nazis are the easy-to-root-against antagonists, this is a war film that doesn’t give equal voice to their characters, nor does it mention or hint at the Holocaust. Yet we are reminded of their capacity for despicable acts, especially the cold-blooded massacring of the rounded-up prisoners on the hillside. <br /><br />The value of teamwork, orchestrated collaboration, and group planning is a prime payoff message imbued herein. The Great Escape shows that solidarity among a group of individuals who accept pre-defined roles and responsibilities can create more successful and efficient outcomes. By assigning jobs to people based on skill and experience, following a chain of command, and maintaining discipline and self-control, even the most insurmountable of obstacles can be cleared. <br /><br />This is also a movie that preaches the perks of turning lemons into lemonade. The resourcefulness and creativity of these men help them conquer one challenge after another, which proves that out-of-the-box thinking, improvisational skills, and on-the-spot ingenuity can make a huge difference in desperate situations. <br /><br />The Great Escape certainly serves as a powerful grace under pressure narrative. Time and again, these prisoners of war must pivot, recalibrate, or start anew in their shared task of escaping and be willing to quickly adapt to changing conditions without panicking or quitting. <br /><br />Arguably, the most important moral to the story is shared sacrifice. While Bartlett aims to get as many prisoners out of the camp as possible, his minimum objective is to complicate matters for the Third Reich by forcing Germany to devote men and resources to guard these highly elusive prisoners and capture any escapees. The men know that, even if they successfully escape the camp they may not be coming back alive, and many altruistically agree to help without any guarantee of escaping at all. The fact that they made a film about an incredibly impressive mass escape by 76 prisoners, but only three of them evaded capture or death, tells us that this is a narrative more about sacrifice and selflessness than man’s inherent need for freedom. Case in point: Recall the dialogue exchange at the conclusion. Hendley: “Do you think it was worth the price?” Ramsey: “Depends on your point of view, Hendley.” </div><div><br /></div><div><i>“The Great Escape cleverly turns a defeat into a tale of victory,” </i>Erickson continued.<i> “No matter how it's made to look, the bottom line of the mass escape is (that)…a lot of rebellious defiance mostly gets a lot of good men killed…we celebrate the protagonists as they dare to defy their German captors…We aren't bothered by the fact that their efforts had little effect on the war proper. But the trial-by-escape with its risk and sacrifice was a personal challenge for men otherwise unable to fight: civilized defiance.” <br /></i><br />Reflect on how the German and English officers within the camp treat each other with basic dignity and respect even though the POWs are routinely defiant and will do everything in their power to break out. This dynamic of maintaining quiet mutual respect and abiding by an unspoken code of honor is a noteworthy facet of the film. <br /><br />Alas, every person has his breaking point. We witness the stir-crazy Ives, desperate to escape, suffer an early demise. Even Danny, the toughest prisoner, suffers from severe claustrophobia and anxiety that can derail his hopes of escape; fortunately, he rises to the challenge and becomes one of only three POWs to flee and survive. <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Stalag 17 </li><li>Grand Illusion </li><li>Bridge on the River Kwai </li><li>Von Ryan’s Express </li><li>The Guns of Navarone </li><li>Army of Shadows </li><li>Papillon </li><li>Soldier of Orange </li><li>Hart’s War </li><li>Escape From Sobibor </li><li>Films with a cast of assembled expert characters, including The Magnificent Seven, Oceans Eleven, Kelly’s Heroes, and The Expendables </li><li>Chicken Run, a CGI-animated remake of sorts </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by John Sturges </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The Magnificent Seven </li><li>Bad Day at Black Rock </li><li>Gunfight at the O.K. Corral </li><li>Joe Kidd</li></ul></div></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-17848235650494393642024-01-17T22:43:00.005-06:002024-01-17T22:43:51.613-06:00Cineversary podcast celebrates 60th birthday of Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2B2vixUivqawdZY2jqaETOfjq3PW8MAPQjuXK5MZaVbvM_KDnWhRxY1YnoldbBXXYMnsRusO7vZNIBLKt6YW7yyEos56pSnKpJujqvBY7aSvG1fGh_oSLVpapAoc0UQMdSUB2F3D70vAznlbZ9Xr3mpnM48qEZIRLioPmoFWoNKZ4e3yqXvpojsfbUziU/s1110/Picture2.png" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1110" data-original-width="526" height="726" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2B2vixUivqawdZY2jqaETOfjq3PW8MAPQjuXK5MZaVbvM_KDnWhRxY1YnoldbBXXYMnsRusO7vZNIBLKt6YW7yyEos56pSnKpJujqvBY7aSvG1fGh_oSLVpapAoc0UQMdSUB2F3D70vAznlbZ9Xr3mpnM48qEZIRLioPmoFWoNKZ4e3yqXvpojsfbUziU/w345-h726/Picture2.png" width="345" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Rodney Hill and Kenneth Turan</td></tr></tbody></table>In Cineversary podcast episode #66, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> heads to the War Room with former LA Times and NPR film critic <a href="https://twitter.com/kennethturan">Kenneth Turan</a> and Hofstra University film professor <a href="https://www.hofstra.edu/faculty-staff/faculty-profile.html?id=3590">Rodney Hill</a> to decipher the top secret codes behind <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057012/">Dr. Strangelove</a>, directed by Stanley Kubrick, in celebration of the movie’s 60th anniversary. Erik and his guests explore how this black comedy masterwork remains evergreen, Kubrick’s brilliant directing choices, and key themes underpinning this supreme political satire. Erik also chats briefly with <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm12448866/">Tom Lucas</a> from Fathom Events, who unveils Fathom’s 2024 lineup of Big Screen Classics returning to theaters this year.<br /><br />To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/66-Dr--Strangelove-60th-anniversary-with-Kenneth-Turan--Rodney-Hill-e2ej5op/a-aarurch"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><b>here </b></span></a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.<div><br /></div><div>Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>.</div><div><br /></div>
<iframe frameborder="0" height="102px" scrolling="no" src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/66-Dr--Strangelove-60th-anniversary-with-Kenneth-Turan--Rodney-Hill-e2ej5op" width="600px"></iframe>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-65848394516959593092024-01-15T14:52:00.005-06:002024-01-15T14:52:33.491-06:00Director Todd Haynes proved his mettle with Poison 33 years ago<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNUagILa8yTNFlqn9Q6Vn0EraAVwzRAWfh7Yd6SrS7KIOGt-nxin8nVxFgiDO3x4Q7umYLSghu_iMxr-tgdqVN7yP7lcvIfFCYEXZ2MZQ7GQApmUmn9HWhXx2XIX3DbenpqaovMwxq1ALQpvdGWDi6tSE4vnKyOBghHhgzB3Zm71vL46Z_ffD1g9lUVeCH/s779/Screen%20Shot%2001-15-24%20at%2002.45%20PM.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="779" data-original-width="562" height="555" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNUagILa8yTNFlqn9Q6Vn0EraAVwzRAWfh7Yd6SrS7KIOGt-nxin8nVxFgiDO3x4Q7umYLSghu_iMxr-tgdqVN7yP7lcvIfFCYEXZ2MZQ7GQApmUmn9HWhXx2XIX3DbenpqaovMwxq1ALQpvdGWDi6tSE4vnKyOBghHhgzB3Zm71vL46Z_ffD1g9lUVeCH/w401-h555/Screen%20Shot%2001-15-24%20at%2002.45%20PM.PNG" width="401" /></a></div>In 1991, acclaimed gay filmmaker Todd Haynes garnered significant attention for his feature film debut Poison, an experimental drama written and directed by Haynes that stands out for its unconventional narrative structure, intertwining three distinct stories that delve into themes of desire, identity, and societal norms. The movie surprisingly won the Grand Jury Prize at the 1991 Sundance Film Festival but quickly became culture war grist for right-wing detractors like Senator Jess Helms and Rev. Donald Wildmon, who criticized the film, which was partially funded via government grants, for being pornographic and homoerotic. <br /><br />Indeed, the picture sparked considerable controversy and garnered both negative and positive attention due to its explicit content, unorthodox style, and thematic exploration, and quickly came to be regarded as an important work. The movie is credited with influencing other independent filmmakers, helping to launch the New Queer Cinema movement of the early 1990s, and inspiring other gay artists. This movement aimed to present LGBTQ+ narratives in ways that challenged conventional norms and departed from mainstream representations. <br /><br />Poison also served as the launching pad for a talented director, laying the foundation for Haynes and a successful filmmaking career. Haynes went on to helm acclaimed films like Safe, Far From Heaven, I’m Not Here, Carol, Dark Waters, and most recently May December. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkd00mwsXIWhTPjriQQ?e=i7iclI"><b>here</b></a>. </i></span></h4><br />Poison is particularly renowned for its inventive narrative structure, blending diverse styles and formats. Comprising three separate yet interconnected and increasingly intertwining stories titled "Hero," "Horror," and "Homo," this unconventional storytelling method proved influential. "Horror” is made to look like a low-budget drive-in horror flick in the vein of Carnival of Souls; “Hero,” mimics the tabloid documentary interview style employed by news programs and afternoon TV shows; and “Homo” adopts the conventions of a prison film but with melodramatic flourishes, stylized visual choices, and ample flashbacks. <br /><br />This is a movie about the experimental nature of storytelling itself; instead of focusing on one main character and his narrative, or dividing the film into three distinct chapters played back to back to back, we crosscut between a trio of tales told chronologically. As the film progresses, the disparate characters and situations begin to overlap thematically and echo some of the same messages and ideas. For example, in "Horror," Dr. Graves jumps from a window just as young Richie does, in an attempt to end his horrific situation; we hear testimony from classmates, teachers, and neighbors of both Dr. Graves and Richie (from "Hero"), many of whom express shock, surprise, and disgust of these two characters; and we observe two young girls spit in Dr. Graves’ face, just as we witness a group spitting-upon of an ostracized boy in a flashback within the “Homo” segment. <br /><br />Poison is a powerful text unafraid of making serious sociopolitical commentary on what it was like to be gay in the early 1990s, a time when the AIDS epidemic was still rampant, the politicians in power turned a blind eye to this suffering, and being sexually different often made you a pariah in society. <br /><br />One prominent theme explored is sexual desire deemed taboo by the mainstream. The film probes various facets of desire and sexuality, presenting narratives that not only challenge societal norms but also delve into the intricacies of sexual identity. Particularly, the "Homo" segment emphasizes candid homosexuality and the hurdles gay men face in expressing their desires. <br /><br />Additionally, Poison posits thought-provoking ideas about identity, otherness, and alienation—scrutinizing matters of self, individuality, and the pervasive sense of estrangement and societal rejection experienced by its characters. The film vividly portrays the emotional and psychological struggles faced by males who find themselves on society's fringes due to their sexual orientation or unconventional behaviors. The exploration of marginalized identities, including queer experiences, contributes to a broader commentary on societal expectations and the ongoing struggle for self-acceptance. <br /><br />This work disrupts traditional societal norms and delves into the repercussions of being different and unaccepted by straight society, examining the classic conflict between conformity vs. nonconformity. Each of the three narratives presents characters who resist or deviate from established norms, resulting in conflicts and rumination on conformity’s limitations. “<i>(Poison illustrates) that the real disease of our contemporary culture—beyond AIDS…or environmental allergies or child abuse, or even a botched serum cooked up in a sci-fi lab—is a social rot formed by fear, bigotry, intolerance, and persecution</i>,” <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/7418-on-the-margins-todd-hayness-poison">wrote</a> Criterion Collection essayist Michael Koresky. <br /><br />Haynes himself said: “<i>…the poison that the film describes is not necessarily one that any of us can avoid, living in the culture that we live in . . . The poison is our culture. The film is about laws and what happens when people break them or transgress them…I think what makes Poison really work for some people is that it gets under your skin and makes you feel something … very sad or disturbed</i>.” <br /><br />Poison further teaches us to fight fear with fearlessness. “<i>Poison is about the power of refusal, of embracing exclusion, and of admitting that queerness can be a threat to the norm. It refuses integration, acceptance, and co-optation. It seeks to be a ragged outsider. It is a film about ruin and rot, how pleasure and degradation become intertwined, how transgression becomes transcendence. Cycles of violence are ended, pride overcomes the shame of illness moments before death, and showers of spit turn into rose petals,” </i><a href="https://www.sundance.org/blogs/transcendent-transgression-looking-back-at-todd-haynes-poison/">wrote</a> Sundance Festival blogger Nick Joyner.<i> “Perhaps a portion of Poison’s notoriety lies in its unwillingness to “play nice” and construct “good” representation for the gay community… Haynes was not interested in making films about simple victims who fell prey to the violences of a homophobic society. Here are characters who are imprisoned but not broken, abused but not powerless, cast aside but not ashamed. They could name their suffering and learn from it without losing track of their desires to revisit or re-enact these sources of violence or punishment. The film is not about surrender, resignation, or quiet disobedience. It’s about transforming oppression into something far more fantastical, pleasurable, and ostentatious: power.</i>” <br /><br />Similar works <br /><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Films regarded as part of the New Queer Cinema movement of the 1990s, including Tongue Untied, The Living End, Go Fish, Swoon, The Hours and Times, and The Watermelon Woman </li><li>Halloween (1978) and its subjective camera sequences; and Eraserhead (1977) with its disorienting black-and-white photography</li><li>Intolerance (1916), which also intercuts different stories into one shifting narrative</li><li>Ali: Fear Eats the Soul, which also features a somewhat similar outdoor dining scene</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-77967657394664564932024-01-09T16:59:00.006-06:002024-01-09T17:10:38.907-06:00How I learned to stop worrying and love Dr. Strangelove<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwZ5yqWZhw-wMg54HQaHurqtwoM63hlZO1OtTbnzcWAZuEUmmF6krOqcz_jtGtgW7008jGafcogBGUdt7Nea1i0yXeEGwDkZQMepG9szvFYMu5bJEAIK96J-n75S7ZJ5QN0y7YKB3b1ZWpdTsOgLNNQfF5J8t0Ty7g_t0UtJk73w_N1aaaS8CQaBeZIhUs/s800/dr_strangelove.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="601" data-original-width="800" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwZ5yqWZhw-wMg54HQaHurqtwoM63hlZO1OtTbnzcWAZuEUmmF6krOqcz_jtGtgW7008jGafcogBGUdt7Nea1i0yXeEGwDkZQMepG9szvFYMu5bJEAIK96J-n75S7ZJ5QN0y7YKB3b1ZWpdTsOgLNNQfF5J8t0Ty7g_t0UtJk73w_N1aaaS8CQaBeZIhUs/w640-h480/dr_strangelove.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, released in January 1964, remains perhaps the greatest black comedy and political satire ever filmed. The film's central plot—with a screenplay authored by Kubrick, Terry Southern, and Peter George loosely inspired by Peter George's novel Red Alert—centers around a mentally unstable U.S. Air Force general who commands a sudden nuclear strike on the Soviet Union, setting off a sequence of absurd and chaotic events. The movie delves into the potentially catastrophic outcomes stemming from human error, political and military miscalculations, and the peculiarities of Cold War-era nuclear policy. <br /><br />Dr. Strangelove adeptly and bravely combines humor with a profound critique of the nuclear arms race and the risks of accidental nuclear warfare. Its release coincided with a tense period in the Cold War, amplifying its impact and relevance. The film's importance extends to its pioneering narrative style and technical accomplishments.<br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>Click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdxlQrfptpxRh9L3BQ?e=dV90h8">here</a> to listen to a recording of our group discussion of Dr. Strangelove, conducted last week. </i></span></h4><div><br /></div>Why and how does Dr. Strangelove remain one of the most cherished and respected films of all time, especially as a black comedy? Why is this movie deserving of celebration 60 years later? It’s arguably the finest political satire and black comedy ever made, and one of the most distinctively original and emotionally conflicting movies of all time—conflicting in how it can consistently conjure laughs with its absurd characters and comedic situations while also shocking and horrifying us by depicting an Armageddon scenario and the very real possibility of nuclear annihilation due to human error and stupidity. By cleverly using humor and parody, it can entertainingly address a nightmarishly realistic scenario that could result in the death of untold millions and the end of mankind—subject matter that is otherwise terrifying to contemplate. <br /><br />Dr. Strangelove also represents a winning collaboration of several top talents at the heights of their skills, especially brilliant director Kubrick, chameleonic performer Peter Sellers, acclaimed actors George C. Scott and Sterling Hayden, and satirical novelist Southern. <br /><br />This picture boasts some of the most colorfully ridiculous characters in movie history—among them General Jack D. Ripper, General Buck Turgidson, Major Kong, President Muffley, and Dr. Strangelove himself—as well as eternally quotable comedic lines, among them: “Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here! This is the War Room!”, “Mein Führer, I can walk!”, “You're gonna have to answer to the Coca-Cola company,” “Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff,” “The whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you keep it a secret—why didn't you tell the world, eh?” and “I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.” <br /><br />Roger Ebert <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-dr-strangelove-1964">wrote</a>: <i>"Dr. Strangelove's" humor is generated by a basic comic principle: People trying to be funny are never as funny as people trying to be serious and failing. The laughs have to seem forced on unwilling characters by the logic of events. A man wearing a funny hat is not funny. But a man who doesn't know he's wearing a funny hat ... ah, now you've got something. The characters in "Dr. Strangelove'' do not know their hats are funny.” </i><br /><br />Consider how the film endures as an exemplary work that ranks high on several lists. It places #3 on the AFI’s list of the funniest American films and #26 on the AFI’s best American movies list; on various greatest films of all time lists, it has been named #5 on the Sight and Sound Poll of 2002; #14 by Entertainment Weekly; #26 by Empire magazine; #24 by Total Film magazine; #42 by the BBC; #47 based on a Time Out readers poll in 1998. And its screenplay placed as the 12th best ever by the Writers Guild of America. <br /><br />Despite its 60-year vintage, the picture remains a timeless and cautionary tale because we continue to live by the tick-tock of the doomsday clock and under the constant fear of nuclear destruction, even decades after the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Even elements that threaten to date the film, including the presence of only one female character—a lusty and male gaze-amenable type at that—chauvinistic attitudes among the male personalities that dominate the story, and references to mid-1960s military concerns like the missile gap, reinforce the movie’s key themes and its satirical stylings. <br /><br />Dr. Strangelove exhibited innovation and groundbreaking elements across various aspects. For starters, the film effectively employed satire to tackle the weighty and delicate subject of nuclear war. It critiqued the political and military establishments of the Cold War era, offering a sardonic perspective on the arms race and the potential for catastrophic outcomes. By fusing two subgenres—black comedy and political satire—it demonstrated that humor could effectively address serious geopolitical issues, challenging conventional expectations regarding the treatment of such topics in film. <br /><br />The movie also proved to be suspenseful, dramatic, and scary, despite its absurd and chaotic treatment of events linked to nuclear war. Viewers bite into an apple with a surreal comedy outer skin obscuring a rotten core underneath and must digest an unsettlingly realistic depiction of an event that could trigger World War III and the end of civilization. There are taut moments in Strangelove that make it a topically relevant thriller, not a wall-to-wall funny fest. Kubrick’s work presents a disturbingly plausible situation that was top of mind for many Americans at this time, capitalizing on the all-too-real fears of the Cold War, only months removed from the Cuban missile crisis and the 1961 Berlin crisis. <br /><br />Kubrick's choice to cast Sellers in multiple roles highlighted the actor's versatility, which was earlier demonstrated in the films Lolita and The Mouse That Roared, two other works featuring multiple Sellers characters. Sellers adeptly portrayed three distinct personalities, including the titular Dr. Strangelove, President Merkin Muffley, and Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake. This inventive use of a single actor in diverse roles likely inspired later thespians including comedians Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins, Lily Tomlin in The Incredible Shrinking Woman, Eddie Murphy in Coming to America and The Nutty Professor, and Mike Myers in Austin Powers. <br /><br />Dr. Strangelove is also replete with innovative visuals. The film's cinematography, employing wide-angle lenses and distinctive camera angles, contributed to its visual impact, as did the memorable special effects—including its depiction of the B-52 bomber and the nuclear bomb—and production designer Ken Adams’ inspired designs, particularly the iconic and expressionistic war room set design. <br /><br />For proof of its influence, ponder subsequent works that have drawn inspiration from Dr. Strangelove, including Fail Safe (1964), released immediately after Strangelove and featuring a very similar story; The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming! (1966); and numerous black comedies and political satires like Catch-22 (1970), Airplane! (1980), Brazil (1985), Mars Attacks! (1996), Wag the Dog (1997), The Pentagon Wars (1998), In the Loop (2009), The Death of Stalin (2017), and Don’t Look Up (2021). <br /><br />Dr. Strangelove represented a turning point for Stanley Kubrick, a filmmaker who imbues the production with a strong vision and impressive skill at balancing its disparate tonal elements. Kubrick adopts a more objective and dispassionate approach to directing a film like Dr. Strangelove than many other filmmakers would have. Criterion Collection essayist David Bromwich <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/4119-dr-strangelove-the-darkest-room">wrote</a>: <i>“Kubrick looks on people as something other than the earnest strivers and helpers we like to imagine we are. In all of his films, individuals are photographed almost neutrally, without flattering close-ups. He would no more deliver these than he would enforce a pointed cut to elicit a predictable laugh or a groan. His is an abstract method, depopulated to the largest practicable extent, so as to approach a geometrical purity.” </i><br /><br />The director cogently juxtaposes images and music in creative ways that add humor and irony to otherwise nonhumorous scenes. Case in point: He marries the footage of the aircraft coupling during the opening credits to the song Try a Little Tenderness, and he pairs footage of nuclear mushroom clouds with the Vera Lynn ballad We’ll Meet Again for a great non-sequitur. He would repeat this method in 2001: A Space Odyssey when he employed The Blue Danube Waltz and in A Clockwork Orange with the song Singin’ in the Rain. <br /><br />Interestingly, Kubrick only used four primary sets/locations in this narrative: the War Room, Ripper’s office, the B-52 bomber interior, and the Air Force base perimeter. Additionally, he wisely chose to shoot in black-and-white, lending a documentary-like realism to the film that would have mimicked what viewers were used to seeing on their television news at the time. <br /><br />The director encouraged improvisation and ad-libbing from his performers and often shot numerous takes of the same shot or scene to capture different elements and approaches from the actors, sometimes benefitting from happy accidents like the shot where Scott trips but gets up and finishes his line in more comedic fashion. And Kubrick was rightly praised for his attention to detail in this film; ponder how, despite no Pentagon cooperation, he and his crew were able to recreate the actual controls and design of a B-52 aircraft. <br /><br />Curiously, the movie is brimming with numerous sexual references and imagery. Consider the suggestive names of many characters:<br /><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Buck is a euphemism for a “manly man,” and Turgidson plays on the word “turgid,” which means full of fluid to the point of hardness. </li><li>President Merkin Muffley has a name that is evocative of female pubic hair, as if to say he’s lacking in male machismo; his character is loosely based on politician Adlai Stevenson. </li><li>Jack D. Ripper is an obvious play on Jack the Ripper, a sexually sadistic serial killer; Ripper’s use of the word “essence” is a synonym for semen; he is depicted as an impotent character who blames his sexual dysfunction on a communist conspiracy. </li><li>Mandrake is the name of a mythical herb or root believed to increase male potency; Mandrake is also evocative of the prim and proper English officer played by Alec Guinness in Bridge on the River Kwai. </li><li>Colonel Bat Guano’s moniker can be interpreted as “bat shit,” slang for insane. </li><li>The titular character, who proposes an outrageous male-friendly strategy for perpetuating the species at the conclusion, is himself an amalgam of several people, including rocket scientist Wernher von Braun, nuclear physicist Edward Teller, RAND Corporation strategist Herman Kahn, and Rotwang the black-gloved mad scientist in Metropolis. </li></ul>Examples of the rampant sexual metaphors, innuendos, and messages used throughout the movie include the refueling of the jets, which serves as an obvious symbol of sexual coupling; Ripper’s dangling cigar, an evident phallic object; the Coke machine spewing cola in a sudden, orgasmic burst; Buck’s girlfriend Miss Scott appearing as the centerfold playmate in the magazine being read aboard the B-52 bomber; the B-52 crew’s complex procedure that arms the bomb for use, suggestive of a “foreplay” ritual of sorts; the plane being rendered impotent at the last moment when the bomb doors fail to open; Major Kong straddling the nuclear bomb as if it were a giant phallus; Dr. Strangelove’s arm saluting gestures and sudden erect standing posture, further phallic symbols; the intended bomb target being the island of Laputa, which in Spanish means “the whore”; the pilot viewing an issue of Playboy; Plan “R” for Romeo, implying that war equals love; and the flight crew’s survival kits being stocked with ample quantities of chewing gum, prophylactics, lipstick, and nylons, intimating that having sex will be as important for survival as eating and breathing.<br /><br />Despite its comedic sheen, Dr. Strangelove several serious messages and morals. Among the important thematic takeaways? The absurdity of nuclear conflict, the folly of the arms race and the Cold War, and the ironic fallacy of nuclear weapons being “deterrents” due to the theory of mutually assured destruction. <br /><br />Front and center is the notion that man’s impulse to wage war is linked to his sexual drive; a man’s sexual dysfunction or frustration (in this case, Ripper’s) can have disastrous repercussions. <a href="https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb-criterion/">Per</a> Slant Magazine critic Clayton Dillard: <i>“Nearly every scene features a scenario or line of dialogue that suggests a world where all men are perpetually on the verge of whipping out their dicks…Dr. Strangelove is unique as an American studio film in that nearly every scene addresses its alignment of military action with sexual impotence and bodily excretion. It’s possibly the filthiest studio comedy ever made, even though there isn’t a single gross-out gag, curse word, or graphic image in its entire running time.” </i><br /><br />Kubrick’s cautionary tale is also a reminder of the paradox of being human, according to film scholar Michael Broderick. Man is technologically advanced, intellectual, and sophisticated, capable of creating machines designed to improve life; but deep down inside, man remains a primitive, utterly fallible creature whose perfectly logical creations can backfire on him and whose id-like tendencies and base instincts can prove his undoing. <br /><br />The film also warns that bureaucracy, red tape, and established protocol can have disastrous consequences. For proof, consider how the B-52 bomber crew follows their orders at all costs; Mandrake has to humor Ripper to try to get the retreat code; Turgidson is compelled to cover his military ass and discourages collaboration with the Russians while the world is on the verge of meltdown; President Muffley attempts to maintain polite diplomatic banter with Russian Prime Minister Kissoff while on the hotline; and Bat Guano resists shooting the Coke machine because it’s private property. “<i>The deep preoccupation of Dr. Strangelove is, in fact, not war itself but rather the political development of which modern war has been the largest symptom: the bureaucratization of terror,”</i> Bromwich posits. <br /><br />Lastly, Strangelove suggests that resistance to the inevitability of destruction is futile. <i>“It is this contrast (in the final mushroom cloud shots)–this contradiction between the beauty of the images and what they represent – where the question of who exactly is this “I” who learned to stop worrying and love the bomb, is finally answered. It is the narrator – the camera itself – who has finally stopped worrying and beholds the images delicately, tenderly, lovingly. The duality and the anxiety that the camera, and we, have struggled with (rooting for Kong but hoping the president and Mandrake will save the world) are assuaged in the final scene. The camera has stopped worrying, has stopped resisting, and now loves. The “explosion” has happened and we must accept the post-apocalyptic, meaning post-coital, world. It is the camera that is the “I” in the title, and in this case that “I”…is most certainly, and very horribly, male,</i>” <a href="https://www.sensesofcinema.com/2015/book-reviews/dr-strangelove-peter-kramer/">wrote</a> Nafis Shafizadeh of Senses of Cinema. <br /><br /> <span class="fullpost">
</span>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-80159289301346158232023-12-22T17:00:00.003-06:002023-12-22T17:00:00.241-06:00From soap to fudge, A Christmas Story remains the go-to movie for fans this time of year<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiA5QZgSEJyOgvlON54bN1ragYtJH1rp7xlherNhb_7YOZv0JQ933FYmXVYAIcqAn4Y4t3I3UWRN1XTMASxBlIhVnPfmKBqR4Uj7lWcYfbK-gEt1yTl35dkLmqgOP0QpBmN-9tdc-xgDb1ve-7oK9YQFCVWEDhmK6b0BNbCsdY7hiMwDhYmPOvNkiGjGjzC/s2007/fgds.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1438" data-original-width="2007" height="337" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiA5QZgSEJyOgvlON54bN1ragYtJH1rp7xlherNhb_7YOZv0JQ933FYmXVYAIcqAn4Y4t3I3UWRN1XTMASxBlIhVnPfmKBqR4Uj7lWcYfbK-gEt1yTl35dkLmqgOP0QpBmN-9tdc-xgDb1ve-7oK9YQFCVWEDhmK6b0BNbCsdY7hiMwDhYmPOvNkiGjGjzC/w471-h337/fgds.jpg" width="471" /></a></div>Let’s talk turkey here—<i>Chinese </i>turkey, if you will. What’s America’s most beloved and rewatched Christmas movie? Many would say the honor goes to a black-and-white classic like It’s a Wonderful Life, A Christmas Carol, or Miracle on 34th Street. Others argue a more modern Yuletide film is deserving of the crown, such as Home Alone, Christmas Vacation, or Elf. But based on continual cable replays, strong polling, and endless repeat viewing value, the champion is A Christmas Story—currently celebrating its 40th anniversary. <br /><br />Consider that the film was only a modest commercial success upon its original release in November 1983 and garnered mostly mediocre notices from critics. It quickly vanished from theaters but years later began snowballing into a huge fan favorite thanks to home video and cable. This is a case study of a little engine that could: A film that defied the odds and became a pop culture sensation.<div><br /></div><div><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted this week, click </i><i><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdsm-kdGu_RxyzL6SA?e=AegBN7">here</a></i><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">. To listen to the latest episode of the Cineversary podcast celebrating A Christmas Story, click </span><a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/65-A-Christmas-Story-40th-anniversary-with-Andrew-Scahill-e2cu1qa">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><br />Amazingly, A Christmas Story has been played in a 24-hour marathon every year on TNT since 1997 and on TBS for the past 20 years. In 2008, over 54 million people are estimated to have watched the marathon, which represents almost one in six Americans tuning in to the cable channel for their yearly dose of A Christmas Story. <br /><br />As proof of its continued popularity, In 2019 and 2012, the film was named the favorite or best holiday movie ever based on the results of surveying by OnePoll and Marist Poll, respectively. It’s also placed tops on the list of greatest Christmas films of all time by IGN and AOL. <br /><br />A Christmas Story earns extra points in the authenticity column for being a period piece that gets all the small details and references right: the fact that kids would use a decoder pin to decipher secret messages on popular radio serials like Little Orphan Annie; Lifebouy soap would have been considered the worst tasting among foul-mouthed kids; sparks and electrical fires were a more serious concern due to overloaded outlets in early 1940s America; the Chicago Bears football team—world champions three out of four years in the early 1940s—was the squad you rooted for if you lived in Northwest Indiana like the Parker family did; many a mom had a copy of Look Magazine in her home; and the Wizard of Oz would have been on the minds of many kids at this time (if you pay attention, you can catch a bit of a meta joke: the costumed Oz characters at the Christmas parade chase away Mickey Mouse and his Disney-ites; remember that the film A Chrisstmas Story was made by MGM, also the studio behind The Wizard of Oz). <br /><br />It’s deserving of accolades, too, thanks to nearly perfect casting. Peter Billingsley has the ideal face, size, and acting instincts for the role of Ralphie, using his big blue eyes, sheepish grin, and expressive eyebrows to maximum effect, while Ian Petrella as younger brother Randy never looks like he’s acting at all, so natural is his performance. All of Ralphie’s friends absolutely look their parts, and the freckled countenance and wicked smile sported by Zach Ward as Scut Farkus is unforgettable. But the crowning touch casting-wise comes with the presence of Melinda Dillon and Darren McGavin as mom and dad Parker, who know exactly how and when to play it straight and when to yuk it up for maximum laughs. McGavin as the “Old Man” chews a bit of scenery, but that’s entirely appropriate considering these are hyperbolic childhood memories. <br /><br />This picture also has one of the all-time great lines in movie history, which is a fantastic running gag: “You’ll shoot your eye out”; among the greatest movie villains ever in the town bully Scut Farkus; and one of the best David versus Goliath feel-good underdog wins in the movies when Ralphie finally fights back and defeats Farkus. <br /><br />What gives this film its staying power and longevity over the past four decades – especially considering that this is a story set in 1940, 83 years ago, and was released 40 years ago? It’s more than simply blind tradition and comfort viewing of a film we’ve seen so often that we can’t help but revisit it that explains its evergreen appeal. A Christmas Story serves as a mini pop-culture history lesson, teaching new generations about what life was like as a kid 80-plus years ago and reminding viewers that the childhood experience and its ups and downs are universal, regardless of what era you grew up in. Younger viewers who pay attention may find it fascinating that the most advanced entertainment technology in 1940 was a radio, that many families brought home and decorated a real Christmas tree much later in the Christmas season, that tires often blew out loudly and suddenly on cars, or that Red Ryder and Little Orphan Annie were as popular to youngsters as Spongebob Squarepants or The Avengers. And yet many can also relate to Ralphie and his life, including the challenges of living in a middle-class family, worrying about Santa getting you the present you want, stressing about a school assignment, or trying to avoid neighborhood bullies, profanity-spewing fathers, report cards, getting punished for a misdeed, your parents arguing, being embarrassed by a younger sibling, and discovering the ugly truth about crass commercialism and consumerism. <br /><br /><a href="https://www.avclub.com/how-a-christmas-story-became-the-preeminent-american-ch-1798242704">Per</a> Emily St. James at AV Club: <i>“It’s the Christmas movie I’d most want to live in. The movie’s Norman Rockwell America seems further and further away with every year—and that’s a good thing in a lot of ways…But at the same time, I miss a world that I came in at the tail-end of—of downtown department stores and small towns that weren’t just bedroom communities for larger cities, of boisterous, copyright-flouting Christmas parades and two-story houses a family could live in on one income.” </i><br /><br />It remains a cut above in the Christmas cinema subgenre perhaps because it’s refreshingly postmodern in its tone and sensibilities while also being traditional in its themes and intentions. Put another way, it’s sentimental yet cynical, nostalgic yet streetwise, although not overly so in any of those departments. <br /><br />Ruminate on how the film’s department store depiction of Santa is certainly not sweet, touching, or precious, or how there is no saccharine scene involving Ralphie having a transcendent moment of spoken kinship with his father, who remains so intimidating, curious, and idiosyncratic to him throughout the story. Also, the boys, while often cute and innocent, are sly and precocious for nine-year-olds, often using adult vernacular like “old man,” “smartass,” and “son of a bitch” and demonstrating a prepubescent interest in the opposite sex, as we see Ralphie fondling his father’s leg lamp. And Ralphie proves to be an undependable friend, abandoning Flick twice and ratting on Schwartz. There’s little sentimentality to be found in these and other examples. <br /><br />Yes, Clark and his collaborators wrap things up in a tender, poignant bow by the conclusion. But many of the vignettes are colored by hilariously sarcastic quips and tinged by the sardonically articulate insights of our narrator, the now-adult Ralphie, who is looking back upon a cherished time in his youth with a fondness that’s nevertheless framed within the aged lens of experience. He’s being honest in his reminiscences, but we can discern that Ralphie the grownup acknowledges that a lot of the things he found wondrous and mysterious as a child actually can be more easily understood now. The wisened and older Ralphie yearns for those simpler, happier times, as we can, too, but he relays how being a kid was more often frustrating, disappointing, confusing, unfair, and downright frightening. <br /><br /><i>“A Christmas Story threads an incredibly difficult needle,” </i>St. James continued in her review. <i>“It’s nostalgic both for a more universal childhood holiday, one full of longing for presents and negotiating bullies and writing down a Christmas wish list—things kids will probably always do as long as the holiday exists—and for a very specific kind of American holiday that’s mostly disappeared… filtered through grown Ralphie’s point-of-view, it becomes this weird nostalgic thing, a memory of something unpleasant that becomes pleasant because of the gauzy haze of nostalgia.” </i><br /><br />Vanity Fair’s Sam Kashner <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/11/how-a-christmas-story-became-an-american-tradition">called this</a> <i>“a new kind of holiday movie, one that acknowledged—even relished—the “unbridled avarice,” the commercialism, the disappointments, the hurt feelings, and all-around bad luck that, in reality, often define the merry season. In other words, what real Christmas was like in real families. It brought a bracing blast of satire and realism.” </i><br /><br />This was one of the very first holiday films to be told from a child’s point of view. Our main protagonist is Ralphie, now a grown man as the narrator who recalls his experiences as a nine-year-old at Christmastime in the Midwest in 1940. As in E.T. a year earlier, the filmmakers often shoot at the kids’ level and keep the adult characters to a minimum. <br /><br />What’s also significant is that, like Home Alone seven years later, it’s that rare Christmas picture involving child characters or geared to kids in which there are no supernatural phenomena—the real Santa doesn’t appear and save the day, for example. <br /><br />In 1983, it was arguably the most significant movie set during and themed around Christmas since Disney’s Babes in Toyland, a 1961 musical that no one remembers or rewatches. You could make a case that the last cherished holiday film before A Christmas Story was 1954’s White Christmas starring Bing Crosby. <br /><br />Unlike many other holiday movies, this one is less driven by plot, serving more as a series of vignettes strung together, many of which have little to do with Christmas. Still, these various episodes work as mini-movies within the movie, scenes that play as self-contained stories you could watch out of context or order and still get immense satisfaction from viewing. <br /><br />As further evidence of its staying power, ponder that A Christmas Story has three sequels: It Runs in the Family, also directed by Clark, released in 1994; A Christmas Story 2, released straight to DVD in 2012; and A Christmas Story Christmas, which debuted on Max in 2022. Additionally, following the debut of A Christmas Story, PBS’ American Playhouse featured two TV film adaptations using Sheperd’s narration and the same characters from the 1983 work: The Star-Crossed Romance of Josephine Cosnowski, and Ollie Hopnoodle's Haven of Bliss. In 2000, there was also a stage play adaptation of the film, in 2012 the movie was adapted into a Broadway musical, and in 2017 that musical was aired live on Fox. <br /><br />The late Bob Clark – who had previously helmed completely different films like the horror movies Black Christmas and Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things, as well as the teen sex comedy Porky’s – would seem an odd choice to direct A Christmas Story. However, although he’s not known for any particular stylistic tendencies and won’t be called an “auteur” anytime soon, Clark seemed to have a knack for bringing out memorable performances in children, as later evidenced in the family comedy Baby Geniuses and its sequel. It was his idea to cut into the set floors and place the camera at Ralphie’s height, better reflecting the perspective of a nine-year-old boy. <br /><br />He used detailed index cards to storyboard each shot, demonstrating careful planning. And when writer and voiceover narrator Jean Shepherd tried to outflank Clark by attempting to supervise some of the actors and scenes, Clark quickly took charge and prevented the author from accessing the set. <br /><br />The filmmaker also had a gift for visual comedy. Case in point: The scene segues of kids running to and from school between vignettes, the Black Bart gang-on-the-run imaginary sequence, and the turkey-stealing Bumpus dogs hastening a quick retreat from the Parker kitchen—all of which are exaggeratedly sped up and impeccably edited for comedic timing. Likewise, his other fantasy sequences – his teacher transforming into the Wicked Witch of the West and a blind Ralphie returning home to shame his parents – are equally effective funny bits. It’s also a nice touch to have Ralphie break the fourth wall and sneak a rascally smile to the audience after he convinces his mother that an icicle broke his glasses. <br /><br /><i>“Clark knows when to play things straight, as in the unbroken long shot of the final Chop Suey Christmas Dinner. He also knows when he can be clever, as shown in Ralphie's disastrous visit to Santa. Clark's wide-angle Santa-boot-in-the-face shot expresses the trauma of childhood powerlessness as well as anything in David Lean's Great Expectations,”</i> <a href="https://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s2736stor.html">per</a> DVD Savant critic Glenn Erickson. <br /><br />Perhaps Clark should also be given credit for some minor racial inclusivity. Ralphie’s classroom has a few African-American students in it, and we have a quick shot of African-Americans caroling on the street, although none of these actors are giving lines of dialogue or listed in the end credits. (On the other hand, Clark and company poke some uncomfortable fun at a group of Chinese restaurant workers in a very dated scene that hasn’t aged well.) <br /><br />Thematically, it may not be Citizen Kane, but A Christmas Story has some valuable messages and subtexts to share. First, it teaches us that the secret to life is turning lemons into lemonade. Time and again, Ralphie and his family are unexpectedly and suddenly challenged but find ways to turn a bad situation into something good. Exhibit A: Thwarted by his subtle attempts to persuade his mother to get him a Red Ryder BB gun for Christmas, Ralphie then tries to advance his aims in writing via his class paper; when that falls through, he pivots to petition Santa toward his cause; that fails, too, but ultimately he is rewarded, surprisingly, when his father makes Ralphie’s wish come true. Exhibit B: After the neighbor’s dogs ruin their Christmas feast, the Parkers buck tradition and enjoy a meal at a Chinese restaurant. The line that sums up this overall life lesson? “Life is like that. Sometimes, at the height of our revelries, when our joy is at its zenith, when all is most right with the world, the most unthinkable disasters descend upon us.” <br /><br />Big takeaway #2? Frustrations are fleeting, but family is forever. A Christmas Story reminds us that life is often unpredictable and upsetting, but things work out when you have a good support system, as in a loving family. Ralphie’s mother covers for her son after his fight with Farkus, helping gloss things over with his father. “From then on, things were different between me and my mother,” the narrator says. And, despite long dreading the punitive nature of his father, the Old Man proves he can be loving and sensitive; remember that it’s Ralphie’s old man who comes through in the clutch by getting him the Red Ryder BB gun, to the mild objection of his mother. (The Old Man undoubtedly recognizes some of his younger self in Ralphie and gets his son the same toy he had when he was nine years old.) <br /><br />This is also, to some extent, an innocence lost narrative. A Christmas Story is really about how Ralphie learns how the world works and how every childhood eventually matures into adulthood. The eloquent voiceover narration from a grown and more sophisticated Ralphie reminds us that we’re being shown two perspectives here: the POV of a nine-year-old but filtered through the weathered lens of a grownup who is wistful about his past yet expresses a worldly sarcasm disguised by florid language. The young Ralphie is wise to the commercialism around him and more perceptive to the power dynamics that drive his parents’ relationship. “We knew darn well it was always better not to get caught,” he says, and so it’s no surprise that he conjures up a lie about an icicle breaking his glasses to avoid having his BB gun confiscated and hearing, “I told you so” about shooting his eye out. Yet, Ralphie is still young enough to believe in Santa Claus and put his trust in St. Nick to deliver the goods. This story depicts that precious pivotal age when blind belief and childhood fantasies didn’t yet surrender to plausible realities and more critical thinking. <br /><br />An official Red Ryder carbine action two-hundred-shot range model air rifle may be the greatest Christmas gift Ralphie would ever receive. But the greatest gift a Christmas Story bestows on viewers is stellar storytelling. This tale and its voiceover by Shepherd demonstrate the author’s exceptional talent for wordsmithing and weaving a transfixing narrative pieced together from brilliantly articulated recollections of his own childhood, many of which were captured in his 1966 tome In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash, some among them that became legendary stories he famously shared on the radio decades ago. Shepherd’s remarkable linguistic skills, Seinfeld-like observational humor, and penchant for relaying relatable yarns that underscore life’s many ironies, foibles, and otherwise routine occurrences that become bigger-fish-story astonishing moments through the prism of fallible memory are deservingly front and center throughout this film. (The television series The Wonder Years, launched a few years later, would successfully steal this adult voiceover narration approach.) <br /><br />Imagine, for a moment, A Christmas Story stripped of this audible storyteller. Sure, it would have been a fun flick with Billingsley as Ralphie doing the heavy lifting. However, it’s the audio narration and verbiage crafting by Shepherd that gives this movie its comical gravitas, nostalgic power, and undeniable charm. His disembodied presence is also crucial to better appreciate one of the key messages of this work—loss of innocence—because without that voice we aren’t reminded how important it is to cherish our childhood memories, both good and bad, and appreciate a time when we maintained a trusting sense of wonder about the world’s mysteries just before its harsher truths came into full light.<br /></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-71395793365680526692023-12-19T16:42:00.008-06:002023-12-19T16:43:20.007-06:00Noir meets sci-fi, French New Wave style<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_zq_w3r3N1rR-GcchI86HFkWzb2eVm_PI1plRMgLb17bVXRoGjQ2xtmMoCEL_sulYl4b1MLG2OCGYbdet0X30B3r8qeuGGT7WJON3ZKd-HZbgdBwq2EsVqOxbIzhy6KY7nYb4DIp0z4NQz4xmaphP6NwdmKT3i4W1jaM9FencSZh007xh5UtyMqUKDITU/s838/Screen%20Shot%2012-19-23%20at%2004.35%20PM.PNG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="838" data-original-width="636" height="567" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_zq_w3r3N1rR-GcchI86HFkWzb2eVm_PI1plRMgLb17bVXRoGjQ2xtmMoCEL_sulYl4b1MLG2OCGYbdet0X30B3r8qeuGGT7WJON3ZKd-HZbgdBwq2EsVqOxbIzhy6KY7nYb4DIp0z4NQz4xmaphP6NwdmKT3i4W1jaM9FencSZh007xh5UtyMqUKDITU/w430-h567/Screen%20Shot%2012-19-23%20at%2004.35%20PM.PNG" width="430" /></a></div>Imagine a science-fiction movie loaded with fascinating ideas and themes but boasting zero special effects. The end product would probably be a lot like Alphaville, a 1965 French film helmed by the influential director Jean-Luc Godard, which emerged just after the zenith of the French New Wave cinema movement. Set against a dystopian backdrop, the narrative follows Lemmy Caution, portrayed by American actor Eddie Constantine, a clandestine operative navigating the emotionless metropolis of Alphaville. Governed by the supercomputer Alpha 60, which orchestrates every facet of existence while stifling human emotions, Caution's directive is to locate and dismantle Alpha 60. <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i style="font-weight: normal;">Click </i><i><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdpjsLLDPlO8w8pO3w?e=dKZF3a">here</a></i><i style="font-weight: normal;"> to listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of Alphaville, conducted last week. </i></span></h4><br />Consider how any science-fiction film today would be crucified by the public for daring to lack the dollars and digital resources we expect of a futuristic genre picture. Yet, despite lacking visual effects, a major budget, or a sacrosanct script (much of the acting and dialogue were widely improvised), the work benefits from a unique visual aesthetic, characterized by stark and minimalist set designs and Godard's incorporation of urban landscapes and modern architecture that contribute to the setting’s Orwellian ambiance. Godard also impressively blends sci-fi and noir elements as well as high and low culture with this production, and he peppers the film with interesting pop culture references--from Dick Tracy and Heckl and Jeckl to Ford automobiles and Nosferatu. <br /><br />This is, after all, a film by one of the architects of the French New Wave and an extreme cinematic experimenter, so it’s no surprise Alphaville looks and feels vastly different from other movies of this period. He employs jump cuts, long takes juxtaposed with quick cuts, and a hodgepodge of stylistic choices, including using negative photography. His characters even occasionally break the fourth wall by looking directly at the camera. <br /><br />DVD Savant critic Glenn Erickson <a href="https://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s549alpha.html">admired this approach, writing</a>: <i>“Godard constructs his movies like unrepentant beat poetry. Many have ragged inter-titles arbitrarily inserting bald political messages, sometimes frustratingly obvious ones. In Alphaville, the screen is constantly being seized by neon signs, drawings and traffic signals, etc. Here they signify the aura of the omniscient Alpha-60 computer, a menace represented visually by whirring fans and crude flashing lights accompanied by telegraph noises…Godard doesn't try to compensate for a lack of traditional production values but instead flaunts his budget 'weaknesses' by declaring them irrelevant. There are no special effects except for flashing to negative every once in a while -- to perhaps represent the malfunctioning of Alpha-60? Raoul Coutard's handheld photography is actually very smooth, even beautiful. There are a number of well-shot scenes that contrast with setups as crude as anything in a no-budget exploitation movie. It's the artistic tone of Godard's film that says, 'I'm trying to express myself here. This is Jazz. Read between the images - it's not my job to put a perfect phony image in front of your faces at all times.'” <br /></i><br />The score for Alphaville can register as unrelentingly self-serious and bombastic, but it hints at Godard’s winking parodic style. He’s often playing with tropes of the noir/detective genre, as when Caution suddenly tussles with an assassin in his hotel room or when he’s being manhandled by the police. Being that the mid-60s was also the prime era of the secret agent thriller film/story, Godard has fun with the iconography and conventions of this subgenre, particularly by casting Constantine as Caution, a character he’d played in a string of B films for other directors before Alphaville. <br /><br />One of the big ideas driving this cinematic bus is that love conquers logic. This is a treatise on the dehumanization of society and how technological progress can gradually strip us of our individuality, personal freedoms, and self-expression. Godard imagines a dystopian future in which emotions are outlawed, replaced by cold intellectualism and a reliance on artificial intelligence. Caution disrupts this new order when he arrives in Alphaville and rejects the prevailing rules. <br /><br />It's also a film that espouses staying true to yourself and your ideals. Caution refuses to accept Alphaville’s laws and structure, which often take on a geometrically symbolic circular pattern, fitting considering the circular logic offered by the Alpha 60 supercomputer and even the architecture we see, suggesting that this society is “going in circles”; by contrast, Contrast gets to the heart of the matter quickly by going in a straight line and not deviating from his goals. Recall how the words within the love poem shared by Natasha and Lemmy mention “going straight to what you love.” <div><i>“The moral of the story, if there is one, seems to be that a commitment to one’s ideals, to one’s possibilities, regardless of how implausible they may appear to the society that one lives in, are the sole method through which can oppose systems of mental and political domination...(Natacha’s) role in the film is essentially to illustrate the possibility that an individual completely imprisoned within a system of ideology may still somehow break out,”</i> <a href="https://brightlightsfilm.com/technocratic-totalitarianism-one-dimensional-thought-in-jean-luc-godards-alphaville/">wrote</a> Maximilian Yoshioka with Bright Lights Film Journal, who went on to suggest that Alphaville asks probing questions that require careful examination: <i>“But if only those who have existed outside of a particular system of power-knowledge have the potential to escape from it, do those indoctrinated from birth have no hope? And then of course there is the question of what happens to those who escape from oppressive systems; are their new destinations ever free from forms of political oppression and domination?” </i><br /><br />Alphaville ruminates, too, on the power of poetry and imagination: not just written words but the ability to express yourself creatively and freely and to be inspired by love and emotion, which Alpha 60 cannot compute. Here, words are also important, however, as evidenced by how Alphaville’s dictionary is constantly being updated, with words regularly being removed or replaced, and how books are vanishing. <br /><br />Additionally, this is yet another tale of the individual versus the state. The filmmakers depict a somewhat futuristic totalitarian/fascist society where the population is forced to conform to new rules of dispassionate reasoning dictated by a technological overlord, robbing humans of their humanity, free speech, and feelings. But Caution upends this structure by demonstrating that one person who dares to disagree and cut right to the heart of the problem (in this story, that means directly addressing and perplexing Alpha 60) can make a difference--as he does by rescuing Natasha from an underworld of brainwashed compliance and subservience, returning her to the real world a la the classic myth of Orpheus and Eurydice.<br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Blade Runner </li><li>2001: A Space Odyssey </li><li>The Matrix </li><li>Brazil </li><li>Invasion of the Body Snatchers </li><li>THX-1138 </li><li>Equilibrium </li><li>Dark City </li><li>Gattaca </li><li>Orpheus </li><li>Mauvais Sang (Bad Blood) </li><li>1984 and Brave New World </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Godard </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Breathless </li><li>Masculin-Feminin </li><li>Band of Outsiders </li><li>Contempt </li><li>Pierrot le Fou</li></ul></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-67905534051236718612023-12-13T16:36:00.004-06:002023-12-13T16:36:37.442-06:00Tarantino packs a potent Rum Punch adaptation<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhUVYY9A_bbABoqmd1bemoZyPVdRtw25-KFOtMZc6MHhvyJmkA2nC86_pC3Rwa7YlUIUNqOG2ZNT8PFTbYYAXth3xqXl2m9BMhFd5KUCG2nnfwmpuPz86_01FyOvEmEHQ9aKJ1wR3mDBt663ihXK9yINJnWE2a_qnC2UZBMwmCfXSb2zuo0e-HfGz0ul-n/s794/Screen%20Shot%2012-13-23%20at%2004.31%20PM.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="794" data-original-width="557" height="555" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhUVYY9A_bbABoqmd1bemoZyPVdRtw25-KFOtMZc6MHhvyJmkA2nC86_pC3Rwa7YlUIUNqOG2ZNT8PFTbYYAXth3xqXl2m9BMhFd5KUCG2nnfwmpuPz86_01FyOvEmEHQ9aKJ1wR3mDBt663ihXK9yINJnWE2a_qnC2UZBMwmCfXSb2zuo0e-HfGz0ul-n/w388-h555/Screen%20Shot%2012-13-23%20at%2004.31%20PM.PNG" width="388" /></a></div>Quentin Tarantino’s Jackie Brown defied audience expectations upon its release in late 1997. This adaptation of Elmore Leonard's novel Rum Punch, with a screenplay penned by Tarantino himself, was the director’s third effort, following his breakout 1994 hit Pulp Fiction. The narrative centers around Jackie Brown, portrayed by Pam Grier, a flight attendant who becomes ensnared in a convoluted scheme involving arms smuggling, law enforcement, and perilous criminals portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson, Robert Forster, Bridget Fonda, Michael Keaton, and Robert De Niro. The storytelling weaves through multiple characters and perspectives, crafting a layered and suspenseful crime drama. <br /><br />Tarantino's skill in creating memorable and nuanced characters is evident in Jackie Brown, with particular emphasis on the well-developed title character. Additionally, the narrative structure is intricate and non-linear, showcasing Tarantino's distinctive storytelling style. The plot unfolds with multiple layers, intersecting storylines, and unexpected twists.<div> <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of Jackie Brown, conducted last week, click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdo-VuAM3gqbvWmyrg?e=YDpvwo">here</a><span style="font-weight: normal;">. </span></i></span></h4><div><br /></div>Jackie Brown continues to fascinate film fans on several fronts. First, It’s a different kind of approach for Tarantino, at least up to this point. Jackie Brown takes its leisurely time – over 2½ hours – painting these characters in fine brush strokes and giving preference to dialogue and character dynamics rather than plot. This film contains less action than other works by Tarantino, but you still get his notable blend of sudden, extreme violence, whipcrack streetwise dialogue, tasty pop-culture references, and quirky personality traits. Some critics and fans didn’t appreciate the slow burn tone and more relaxed pace of Jackie Brown, while others relished this more character-focused narrative that forces us to linger in seemingly trifling but intriguing and revealing mundane moments that allow the actors extra time to breathe and fill their roles with small, realistic touches. <br /><br /><i>“With Jackie Brown, Tarantino doesn’t solely rely on the flashier aspects of his patented postmodern style (disjointed editing, extreme violence, fetishistic images) to convey a character’s fated desires or failures. He positions individuals as pieces of a larger mosaic, one populated by burgeoning and disintegrating relationships that reach beyond the frame. This construct produces subtext-heavy conversations containing real conflict and tension at their core. The menacing verbal dance between Ordell and Jackie set in her apartment, where the former turns off each light the latter has just switched on, is a perfect example of this seemingly organic tension between conflicting characters. It’s just one of the many great moments in Jackie Brown where applied emotional pressure is a defining attribute, a telling lesson in flight or fight,”</i> <a href="https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/jackie-brown/">wrote</a> Slant’s Glenn Heath Jr. <br /><br />Yet, despite a more streamlined story than his predecessor, Pulp Fiction, Jackie’s heist and the dangerous game of chess she’s playing is fairly complex, motivating the viewer to pay close attention and try to evaluate all the angles and possibilities. Jackie Brown’s endlessly enthralling characters reward repeat viewings, but so does its central scheme as we root for Jackie to outwit her adversaries. Roger Ebert <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jackie-brown-1997">posited</a>: <i>“One of the pleasures of Jackie Brown…is that everybody in the movie is smart. Whoever is smartest will live… This is the movie that proves Tarantino is the real thing, and not just a two-film wonder boy. It's not a retread of "Reservoir Dogs" or "Pulp Fiction," but a new film in a new style, and it evokes the particular magic of Elmore Leonard--who elevates the crime novel to a form of sociological comedy… This movie is about texture, not plot.” </i><br /><br />Tarantino has fun here paying tribute to blaxploitation films and influential cinematic works, large and small. There’s a nod to The Graduate in the opening credits, and plenty of references to other pictures like The Killing, Rashomon, Coffy and Foxy Brown, The Friends of Eddie Coyle, Once Upon a Time in America, Shampoo, and more. <br /><br />Tarantino’s cache as a hot filmmaker at this time enabled him to cast two long-forgotten thespians in the lead roles: Grier and Forster, who each prove they can carry a movie with aplomb, charisma, and good looks—despite their ages (48 and 54, respectively). <br /><br />Notably, this is the only Tarantino film where the story is adapted from a different source; all of his other films are original screenplays he wrote himself. Jackie Brown has also been called <i>“his most conventional movie…and his most humane and most romantic: he gives Grier and Forster one of the greatest screen kisses in history,”</i> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/sep/15/jackie-brown-review-tarantinos-most-romantic-film-is-a-stone-cold-classic">per</a> The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw. Additionally, Max may be the director’s most empathetic male character, according to Collider. <br /><br />Jackie Brown is a fascinating rumination on unrequited affection. Max instantly falls for Jackie and secretly pines for her without coming on too strong, although these feelings are not reciprocated or shared by her, at least as strongly. The story ends with Jackie leaving Max romantically unfulfilled although not necessarily broken-hearted, a refreshing and unexpected conclusion. Tarantino’s playful notions on how opposites attract are evident, too. Max and Jackie are about as unexpected a couple as you could likely expect, each with extremely different backgrounds, ethnicities, careers, and cultures. But Max is quickly smitten with Ms. Brown, including her taste in music, and Jackie quickly learns to trust him completely in her plans. Similarly, we see other interracial romantic pairings, including Ordell and Melanie, Louis and Simone, and Ray and Jackie. <br /><br />This is also a film about survival of the fittest and the fine line between loyalty and betrayal. Jackie Brown is an absorbing study of characters who continually backstab, sabotage, or damage each other, with the only honest relationship existing between Jackie and Max. Audiences appreciate the rags to riches and pluck of the underdog themes at work, too. Jackie is a woman of meager means from the bottom rungs of the societal totem pole, with the fewest resources to work with. Yet, with clever strategizing and by using her sex appeal, she persuades men to help her overcome Ordell, walk away with his fortune, and raise her station in life. <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Out of Sight and Get Shorty, two other Elmore Leonard film adaptations </li><li>Coffy and Foxy Brown, also starring Pam Grier </li><li>Blaxploitation films from the 1970s including Super Fly, Dolemite, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, Shaft, Blacula, and others </li><li>Oceans Eleven </li><li>Heist </li><li>Snatch </li><li>The Limey </li><li>Sexy Beast </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Quentin Tarantino </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Reservoir Dogs </li><li>Pulp Fiction </li><li>Kill Bill I and II </li><li>Inglorious Basterds </li><li>Django Unchained </li><li>Once Upon a Time in Hollywood</li></ul></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-30331539325305128402023-12-07T00:38:00.003-06:002023-12-07T00:38:19.330-06:00Cineversary podcast rings in A Christmas Story's 40th birthday<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkC6-xNCSOQdvkxJg05juMLqCdvQwa7N9tYSmOLuK7Gv93hhGZ-dE55LeinfVZJ0tEryf1gs955_WXAM_z9SZm-pZCPOEdofPqMyJaankUsXsYYn3FLoK0TcF4jNaPpSlYT4vvyskHsYQdZ7sC8TVV79lKm3-oOjE5hvlcGQjjGK6Y7lyzRIxkg9khncAy/s754/Screen%20Shot%2012-06-23%20at%2002.38%20PM.PNG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="754" data-original-width="484" height="532" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkC6-xNCSOQdvkxJg05juMLqCdvQwa7N9tYSmOLuK7Gv93hhGZ-dE55LeinfVZJ0tEryf1gs955_WXAM_z9SZm-pZCPOEdofPqMyJaankUsXsYYn3FLoK0TcF4jNaPpSlYT4vvyskHsYQdZ7sC8TVV79lKm3-oOjE5hvlcGQjjGK6Y7lyzRIxkg9khncAy/w341-h532/Screen%20Shot%2012-06-23%20at%2002.38%20PM.PNG" width="341" /></a></div>In Cineversary podcast episode #65, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> talks Chinese turkey with leg lamp expert <a href="https://www.adscahill.com/">Andrew Scahill</a>, a film studies professor at the University of Colorado Denver known for his holiday movies course, as they commemorate the 40th anniversary of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085334/">A Christmas Story</a>, directed by Bob Clark. Andrew and Erik cover this film from soap to fudge, exploring why this film remains timeless and deserves celebration four decades later, how it became a pop culture phenomenon, and much more.<br /><br /><div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Dz0KgyWD9hMrj1uWfGIiLKsZkD8awhyu2wHCT8HywUp0Zeu1z223LtRupAXUR0R0I-rT1AeD5J5Tqkdxq5U6vsiWgjwcgC4IOpcWs-68tt6FMdKE8Emwl2eQjgfXpodDIWdHhqD-6JDBpJU-fyX_Zt0rX3OOg7GB3T7ui4MpGiMkmFiuuYPXhfSELNCC/s600/Andy-Scahill.jpg" style="clear: left; display: inline; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="420" data-original-width="600" height="193" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Dz0KgyWD9hMrj1uWfGIiLKsZkD8awhyu2wHCT8HywUp0Zeu1z223LtRupAXUR0R0I-rT1AeD5J5Tqkdxq5U6vsiWgjwcgC4IOpcWs-68tt6FMdKE8Emwl2eQjgfXpodDIWdHhqD-6JDBpJU-fyX_Zt0rX3OOg7GB3T7ui4MpGiMkmFiuuYPXhfSELNCC/w275-h193/Andy-Scahill.jpg" width="275" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Andrew Scahill</td></tr></tbody></table>To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/65-A-Christmas-Story-40th-anniversary-with-Andrew-Scahill-e2cu1qa"><b>here </b></a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>.<span class="fullpost">
</span></div><div><br /></div>
<iframe frameborder="0" height="102px" scrolling="no" src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/65-A-Christmas-Story-40th-anniversary-with-Andrew-Scahill-e2cu1qa" width="600px"></iframe>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-48883494524511109952023-12-04T19:59:00.002-06:002023-12-04T19:59:33.431-06:00Tall tales of bygone crimes in the Windy City<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTEn-HVef5EcLergC4rDyHzKClSDfG52BG8wRlb0q7lX9-A3rPpT6vgk8wEdDLoS8cEKVd_bsPKXIQ-dPIdKFPrk2RGhiomith95dVwUVsx4VnhiA_yx-MdgW2KzGCFFx0b3smYP57bWl1Ct1G7jRItdJd0brcHlaMOpjYDH-90hcn759fKOFyJVHR8qPy/s700/TheUntouchables_onesheet_USA-1-500x753.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="457" height="577" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTEn-HVef5EcLergC4rDyHzKClSDfG52BG8wRlb0q7lX9-A3rPpT6vgk8wEdDLoS8cEKVd_bsPKXIQ-dPIdKFPrk2RGhiomith95dVwUVsx4VnhiA_yx-MdgW2KzGCFFx0b3smYP57bWl1Ct1G7jRItdJd0brcHlaMOpjYDH-90hcn759fKOFyJVHR8qPy/w377-h577/TheUntouchables_onesheet_USA-1-500x753.jpg" width="377" /></a></div>Helmed by Brian De Palma, with a screenplay by David Mamet, The Untouchables quickly became a hit after its theatrical debut in the summer of 1987, drawing inspiration from the real-life endeavors of Elliot Ness and other law enforcement agents who banded together to take down infamous gangster Al Capone during the violent Prohibition era in Chicago. The film, produced by Art Linson, boasts a star-studded cast featuring Kevin Costner in the role of Ness, Robert De Niro as the notorious Capone, and Sean Connery (who won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor), Andy Garcia, and Charles Martin Smith. <br /><br />This picture skillfully blends historical events (it’s more of a “based on” than an accurate retelling) with compelling storytelling, delivering an engaging narrative that vividly captures the essence of the bootleg era and the battle against organized crime.<div><i style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;"><span><br /></span></i></div><div><i style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;"><span>Click </span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdlWWCraO45N-8ugyg?e=AoDsvb">here</a><span><a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdlWWCraO45N-8ugyg?e=AoDsvb"> </a>to listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of The Untouchables, conducted last week.</span></i><br /><br /></div><div>What stands out about this 36-year-old film? It’s a throwback, in many ways—a retro love letter to the gangster and social message pictures of the 1930s and 1940s primarily made by Warner Brothers, especially in how it hones in on very clear good vs. evil themes and the need to bring extreme social villains like Capone to justice. The exaggerated if not implausible action scenes and bravura moments feel very Hollywood, and DePalma’s hyperbolic stylized tendencies make for an extremely entertaining narrative with characters that are easy to root for. <br /><br />Yet, DePalma has the benefit of employing graphic violence and brutality to help sell the idea to the viewer that Capone must be stopped, at all costs, by any means necessary. Interestingly, this is the rare rated-R film with no nudity or sexual scenes and little profanity. It’s DePalma’s brand of blood, gore, and carnage that pushes this into restricted territory. <br /><br />The Untouchables looks astounding, benefitting from a high-production-value sheen and Stephen H. Burum's cinematography, marked by iconic scenes and the effective use of visuals to heighten tension. Indeed, The Untouchables is one of the very best retro dramas evoked visually, thanks to careful attention to authentic details like shooting on the streets of Chicago (carefully dressed to look like the Windy City of 1930), fantastic period-authentic costumes and sets, and diegetic music of the time. <br /><br />The gunfight at Union Station—created by DePalma on the fly when original plans for a showdown via helicopter chase fell through due to budget constraints—is a tour de force of stylized suspense, echoing the visuals and editing of the famous Odessa steps sequence in Eisenstein’s Battleship Potemkin. Some argue this is DePalma’s finest moment as a director. His choice to use slow motion and extend the tension is an inspired one. <br /><br />Much of this plot is pure hokum, as many of these characters and situations are fabricated or embellished. Ness didn’t kill Capone enforcer Frank Nitti, the Canadian raid is fictional, as are the gunfights at the courthouse and train station, and the real Wallace (his actual name was Wilson) wasn’t murdered. Still, although it plays loose and fast with historical events, The Untouchables satisfies as a white-knuckle action film and police thriller. <br /><br />There’s an impressive array of talent attached to this project, including DePalma in the directing chair, Pulitzer Prize-winning Mamet handling screenwriting duties, venerable maestro Ennio Morricone scoring the music, and heavyweights like Connery, DeNiro, and Costner in the top roles. Some critics found fault with DeNiro’s extravagant take on Capone, while others commended his approach. <a href="https://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/untouchables-the">Per</a> critic James Berardinelli: “This is a cartoonish interpretation – a villain so black-hearted that it's impossible to root for him. Some critics have seen this as a flaw, but it's actually an asset. Let other movies paint Capone as a complex individual. De Niro's over-the-top portrayal is perfect for this context.” <br /><br />“Right vs. might,” or the legal way vs. the Chicago way, is the key to appreciating this movie’s thematic center. Ness’ character arc begins with an earnest attempt to capture Capone lawfully and legally but his methods and mindset change as he realizes, like Malone told him, that he’s got to play dirty and outside the law to succeed in a town as corrupt as Chicago. Malone’s advice? “He pulls a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue! That's the Chicago way.” <br /><br />The Untouchables also touches on the benefits of rugged individualism and a hardened heart. Much of the film’s emotional conflict concerns if and how Ness will turn to the dark side, and how his inherent virtues and beliefs will be forever compromised or surrendered. Ness and company realize that vigilantism and emotional prejudice are necessary to bring down a ruthless criminal. Ness, a sensitive character attuned to the female sensibilities of women around him like his wife, his daughter, and the grieving mother, learns the hard way that he has to adopt a more macho, insensitive attitude against Capone, with whom he is consistently contrasted in the film. <br /><br />Brian Eggert with Deep Focus Review <a href="https://deepfocusreview.com/definitives/the-untouchables/">wrote</a>: “Capone’s masculinity defines him; he’s surrounded by tough men with guns, while other men in the press admire and laugh at his jokes. Never do we see a woman by his side. By contrast, Ness is surrounded by women: his wife Catherine (Patricia Clarkson) and their young daughter, to whom he gives delicate butterfly kisses. Butterflies symbolize Ness’ femininity. When the press mocks his initial failures, they call him a “poor butterfly” and liken him to the suicidal wife in Puccini’s opera, Madame Butterfly—a character who waits up for her husband only to be humiliated. Ness is a man bound by his family. He endearingly remarks, “It’s nice to be married,” and smiles at the note his wife included with his lunch reading, “I’m very proud of you.” But Ness is too close to the wholesome family ideology he’s trying to preserve. Capone sees Ness’ weakness and uses his slimy hitman Frank Nitti (Billy Drago) to issue a veiled threat to Ness’ family. Ness knows he must send away his wife and daughter—a pointedly feminine and therefore vulnerable family in these very classicized terms—to focus his energies on Capone.” <br /><br />Ness’ line, “You tell Capone that I’ll see him in hell,” spoken before he kills Nitti, suggests that Ness has crossed over the threshold into lawless vigilantism and is morally damned for compromising his principles; yet, by the end of the film, he appears satisfied that justice was served and, we can assume, like Malone said, “Well, then, you've done your job. Go home and sleep well tonight.” <br /><br />Additionally, this is a work that reminds us not to underestimate the underdog. Wallace proves he’s more heroic than the nerdy pencil pusher he appears to be; a lowly beat cop demonstrates that he’s the most savvy at strategizing Capone’s downfall; the short-statured and soft-spoken Stone is the most reliable and resourceful in a showdown; and Ness, despite the odds stacked against him and his inability to trust anyone besides his small team, cleverly outlasts Capone in the end, enjoying the satisfaction of telling Capone to his face: ““Never stop fighting till the fight is done!” <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Gangster pictures of the 1930s, including The Roaring Twenties, Public Enemy, and Scarface </li><li>Battleship Potemkin </li><li>Sabotage by Hitchcock </li><li>Modern retro gangster films like Public Enemies, Gangster Squad, Gangster Land, and Mobsters </li><li>The Magnificent Seven and The Dirty Dozen </li><li>Serpico </li><li>The King of New York </li><li>Once Upon a Time in America and Once Upon a Time in the West by Leone </li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Brian DePalma </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Carrie </li><li>Dressed to Kill </li><li>Blow Out </li><li>Scarface </li><li>Body Double </li><li>Mission: Impossible</li></ul></div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-26832038543162053582023-11-29T16:18:00.001-06:002023-11-29T16:18:09.333-06:00The Queen comes clean<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeVyXE6ZmbpsMjkZqDgo7Sh31_s3sCe8LIzgXE84BIg2fwAwxH_AxyoSkfxlXVrxtNUV19-eTiIBUERRbG-6opNOzFT9Cjzu6bAly550uzYdp6ySkWaIXHsk7nRWmgIZIt8k5JeVLGTXpFTg_JsXtleMcP5Pvhc1t3lfKBKatFu0x0e4_JQ8T1DTrzB7zw/s773/Screen%20Shot%2011-29-23%20at%2004.15%20PM.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="773" data-original-width="552" height="461" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeVyXE6ZmbpsMjkZqDgo7Sh31_s3sCe8LIzgXE84BIg2fwAwxH_AxyoSkfxlXVrxtNUV19-eTiIBUERRbG-6opNOzFT9Cjzu6bAly550uzYdp6ySkWaIXHsk7nRWmgIZIt8k5JeVLGTXpFTg_JsXtleMcP5Pvhc1t3lfKBKatFu0x0e4_JQ8T1DTrzB7zw/w330-h461/Screen%20Shot%2011-29-23%20at%2004.15%20PM.PNG" width="330" /></a></div>Director Lauren Greenfield hit the documentary jackpot when she was filming The Queen of Versailles, her 2012 feature chronicling the lives of uber-rich couple David and Jackie Siegel. That’s because the 2008 financial meltdown happened during production, which seriously threatened the fortunes of Siegel and his timeshare empire, transforming the film seemingly from a puff piece profile of extravagant prosperity to a cautionary tale rumination on the fleeting nature of wealth and privilege. The timing was perfect, as the Siegels were constructing the largest single-family home in the United States, inspired by the Palace of Versailles in France, while the cameras were rolling, until the financial crisis hit and their Xanadu was put on hold. This doc adeptly captures the aftermath of that tumultuous period, providing a distinctive perspective on how economic downturns can impact even the most advantaged individuals. David and Jackie Siegel emerge as fascinating—if not completely unsympathetic—characters, shedding light on the extravagances and vulnerabilities inherent in the lives of the super-rich. The Queen of Versailles also serves as a timely social commentary on opulence, consumerism, and the pursuit of the American Dream, prompting watchers to ponder the ramifications of unbridled ambition and materialism. <br /><br /><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group’s discussion of this film, conducted last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdh_tvwfYqSC20mA-A?e=6nnNOO"><b>here</b></a>. </i></span><br /><br />Unparalleled access to privileged lives makes this movie particularly riveting. It’s easy to question why David and Jackie would allow the cameras to infiltrate into their present and past lives to such an intimate and revealing extent. And some of the unflattering, nakedly candid, and boastful things David says are eyebrow-raising – things he will likely later regret revealing. <br /><br />It’s difficult to feel sorry for these real-life characters whatsoever, considering their extravagant lifestyles, selfish proclivities, and swaggering attitudes. But Jackie in particular can sometimes evoke our empathy – not necessarily sympathy – because she appears more down-to-earth, humanistic, and centered than her husband. <br /><br />The filmmakers seem to be relatively objective and fair-handed in the footage they present, avoiding any statement-making about, for example, David’s financial comeuppance. However, a New York Times <a href="https://archive.nytimes.com/carpetbagger.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/documentary-footage-raises-questions-about-lawsuit/">article</a> brought the director’s editing approaches into question, suggesting that shots were arranged out of order to affect the narrative timeline, which suggests that this film is biased and manipulative. Reviewer Brian Orndorf <a href="https://www.blu-ray.com/The-Queen-of-Versailles/132283/#Review">wrote</a>: “Greenfield keeps the focus on the absurdity of behavior and routine, studying David and Jackie for cracks in their veneer, hoping to expose a pinhole of vulnerability as the empire comes crashing down around them, introducing new realities for the pair and their kids, a spoiled yet observant bunch who will have to sing for their supper when adulthood hits them like a truck.” <br /><br />Major themes woven into this work include the dark side of the American dream, hubris, bad karma, and schadenfreude. David Siegel is easy to dislike because he comes across as arrogant, boastful, narcissistic, and opportunistic. His fall from financial heights is especially delicious to viewers who find him vulgar and appalling in his ostentatious lifestyle. Indeed, The Queen of Versailles also reminds us that pride goeth before a fall. This story proves, yet again, that overconfident, self-important, and conceited people are likely to fail and suffer indignity and public scorn. The Economist <a href="https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2012/08/25/all-fall-down">wrote</a>: “The film's great achievement is that it invites both compassion and Schadenfreude. What could have been merely a silly send-up manages to be a meditation on marriage and a metaphor for the fragility of fortunes, big and small.” <br /><br />Life lesson #2? Never forget your roots. Jackie comes across as a slightly more relatable character we can empathize with, partially because she doesn’t forget where she came from and she demonstrates compassion and generosity for those less fortunate, although she is also spoiled, privileged, and presumptuous. Recall how she mistakenly thinks that the car rental company will provide a chauffeur and that the hired help can handle all of the responsibilities around her home. <br /><br />The emperor wears no clothes is another clear takeaway. David and Jackie flaunted their wealth and power for years, but face a reckoning after the financial crisis of 2008. Despite having a home that appears lavish and countless enviable possessions, their property is littered with feces and accumulated junk – a symbol of how, despite being rich on paper, this couple has poor values. <br /><br />Lastly, this is certainly a story of a floundering family tree. David and Jackie should be overjoyed that they have a large family and many children who, at least earlier in the story, presumably won’t have to worry about their financial futures. But they take these kids for granted, let other caregivers primarily raise them, and in the case of David show little to no attention. A man can, despite lacking money, be enriched with the rewarding responsibility of having a family, but David appears to be going broke on both fronts. <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Billionaire Boys Club </li><li>The Big Short </li><li>Too Big to Fail </li><li>Some Kind of Heaven </li><li>Inside Job </li><li>Untouchable</li><li>Reality TV series like The Real Housewives</li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Lauren Greenfield </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Thin </li><li>Generation Wealth </li><li>The Kingmaker</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-50001412854070895512023-11-21T18:15:00.003-06:002023-11-21T18:15:38.636-06:00Dark political comedy, Italian style<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5AJjwpQmAj8ndmqZSoVQsrS7qj9SMHuV5hGqacyGGI6ZJwpAbsAb9lRvdSMo4rLBWKZao3xUsmOcKZKF1w3RsiCS5kOAzE0PEpnKAopbikJNONa8qLQI91ClkkkdmGP1dKn9SI9tcijziAPJ97zKwFLWEcTrqN25gp0RXdQ60frgL9JEohrTAHDOGQOIk/s743/fdsa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="580" data-original-width="743" height="500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5AJjwpQmAj8ndmqZSoVQsrS7qj9SMHuV5hGqacyGGI6ZJwpAbsAb9lRvdSMo4rLBWKZao3xUsmOcKZKF1w3RsiCS5kOAzE0PEpnKAopbikJNONa8qLQI91ClkkkdmGP1dKn9SI9tcijziAPJ97zKwFLWEcTrqN25gp0RXdQ60frgL9JEohrTAHDOGQOIk/w640-h500/fdsa.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>Directed by Italian filmmaker Lina Wertmüller, Seven Beauties is a dark comedy-drama from 1975 depicting the story of Pasqualino, a World War II petty criminal and deserter portrayed by Giancarlo Giannini. Renowned for its black humor and thought-provoking perspective on war, politics, and human nature, the movie follows Pasqualino as he navigates a harsh and tumultuous world and tries to survive despite increasingly harsh circumstances. The film delves into themes of endurance, morality, and the dehumanizing impact of war. Despite its somber thematic content and graphic violence, Wertmüller skillfully infuses laughs and satire into the storyline, resulting in a distinctive fusion of genres. <br /><br />Seven Beauties garnered critical acclaim for its daring and unconventional approach, securing four Academy Award nominations, notably Best Director for Wertmüller, making this the first film directed by a woman to receive a nomination in that category. <br /><br /><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of Seven Beauties, conducted last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdgbynXsU5A33IynWQ?e=eW4k0f"><b>here</b></a>. </i></span><br /><br />One of the most interesting things about Seven Beauties is that, despite being made by a woman, it’s not regarded as a feminist film. Many of the female characters in the picture are deliberately made to look and act ugly, grotesque, fat, crazy, cruel, and inhuman. Wertmüller makes us follow and root for a repugnant, unsympathetic man who commits murder and rape, acts violently against women, kills his fellow prisoners, and yet survives against the odds. <br /><br />Seven Beauties has one of the strangest opening sequences of any 1970s film, featuring black-and-white archival war footage mixed with a jazzy tune married to badly sung lyrics that seem to be indicting the gullibility of the Italian people for their part as an Axis power in World War II under the spell of the dictator Mussolini. <br /><br />Additionally, the movie adopts sudden and strange tonal shifts, trying to balance between serious drama and black comedy and often leaving the viewer unsure as to how they should feel. Wertmüller attempts to wield comedy as a tool to navigate through the tragedy, introducing a layer of complexity to the narrative. Some critics found fault with this approach, while others admired it. <br /><br /><a href="https://thehotpinkpen.com/2020/09/01/lina-wertmullers-seven-beauties-is-a-poignant-portrait-of-the-worst-of-humanity/">Per</a> reviewer Amelie Lasker: “The film is a masterclass in shifting tone. It manages to mingle humor with the atrocities without trivializing what the Nazis are doing. Instead, Pasqualino trying to dispose of the body of the pimp he murders, is effectively played for laughs, as is a scene in which he feigns madness to get himself moved from prison to the insane asylum. Giannini is fantastic in both the comedic scenes and the intensely emotional scenes…How Wertmüller mixes the humorous with haunting realism makes both seem more intense.” <br /><br />Seven Beauties is noteworthy, too, because Wertmüller often uses no dialogue to depict major scenes, such as the courtroom sequence; also, the narrative is told in nonlinear fashion, beginning in the middle of Pasqualino’s tale and interspersing lots of flashbacks as it cuts between timelines. Cinema Sight blogger Wesley Lovell <a href="https://www.cinemasight.com/review-seven-beauties-1975/">wrote</a>: “One of the most interesting things about the film is the structure of the parallel time periods. The present-tense segments are short at the beginning and grow in length until they dominate the latter half of the film. In reverse, the flashbacks monopolize the first half of the film and then diminish in length through the end. And the final scene, designed like the flashbacks, but purportedly taking place in the present, almost seems too idyllic and hopeful, suggesting that perhaps what we’re witnessing is a flashforward of desire and not an embodiment of reality.” <br /><br />This would have been controversial as one of the first films to attempt a graphically violent representation/recreation of a Nazi concentration camp where Holocaust victims were kept and killed. Seven Beauties also contains one of the most deliberately repulsive and non-titillating sex scenes ever made. <br /><br />Survival at all costs is the predominant tenet here. The filmmakers continually ask: What are you willing to do and how much morality and self-respect are you willing to forego to survive when you are desperate? Pasqualino, ironically a man consumed with maintaining honor, appearances, and dignity, is prepared to debase himself to the extreme to avoid death and punishment. He learns that, to survive and thrive, you have to be willing to compromise yourself and your values, as evidenced when he returns home at the end to find that his mother, sisters, and the girl he loves have all become prostitutes. Unlike earlier in the film, when he would have rejected these supposedly corrupted women, he accepts their status and insists on marrying the prostitute who loves him. <br /><br />“Seven Beauties is essentially one long prostitution joke, one which operates on the central thesis that anyone who can survive war must inherently be some kind of monster,” <a href="https://www.brattleblog.brattlefilm.org/2017/06/02/seven-beauties-a-satire-of-survival-5172/">opined </a>Blogger Eli Boonin-Vail. “In a brilliant and sickening twist of fate, Wertmüller chronicles how a man who once assaulted his own sister for becoming a prostitute is forced to pimp himself out.” <br /><br />The dehumanizing effects of war are front and center, as well. Pasqualino is forced to commit immoral acts while a soldier, deserter, and concentration camp prisoner that erodes any sense of morality, honor, or dignity. <br /><br />A reading of Seven Beauties is also impossible without exploring gender politics. Pasqualino seems to represent some of the worst aspects of toxic masculinity, including the adoption of macho bravado, misogynistic treatment of women, and being sexually opportunistic and deviant. But we witness his gradual debasement as the power dynamics are shifted away from Pasqualino to other women, including the asylum clinician and the female commandant of the Nazi concentration camp. <br /><br />Lastly, consider how political crimes are punished worse than more reprehensible acts in the world of Seven Beauties. Pasqualino gets a lighter sentence than another prisoner who is labeled a socialist, and he’s more severely punished (with electroshock therapy) for mocking Mussolini in the sanitarium than he is for raping a patient there. Talk about making a political statement as a filmmaker. <br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Amarcord </li><li>A Clockwork Orange</li><li>Inglorious Basterds</li><li>Life is Beautiful</li></ul><h4 style="text-align: left;">Other films by Lina Wertmüller </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Swept Away </li><li>The Seduction of Mimi </li><li>Love and Anarchy</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-80107721432499162122023-11-16T07:00:00.001-06:002023-11-16T07:00:00.140-06:00Here's looking at you, "Kid"<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ZWODSezjsiQ-HnxQBuRiWW8LLPYiu4uEl2TutpT2KX60whT-UOWnZhPHUndsDSuzjIl6Ol_oNhAWruijHBKP0ppFvaGqRsMZKEbEGtTojCXBYzkdrhGo_NrA5opYmJ55eiKtWKAjhZpVOLa8fKlJ2Ae4qbTrwFfxBBXeodET4DPAo2NsRLOfDRkDvB1D/s561/lf.jpeg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="561" data-original-width="294" height="665" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ZWODSezjsiQ-HnxQBuRiWW8LLPYiu4uEl2TutpT2KX60whT-UOWnZhPHUndsDSuzjIl6Ol_oNhAWruijHBKP0ppFvaGqRsMZKEbEGtTojCXBYzkdrhGo_NrA5opYmJ55eiKtWKAjhZpVOLa8fKlJ2Ae4qbTrwFfxBBXeodET4DPAo2NsRLOfDRkDvB1D/w349-h665/lf.jpeg" width="349" /></a></div>The Kid, a 1921 silent comedy-drama film directed, written, produced, scored, and starring Charlie Chaplin, remains one of the artist’s most renowned and timeless creations. The narrative revolves around a vagabond who stumbles upon an abandoned infant, taking on the role of a surrogate parent. Six-year-old Jackie Coogan portrays the child, whose presence becomes an integral part of the tramp's existence, as they grapple with the hardships of poverty, the complexities of social services, and the challenges of life on the streets.</div><br /><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of The Kid, which occurred last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdcgswSlswVezKOGDg?e=PjBLZw"><b>here</b></a>.</i></span><br /><br />What’s significant about The Kid is that this was Chaplin’s first feature-length film he directed and wrote—a six-reeler that spans over 60 minutes. Chaplin had been increasing his runtimes over the previous few years, but this was a gamble on his part financially and artistically that a 60-plus-minute movie would be commercially successful and embraced by the masses, which it was. (Note that the original 1921 version of the film was slightly edited by Chaplin in 1971 and given a new score he wrote; the director excised some shots and scenes he feared were too maudlin for contemporary viewers.)<br /><br />The Kid is also noteworthy for its groundbreaking narrative approach, seamlessly blending elements of comedy and melodrama, at a time when the two weren’t commonly mixed. It aptly demonstrates Chaplin's knack for melding slapstick humor with poignant and emotionally resonant moments, earning it a place as one of the earliest instances of a dramedy (comedy-drama) in cinema.<br /><br />Jackie Coogan's performance garnered deserved critical acclaim, too. His work in The Kid, at the tender age of six, solidified his position as one of the first major child stars in the history of film.<br /><br />This work also serves as a platform for social commentary, shedding light on the trials and tribulations of the impoverished and the obstacles they confront, including the inadequacies of the welfare system. It emerged as one of the early films to address social issues through a combination of humor and storytelling.<br /><br />Consider that Chaplin came from a childhood of poverty and abandonment. He had an absent father and a mother who couldn’t provide financially for her children; she was committed to a mental asylum when Chaplin was 14. The boy also was forced to serve in a workhouse twice before age nine. Additionally, Chaplin’s newborn son died of birth defects just days after being born in 1919, and he experienced a troubled marriage and impending divorce from his first wife. All of these factors contributed to the narrative, acting, and sentimental/melodramatic tone of The Kid. “The horror of abandonment, the pathetic vulnerability of an infant in a harsh world, provides the dark backdrop against which that vision stands out. Instead of denying such horrors, Chaplin learned from melodrama that hardship could be confronted and defeated. His way of defeating horror was to transform it—by converting loss into gags,” <a href="https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/3905-the-kid-the-grail-of-laughter-and-the-fallen-angel">opined</a> Criterion Collection essayist Tom Gunning.<br /><br />The thematic thrust of The Kid concerns socioeconomically disadvantaged surrogacy, or the concept of a “stray adopting a stray.” Despite his impoverished position and several attempts to skirt any responsibility, the Tramp ultimately chooses to keep the orphaned and abandoned infant as his own, and he finds a way to make this arrangement work practically and financially. Even though he is not the boy’s biological father nor is he an ideal provider financially, the Tramp develops a stronger bond with young John than most dads would with their sons.<br /><br />Reinvention and resourcefulness is a further collective idea espoused in this film. The Tramp is forced to get crafty and adaptive with the meager means he has. He recycles or reconfigures several objects and cleverly finds solutions to common parenting problems like the need for diapers and bottles by being quick-witted. Gunning continued: “Chaplin’s poetic response to the world relies on his ingenious redefinition of objects. Many of his gags repurpose things, transforming their uses and meanings through his inventive play with them…We see him efficiently cutting up and folding cloths for the baby’s diapers, acknowledging from the start that care includes the most basic of bodily functions. Instead of a traditional cradle, the baby hangs suspended in an improvised hammock. His nutritive needs are taken care of by a similarly hanging teapot with a nipple forced onto its spout.”<br /><br />The Kid also reminds us that we are our brothers’ keepers, suggesting that, regardless of our station in life or lack of resources, we have a responsibility to step up and help those less fortunate, the emotional rewards for which can be priceless. <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/features/what-child-is-this-the-enduring-legacy-of-charlie-chaplins-the-kid">Per</a> film essayist Audrey Fox: “It’s a tremendously optimistic view of humanity, that a reclusive and antisocial person who is perhaps least likely to seek to protect the herd would nonetheless make the choice to care for a small, helpless child for no other reason than instinctual compassion. This raw empathy is why “The Kid” remains Chaplin’s most emotionally complex film, and how his simple story of would-be father and son has maintained its relevance for a century.”<br /><br />Additionally, this movie stresses that maintaining a traditional family dynamic is often in a child’s best interest. Remember that the Tramp is, in reality, a con artist by necessity who trains his child in the business of bilking customers who wouldn’t otherwise need his products and services. Like a Jean Valjean who would steal a loaf of bread to feed his starving family, the Tramp remains sympathetic to us because of his low socioeconomic underdog status and the fact that he chose to unofficially adopt John when he didn’t have to. But this hardscrabble life likely would have led to a lack of opportunities and higher risks for John growing up. It’s fortunate, then, that he is reunited with his mother by the conclusion of the story and that she allows the Tramp to presumably remain in John’s life, although we don’t know to what extent. John will assumedly be safer, healthier, and better advantaged under her roof while also, hopefully, benefitting from a continued relationship with the Tramp. Fox added: “It’s crucial to the impact of the story that the Tramp’s way to earn a living lies outside the law: it further highlights how removed he is from a traditional community and creates a natural conflict within the narrative. The life he can provide for his child is loving, but is that enough?”<br /><h4>Similar works</h4><ul><li>A Dog’s Life, a short also by Chaplin</li><li>Paper Moon</li><li>Sidewalk Stories</li><li>A Perfect World</li><li>Little Miss Marker</li><li>News of the World</li><li>The Midnight Sky</li><li>Up</li><li>The Mandalorian</li><li> Leon: The Professional</li><li>Kramer vs. Kramer</li></ul><h4>Other feature films by Chaplin</h4><ul><li>The Gold Rush</li><li>The Circus</li><li>City Lights</li><li>Modern Times</li><li>The Great Dictator</li><li>Limelight</li></ul><span class="fullpost">
</span>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-20029228436567885292023-11-14T23:42:00.002-06:002023-11-14T23:42:57.949-06:00Cineversary podcast honors 70th birthday of Ozu's Tokyo Story<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPG8Tg-px-MEAAa8lmhyphenhyphenCpsJRik1gqSm44POY6nxeA5cFKcrAGtHCz-O7F3ZqNqJ4bf46WV3XvTGlXPdr0Kcz2hXCQi9tiWK3sbw7WCWv50NkUt3e7KMfqpPReh80oR3H_2Fc5tczDOeF_t_uMwTYBSc5h_k7eYp60jylBa9rk3bA-fDxhCgUyRvv7iJK6/s3000/Tokyo-story-20201121.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3000" data-original-width="2117" height="498" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPG8Tg-px-MEAAa8lmhyphenhyphenCpsJRik1gqSm44POY6nxeA5cFKcrAGtHCz-O7F3ZqNqJ4bf46WV3XvTGlXPdr0Kcz2hXCQi9tiWK3sbw7WCWv50NkUt3e7KMfqpPReh80oR3H_2Fc5tczDOeF_t_uMwTYBSc5h_k7eYp60jylBa9rk3bA-fDxhCgUyRvv7iJK6/w352-h498/Tokyo-story-20201121.jpg" width="352" /></a></div>In Cineversary podcast episode #64, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> is joined by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Desser">David Desser</a>, emeritus professor of cinema studies at the University of Illinois and one of the world’s foremost experts on Asian cinema, to celebrate the 70th anniversary of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046438/">Tokyo Story</a>, directed by Yasujirō Ozu. They discuss why and how this film remains a masterwork, Tokyo Story’s prominent themes, Ozu’s unique style, and much more.<div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtwIO3wd_FfUnY8c14E_tyKebWX0t-pPpEtI6VWO7-0x01vxtBgwE8lgIEnhW8fpq8FOKDYXgmEK-oVbrZ0a7FPCMvNh-53t8QXEimQlxVLqDc5cltA50g9t-WhFLdZQhyU4maLbuX_ZtXqKsn4GOF9_5U47_VE_XBOCc9aaKq8XNI90W21wnPkoN-ap0p/s206/desser_d.jpg" style="clear: right; display: inline; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="206" data-original-width="164" height="195" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtwIO3wd_FfUnY8c14E_tyKebWX0t-pPpEtI6VWO7-0x01vxtBgwE8lgIEnhW8fpq8FOKDYXgmEK-oVbrZ0a7FPCMvNh-53t8QXEimQlxVLqDc5cltA50g9t-WhFLdZQhyU4maLbuX_ZtXqKsn4GOF9_5U47_VE_XBOCc9aaKq8XNI90W21wnPkoN-ap0p/w155-h195/desser_d.jpg" width="155" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">David Desser</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div><div>To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/64-Tokyo-Story-70th-anniversary-with-David-Desser-e2bukp7"><b>here</b> </a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>.</div></div>
<iframe src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/64-Tokyo-Story-70th-anniversary-with-David-Desser-e2bukp7" height="102px" width="600px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-65306159883278532612023-11-07T18:05:00.003-06:002023-11-07T18:05:34.233-06:00Hello darkness, my old friend...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZQcm-kZaTfjlBVa62675q4XIRV6nNPWy_kWjZr2bDWOF1kSztTKIW9kx89vNJq_KXN0vaBWLAC9Wh_W4aIWfL9oGfou6TGCOVAr0LYRHHeLqj2zwudZdhR16Lcza6fC0Q7PAR_ofuBPYxKQzQn-njeYfTj8jmbw8SJsos5ND_2mXEz9O_-9JwKxYvD0-S/s802/61CShFg+5kL._AC_SL1000_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="802" data-original-width="589" height="520" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZQcm-kZaTfjlBVa62675q4XIRV6nNPWy_kWjZr2bDWOF1kSztTKIW9kx89vNJq_KXN0vaBWLAC9Wh_W4aIWfL9oGfou6TGCOVAr0LYRHHeLqj2zwudZdhR16Lcza6fC0Q7PAR_ofuBPYxKQzQn-njeYfTj8jmbw8SJsos5ND_2mXEz9O_-9JwKxYvD0-S/w382-h520/61CShFg+5kL._AC_SL1000_.jpg" width="382" /></a></div>Whether you regard it as a timeless classic or a fascinating but dated relic of its era, The Graduate continues to intrigue as a unique cinematic work that reflects the boomer generation it targeted as well as the talented collaborators involved, including director Mike Nichols. Adapted from Charles Webb's 1963 novel of the same name by screenwriters Calder Willingham and Buck Henry, the movie features Dustin Hoffman in the role of Benjamin Braddock, a recent college graduate grappling with uncertainty about his future and embarking on a complex affair with an older woman, Mrs. Robinson, portrayed by Anne Bancroft. The film delves into themes of alienation, intergenerational strife, and the quest for purpose in a post-graduate world.<div><br /></div><div>The Graduate serves as a mirror to the evolving societal norms and values of the 1960s, vividly depicting the generation gap between younger and older characters while challenging the conformity and materialism prevalent in the older generation. Notably, the film's soundtrack, featuring music by Simon & Garfunkel, gained immense popularity and is closely associated with the movie. Songs such as "Mrs. Robinson" and "The Sound of Silence" became chart-toppers and are inseparable from the film's thematic essence. The Graduate's impressive cinematography, narrative techniques, and use of symbolism have left an enduring influence on the craft of filmmaking, and the work garnered numerous Academy Award nominations, including a nod for Best Picture, with Mike Nichols securing the Oscar for Best Director. <br /><br />Our CineVerse group revisited this picture last week and engaged in a healthy discourse about its many merits. To listen to a recording of that group discussion, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdY2MIZdxObNMKV6-w?e=RKDXBe"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></b></a>.<br /><br />To read a past CineVerse post about The Graduate, click <a href="https://www.cineversegroup.com/2017/11/the-curious-case-of-benjamin-braddock.html"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></b></a>.</div>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-46719483945006850002023-10-31T13:22:00.003-05:002023-10-31T13:22:20.649-05:00Punk rock horror<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEholSROoofceNHji1aAEKegZR2EUj2Orgt-p_ZkJUTKLLHcXHBvo4t4LI3bstRuvNnoH3s6UPHrkMA1tut858Y66rNjWsDul0QMOjMCjwP8yQhyphenhyphenFysrbQjEywERXeh73wnrrsPa1ivIYmcTWEHiU0snDmK6yH4vDIPN_dxkHpwYwLwmIWDzLuzOHcovTE3w/s1027/71M8qVpeeML._AC_SL1040_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1027" data-original-width="668" height="602" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEholSROoofceNHji1aAEKegZR2EUj2Orgt-p_ZkJUTKLLHcXHBvo4t4LI3bstRuvNnoH3s6UPHrkMA1tut858Y66rNjWsDul0QMOjMCjwP8yQhyphenhyphenFysrbQjEywERXeh73wnrrsPa1ivIYmcTWEHiU0snDmK6yH4vDIPN_dxkHpwYwLwmIWDzLuzOHcovTE3w/w391-h602/71M8qVpeeML._AC_SL1040_.jpg" width="391" /></a></div>In 1985, The Return of the Living Dead, directed by Dan O'Bannon and written by John A. Russo—co-collaborator with George Romero on the original Night of the Living Dead—emerged as a cult classic in the horror-comedy genre. <br /><br /><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdV9Iv98MRz_os0sUg?e=TYlarY"><b>here</b></a>. </i></span><br /><br />What sets this film apart from other zombie fare and makes Return of the Living Dead memorable? Unlike the lumbering, slow-moving zombies popularized by Romero in his zombie movies, this work introduced a few fresh twists: Here, zombies are fast, talkative, and retain their intelligence and personalities, driven by an insatiable craving for brains, which became a hallmark of the film and a reference point in pop culture. These living dead also cannot be killed simply by a gunshot to the head; they need to be dismembered and burned. <br /><br />Also, this is possibly the first and one of the only instances of a zombie film in which viewers can sympathize with the living dead. The capture and questioning of the half-zombie woman reveal that eating brains helps take away the visceral pain they feel from being dead yet alive. <br /><br />Additionally, this picture effectively blends horror and gore with dark humor, delivering a unique and engaging experience for its audience. Noted for its witty dialogue, eccentric characters, and absurd scenarios, the comedy it injects sets it apart from more solemn and grave horror films of its time. Reviewer Richard Scheib <a href="https://www.moriareviews.com/horror/return-of-the-living-dead-1985.htm">wrote</a>: “George Romero uses zombies to make sweeping social metaphors; Dan O’Bannon takes his approach with a sense of caustic humor that only becomes more hilarious the darker he makes it – everything anybody in the film tries to do about the situation only ends up making it worse.” <br /><br />Return of the Living Dead boasts a memorable punk rock soundtrack, as well, further contributing to its cult status. Songs by The Cramps, Roky Erickson, The Damned, and 45 Grave stand out, offering music that humorously punctuates the action and frights. <br /><br />The movie helped influence future zombie films, including Shaun of the Dead and Zombieland, and it triggered four sequels, which speaks to its pop culture reach. The appearance of the zombies in the film drew inspiration from sources such as the mummies of Guanajuato, Mexico, and the Bog People of Wales, along with artwork from EC Comics. <br /><br />The existential threat suggested by earlier zombie films takes a darker, ironic turn here. In nearly all zombie-apocalypse movies, mankind becomes outnumbered by zombies who populate exponentially as more people die or are bitten and infected; in Return of the Living Dead, the irony is that the only way to kill the undead completely is to burn them, but the ashes and vapors of the incinerated zombies get recirculated through the environment, ultimately rejuvenating more buried bodies and humans infected by these remnants. Unleashing a nuclear bomb to nullify the threat posed by an outbreak in a small urban area actually widens the crisis. <br /><br />This work also expands upon zombie mythology by introducing the notion of the military, the government, and a big chemical company being responsible for creating and using a fictional chemical that inadvertently creates zombies and then trying to cover up the evidence—adding a conspiratorial element to the mythos. <br /><br />While this isn’t a film replete with juicy themes, the main takeaway is clear: Human error can easily lead to inhuman catastrophe. DVD Savant critic Glenn Erickson <a href="https://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s571dead.html">wrote</a>: “The cynical Army subplot wraps up with the brass making the same dumb mistakes as did Frank and Freddy.” <br /><br /><h4 style="text-align: left;">Similar works </h4><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>George Romero’s Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead, and subsequent sequels </li><li>The zombie comedies Shaun of the Dead, Zombieland, and The Dead Don’t Die </li><li>The Walking Dead and Fear the Walking Dead TV shows </li><li>Other reanimated dead films in the immediate years after Return of the Living Dead, including Reanimator, The Video Dead, and Braindead (Dead Alive) </li><li>Other 1980s horror films that cleverly blended comedy and scares, including Killer Klowns From Outer Space, Fright Night, The Blob remake, and Night of the Creeps</li></ul>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-72509684368652841012023-10-24T11:30:00.001-05:002023-10-24T11:30:00.159-05:00The devil is in the details<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW41qZ_aM7mGuttfbWDgU1tbTKZOVpQ6Yss4LMN0Ecs5Z5rglk-xpPPev1wiml3NvFrpzrD4nn7rAJBP2Yk2Ov-ggUdfqHHfXBCjDMYf9ZhAH_O88KzNJevoEd9RmkV1aDf_xzLtjBMK5wzOAtE5evo-IVIBqVeBOnTuk9S48B7Gib-AaMH6i-L-oz7Hx2/s1200/The-Exorcist-1973-e1612470963320.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW41qZ_aM7mGuttfbWDgU1tbTKZOVpQ6Yss4LMN0Ecs5Z5rglk-xpPPev1wiml3NvFrpzrD4nn7rAJBP2Yk2Ov-ggUdfqHHfXBCjDMYf9ZhAH_O88KzNJevoEd9RmkV1aDf_xzLtjBMK5wzOAtE5evo-IVIBqVeBOnTuk9S48B7Gib-AaMH6i-L-oz7Hx2/w640-h426/The-Exorcist-1973-e1612470963320.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>The Exorcist, released in late December 1973, came out of the gate like a thunderbolt and immediately established itself as a modern fright classic, becoming the second-highest-grossing film ever at that time and setting a new benchmark for quality in the horror genre—garnering 10 Academy Award nominations and winning two Oscars. Directed by William Friedkin and produced by William Peter Blatty, who penned the 1971 novel of the same name, The Exorcist depicts the possession of a young girl named Regan, portrayed by Linda Blair, and the determined efforts of Father Damien Karras and Father Merrin, played, respectively, by Jason Miller and Max Von Sydow, to expel the demon inhabiting her. Ellen Burstyn also stars as Regan's mother Chris. <br /><br /><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><i>Click <a href="https://1drv.ms/u/s!AirKFvqffXlvkdU4npK-9ljKtuN1ow?e=xP8MRP"><b>here</b></a> to listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of The Exorcist, conducted last week; to hear the latest Cineversary podcast episode spotlighting The Exorcist, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/63-The-Exorcist-50th-and-Abbott--Costello-Meet-Frankenstein-75th-anniversaries-e2an8h7"><b>here</b></a>. </i></span><br /><br />Why and how does The Exorcist remain one of the all-time great horror movies five decades onward? This film deserves praise for its authenticity, high production values, and quality craftsmanship. The phenomenal special effects aren’t shlocky or budget-constrained: The outstanding makeup work by Dick Smith and the carefully orchestrated practical effects—from Regan’s rotating head and levitated body to the simulated projectile vomiting—look and feel realistic. While his tactics may have been abusive, selfish, and extreme, Friedkin pushed his cast and crew hard to achieve these horrific visuals and lend the film a verisimilitude that places The Exorcist many notches higher than standard horror fare for this era. It also helps that he and Blatty imbue the picture with authentic details, basing the narrative on a true account of exorcism, consulting with religious experts to accurately depict the exorcism rite, placing his actors within a refrigerated bedroom set to produce visible breath vapor, and taking advice from medical experts to make the hospital testing scenes so unnerving yet also faithful to what was involved with an actual angiography at that time. The collaborators deserve kudos for giving The Exorcist an utterly plausible sheen of realism by paying attention to the fine details and making Regan’s physical transformation disturbingly graphic. <br /><br />Much of what makes The Exorcist so great is that it wasn’t afraid to push the envelope and risk extreme controversy. Audiences had never before seen a demonic possession so convincingly portrayed or a young female character so graphically vulgar or sexually expressive in this context. Add in the blasphemous and profane words Regan utters, the grotesque physical manifestations of the demon inhabiting her body, the brief but completely upsetting subliminal images like flashes of the face of Pazuzu, and the gross-out hospital testing sequences and you’ve got a potently distressing film whose content consistently upset audiences—creating a perfect formula for word-of-mouth buzz and high ticket demand. No one had ever viewed a film like this before, one that reportedly caused viewers to faint, vomit, suffer miscarriages, believe they were possessed, seek medical and psychiatric care, and flee theaters in abject terror. This movie was so alarming it was banned in the UK and other countries and received negative reviews from several prominent critics at the time, although many others gave it positive notices. <br /><br />The Exorcist isn’t a simplistic exploitation film going for gore, easy jump scares, and cheap shocks. While the supernatural elements are front and center in the second half, it also explores psychological horror elements by examining the personal torments and inner turmoil of Chris, a terrified mother desperate to help her child, and Karras, a priest experiencing a crisis of faith and guilt about his dead mother. <br /><br />The sound design proved exceptional; consider the many abrupt loud, percussive noises meant to startle us (such as the attic din, the horse cart in Iraq, the unexpected rings of the phone, and the noisy medical equipment) as well as the fantastic amalgamation created to conjure up the demonic voice, which includes haunting words by a gravely-voiced actress mixed with animal noises and electronic sound distortions. <br /><br />This is a slow-burn film that demands great patience from viewers who are eagerly awaiting the scares; the possession doesn’t kick in until at least 40 minutes have passed, and the famous exorcism sequence arrives in the final 26 minutes. For that matter, several key actions occur offscreen, preventing the viewer from seeing the killing of Burke, the death of Karras’ mother, and Merrin’s demise, for example. <br /><br />Slant Magazine critic Wes Greene <a href="https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/the-exorcist/">wrote</a> that the film prefers “tone and theme over story: The horror is mostly dictated through its masterful atmosphere and ellipses, which carefully eliminates exposition and character detail to subconsciously put the viewer in a state of unease and preparing us for the overt frights that occur later on.” <br /><br />The success of The Exorcist also owes much to the outstanding performances, especially by the 12-year-old Linda Blair, who had to endure extreme physical and psychological discomfort to inhabit this role, as well as Ellen Burstyn as her mother and Jason Miller as Karras; all three earned Oscar nominations despite being relatively unknown newcomers. The fine cast further includes Max Von Sydow, who distinguished himself years earlier as a stellar thespian for Ingmar Bergman (often playing faith-challenged characters), Lee J. Cobb as Kinderman, and Mercedes McCambridge as the unholy voice of Pazuzu, the demon possessing Regan. <br /><br />All of these aforementioned aspects coalesced to make The Exorcist a groundbreaking picture—one that added legitimacy to the horror genre and cleared the path for other prestige horror films to come that benefitted from bigger budgets, acclaimed filmmakers attached to them, and more extensive marketing, including Jaws, The Omen, Carrie, and Alien in the 1970s. It’s no small feat that The Exorcist won two Academy Awards (for Best Sound and Best Adapted Screenplay) after 10 nominations and was the first horror film nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award, one of only six movies in this genre to earn that distinction—and one of only 19 horror films to have won an Oscar in any category. The Exorcist proved that horror movies could be incredibly frightening, artistically constructed, and well-made and should be taken seriously as an art form and work of entertainment. <br /><br />The box-office triumph of The Exorcist prompted Warner Brothers to greenlight a sequel—a rarity for the horror genre at this time; in fact, this film spawned three sequels, one prequel, a TV series, and innumerable imitators and copycats in its wake, especially in the immediate years that followed. For proof, consider Abby (1974), Beyond the Door (1974), Seytan (1974), The Antichrist (1974), The House of Exorcism (1975), The Sentinel (1977), The Manitou (1978), and The Amityville Horror (1979). More recent examples include The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005), The Last Exorcism (2010), The Rite (2011), The Devil Inside (2012), The Possession (2012), The Conjuring (2012) and The Conjuring 2 (2016), Deliver Us From Evil (2014), The Devil's Doorway (2018), The Cleansing Hour (2019), and The Exorcism of God (2021). The sheer number of films within the possession horror subgenre speaks to the lasting influence and pop culture pervasiveness of the original from 1973. And The Exorcist’s extremely graphic scenes depicting mutilation, vomiting, urination, and bloody self-harm likely inspired future films in the body horror subgenre, too. <br /><br />This work had an immediate cultural impact, as evidenced by all the press and media coverage it received in the months following its release and the extent to which it was parodied and emulated in pop culture. Additionally, The Exorcist sparked spiritual and existential conversations, including renewed debate about the existence of God and the devil, the endless struggle of good versus evil, and the relevance and value of Christianity and Catholic doctrine. <br /><br />The Exorcist also proved that you don’t necessarily need a traditional score to musically punctuate a horror film; the choice to add atmospheric music instead, including Mike Oldfield’s song Tubular Bells, was an inspired one, as was Friedkin’s decision to feature the avant-garde music of Polish composer Krzysztof Penderecki, which uses unsettling tones, loud chords, sound clusters, and non-melodic instrumentation to evoke a frightening mood. The Shining took a cue from this latter musical choice, and countless horror films in the decades since The Exorcist have copied this approach to discordant, disquieting musical accompaniment. <br /><br />Furthermore, the movie illustrated that challenging the norms of what was deemed acceptable in filmmaking could spark significant interest and discussion—prompting the development of inventive marketing approaches for future horror movies—and backlash; several communities, cities, and even countries banned or tried to ban the film. <br /><br />Friedkin often pushed his actors and crew to extreme lengths to achieve his vision. He slapped one actor to elicit an alarmed reaction just before turning on the camera, for key scenes he fired gunshot blanks in the air to unsettle his thespians, and both Burstyn and Blair were injured during the filming of violent scenes. Friedkin often employs a slow zoom-in or zoom-out on characters or objects in The Exorcist to produce a disconcerting visual effect; this style was copied somewhat in two subsequent classics of 1970s horror: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Alien. <br /><br />The director further deserves applause for allowing himself to be inspired by earlier artists, including painters like Rembrandt, Monet, and Magritte, and filmmakers Sidney Lumet and Alain Resnais (who each had films that also effectively utilized subliminal images) and Hitchcock (he borrows at least two shots from Psycho). <br /><br />At its heart, this tale is about the timeless conflict of good versus evil and faith versus doubt. What Regan suffers can’t be explained or cured by science or psychology. This film purports that truly evil and demonic forces exist that can be supernaturally embodied within us against our will—even within the form of an innocent young girl. When Karras essentially asks “Why her?” (in the director’s cut, not the original theatrical version), we hear Merrin tell Karras: “I think the point is to make us despair, Damien—to see ourselves as animal, and ugly—to reject our own humanity—to reject the possibility that God could ever love us.” <br /><br />Deep Focus Review critic Brian Eggert <a href="https://deepfocusreview.com/definitives/the-exorcist/">wrote</a>: “The suggestion is that Satan has chosen Regan not because she is vulnerable, but because those around her are vulnerable. The demon’s goal is to drive the family apart and antagonize Karras, while also inciting a re-match of sorts against Merrin, whom Satan has battled before. Regan’s imaginary friend, Captain Howdy, tells her lies about Chris’ friend Dennings to drive them apart; the demon attacks Karras where it hurts, with his mother. The real victim is not Regan, but those who must bear witness helplessly as the demon tears down the girl.” <br /><br />Filmmaker Mark Judge agrees, <a href="https://kirkcenter.org/essays/why-the-exorcist-endures/">writing</a>: “The point of the demonic in The Exorcist is not to levitate bodies, vomit on priests, and telepathically toss furniture around the room…The demon refers to Regan’s mother, a famous actress named Chris, as “Pig,” and to Regan as “Piglet.” Part of this is carried over to the film, where the demon calls Regan “the sow.” This is part of the dehumanization that Fr. Merrin talks about—the way evil attempts to make us despair and consider ourselves animals unworthy of God’s love. This theme is effective in the story because Fr. Karras is having a crisis of faith—he both doubts the existence of God and feels his sins have made him unworthy of love. The demon, as Fr. Merrin notes, ‘knows where to strike’… Amidst the drugs, scandal, rock and roll, and moral collapse of the 1970s, The Exorcist announced that there are some evils that are timeless and don’t change.” <br /><br />Selflessness and sacrifice are also front and center in The Exorcist. This is more a story about Karras rising to the occasion than a tale about Regan or Chris. Suffering a crisis of spiritual faith and racked with guilt over his mother’s suffering and death, Karras has to summon inner strength and conviction to battle Pazuzu, especially after Merrin dies. The exorcism rite has been thwarted or failed, and he must take matters into his own hands and attempt to pull the demon out of Regan and into himself; Pazuzu helps matters by yanking the St. Joseph medallion off Karras’ neck, which enables the entity to possess the priest. Karras then throws himself from the window to prevent full possession and protect Regan. <br /><br />Another salient theme is symbiosis and the intersecting of disparate lives. Gradually, the film brings together four key characters who seem drawn together by fate: Merrin, Karras, Chris/Regan, and, to a lesser extent, Kinderman. Bad omens, foreshadowing elements, and premonitions proliferate through the first two acts—such as Merrin’s unsettling experiences in Iraq (and the sudden stopping of a clock that suggests his ticker will eventually expire), a framed photo of Regan clasping her hands in a prayer-like pose, the declining health of Karras’ mother (recall her convalescing in a mental hospital amid patients who look possessed), and the falling St. Joseph medallion in Karras’ dream that later becomes reality. By the final act, all these prime characters coalesce inside Chris’ home and the ultimate battle between good and evil transpires. <br /><br />Another takeaway? Conservative values matter. The Exorcist suggests that age-old forces of good and evil are at work shaping the world and that science, technology, and secularism are no match for belief in a higher power. It’s no surprise that Friedkin described this as a film “about the mystery of faith.” For Karras to defeat Pazuzu and save Regan, his faith in God and belief in the existence and power of the devil had to be restored. Because Chris is a liberal-minded, divorced single mother working in the Hollywood system who proves powerless against the demonic possession of her daughter, the message, for those who subscribe to this disputed theory, is that feminism lacks agency and children need a traditional family paradigm with a more dedicated mom: That’s why it takes two patriarchal priestly figures to rescue Regan and restore her body, soul, and innocence. <br /><br /><a href="https://www.moriareviews.com/horror/exorcist-1973.htm">Per</a> film reviewer Richard Scheib, The Exorcist “seems to imply that innocence is a natural state of childhood and that for children to be obscene, use sexual references, masturbate, even to pee on the carpet is something evil (i.e., it is behaviourally alien to them, therefore it must come from The Devil). It is a type of thinking that sits atop the mood of conservative parental thinking of the 1970s – that of parents suddenly unable to understand how come their children were no longer innocent and cherubic and were instead dropping out of society, taking drugs, having sex before marriage and rioting against established authority. The 1960s youth revolt was something so far removed from some traditional parents’ views that children should be good and innocent that the temptation to see The Devil as the cause must have been strong.” <br /><br />This is a film with some plot ambiguities. Several unanswered questions that arise after watching The Exorcist include: <br /><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>What is Merrin specifically searching for in Iraq before he discovers the Pazuzu relic, how did he never notice the massive Pazuzu statue before, and why does he suddenly depart for America? </li><li>Who defiles the Virgin Mary statue?</li><li>Why is Dennings the only person Pazuzu kills before the priests arrive?</li><li>Did Pazuzu kill Merrin directly, or did Merrin suffer a heart attack?</li><li>Why does Karras so violently attack Regan’s body in the climactic scene (this is a 12-year-old girl’s body, after all)?</li><li>How could Regan have lived after twisting her neck 180 degrees? And how did all those gouges, cuts, and scars disappear so quickly?</li><li>What happens to Dennings’ murder investigation, and how and why is the family cleared from responsibility in the wake of three dead men?</li></ul>The Exorcist may not be as traumatizing and radical as it was on first release—a time when Americans’ faith in their country, its leaders, and the future was shaken by the Vietnam War, Watergate, the sexual revolution, and a growing sociocultural pessimism—but it’s still got plenty of venom in its sharp fangs. And I expect that it continues to serve as an alarming sensory and psychological experience for so many different types of watchers. If you’re a parent, this tale is your worst nightmare. If you’re a teenager, you put yourself in Regan’s position and perhaps worry if you’re a candidate for possession. Perhaps most vulnerable to its spiritual scares are religious types, who can find affirmation of their faith in a higher power after screening The Exorcist, while secular viewers and lapsed Christians, on the other end of the spectrum, could end up asking themselves, “what if?” and shuddering at the inexplicable. Older fans can find inspiration in the tried-and-tested Merrin yet be horrified by the reality that age eventually catches up with you and, if the devil doesn’t get you, a heart attack might. <br /><br />The Exorcist’s greatest gift could be that it’s an equal opportunity terrifier—a film with a deserved shock reputation that precedes every rewatch and reminds you that, for the past 50 years, this has been regarded by the masses and the media as the most frightening film of them all. It’s no surprise that Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, Time Out, AMC, Vudu, Study Finds, Meerkat Movies, and other reputable sources, pollsters, and publishers have ranked The Exorcist #1 on their lists of the scariest film ever made. The ability to terrify so many generations after half a century is one helluva superpower.<span class="fullpost">
</span>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7796459348496228878.post-33424134651292107482023-10-17T22:40:00.000-05:002023-10-17T22:40:10.131-05:00Cineversary podcast throws 50th and 75th birthday party for The Exorcist and Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirbG7kOk5aj5drxCayWOaZSgEuW2D7KoGjTTvq-VNfWwY9EgHyV6qsYS5bRDFKNMKQ3-sm_28ggIffR5lwzs1UA7U9y1zoilwFSOYFK3QvcY52kbkydjHifRpji5dBxSZz3XoeCIjNQ7tACdn0L-IYe8NMxTswbCFfk4E8JBuJB6xoa2E4N-vxHz0mg90k/s2076/Picture1.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2076" data-original-width="1909" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirbG7kOk5aj5drxCayWOaZSgEuW2D7KoGjTTvq-VNfWwY9EgHyV6qsYS5bRDFKNMKQ3-sm_28ggIffR5lwzs1UA7U9y1zoilwFSOYFK3QvcY52kbkydjHifRpji5dBxSZz3XoeCIjNQ7tACdn0L-IYe8NMxTswbCFfk4E8JBuJB6xoa2E4N-vxHz0mg90k/w425-h462/Picture1.png" width="425" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alexandre Philippe and Gregory Mank</td></tr></tbody></table>In Cineversary podcast episode #63, host <a href="http://www.martinspiration.com/">Erik Martin</a> honors big birthdays of 2 great horror films. First, he’s joined by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1465431/">Alexandre O. Philippe</a>, director of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10681070/">Leap of Faith: William Friedkin on The Exorcist</a>, to honor the 50th anniversary of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070047/">The Exorcist</a>, directed by William Friedkin; and then he partners with classic horror historian and author <a href="http://www.gregorymank.com/">Gregory Mank</a> to commemorate the 75th anniversary of <a href="https://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/66686/bud-abbott-and-lou-costello-meet-frankenstein/#overview">Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein</a>. Erik and his guests indulge in some Halloween frights and fun, exploring why these two films remain masterworks, how they’ve stood the test of time, and more.<div><br /></div><div>To listen to this episode, click <a href="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/episodes/63-The-Exorcist-50th-and-Abbott--Costello-Meet-Frankenstein-75th-anniversaries-e2an8h7"><b>here</b> </a>or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/cineversary/id1415875337">Apple Podcasts,</a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3dMB6cBsUDJovPeKvQc6ae">Spotif</a>y, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cineversary/dp/B08K58KPSX">Audible</a>, <a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id1382267?country=us">Castbox</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81NTI2MTI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz">Google Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://pca.st/Z1eU">Pocket Casts</a>, <a href="https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/t8akd-71a88/Cineversary-Podcast">PodBean</a>, <a href="https://radiopublic.com/cineversary-WJ9r2P">RadioPublic</a>, and <a href="https://overcast.fm/login">Overcast</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at <a href="http://www.cineversary.com/">www.cineversary.com</a> and email show comments or suggestions to <a href="mailto:cineversarypodcast@gmail.com">cineversarypodcast@gmail.com</a>.<span class="fullpost">
</span></div>
<iframe src="https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cineversary/embed/episodes/63-The-Exorcist-50th-and-Abbott--Costello-Meet-Frankenstein-75th-anniversaries-e2an8h7" height="102px" width="600px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>Erikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08852754772090568018noreply@blogger.com