Film Commune

les Cent et une nuits de Simon Cinéma

2007-12-31T08:31:00.001-08:00

A Hundred and One Nights

Dir: Agnés Varda
Prod: 1995
IMDB

Agnés Varda’s film, is a vibrant reflection of the first one hundred years of cinema told through the central character, Mr. Simon Cinéma (Michel Piccoli). Piccoli is not a surprising casting choice considering Michel has well over 200 film credits of his own as an actor plus numerous credits as producer, director, composer and writer. Though Simon is the principal focus of the film, the true main character is the cinema itself, voiced thorough those who bring it life. It is no coincidence that Simon is one hundred years old, as he is truly the physical embodiment of cinema.

The lesson of the film, if there needs to be one, is that cinema is not what it is today, without being what it was in years past.

At times, the film can feel like a list of titles out of a film history book, but Varda’s attention to detail in mise-en-scène make it far more rich than most history books. The film also lacks Vardas often harsh reality, but that doesn’t make the film any less appealing. Particularly when you consider that it is really a celebration of the love of cinema that brings its players together, both young and old.

Favorite line: “Italian neo-realism strikes again”

As an aside… for those of you who watch films on your computers, I could not for the life of me get the subtitles to play on my Mac. They worked just fine on my home DVD player, but for some reason, my computer would not recognize them.

Queer As Folk A Double Edged Sword of Queer Representations on American Television

2006-12-30T21:23:00.000-08:00

In December of 2000, the Showtime premium cable network rocked American television with the US adaptation of the UK television program Queer as Folk (Russel T. Davies, 2000 - 2005). The show was by far the most aggressive and comprehensive representation of the queer community on television to date, moving queer characters from the roles of best friends, and supporting characters into the narrative focus. It was not the first time queer characters had been represented on television, but it was the first time that a television show attempted to chronicle the lives of characters almost exclusively queer.

While it never received mainstream critical acclaim, most gay critics hailed the show as a groundbreaking voice for the queer community. Queer audiences could finally tune into a program that would act as a reflection of their own lives, their struggles and the challenges they face on a day-to-day basis. Unquestionably, the show marked a new era in cable television with the advancement of queer imagery but it wasn’t immune to criticisms, even from within the queer community.

The frank and graphic depiction of sex and language, inclusion of stereotypical depictions of the queer community, lack of diversity within the show’s cast and oversimplification of queer issues would over the course of the five years of the program drew some criticism. The power and benefit of the show act as a double edged sword between positive queer presence and potentially reinforcing negative queer imagery.

At almost two hours long, the first episode not only established the characters the show would follow, but the controversial manner in which it would do it. Cradled in the safety of cable television, the show was less limited on its language use, ability to deal with sexually explicit material and full nudity of characters. In fact, the show was one of the most sexually explicit series on broadcast television with an appeal to mass audience. Initially, the targeted audience was queer (mostly gay men) but after the first few episodes, an un expected audience began to tune in: married heterosexual women. Perhaps the reason for this unintended demographic is the fact that the show’s nudity turned Laura Mulvey’s male gaze back on itself; reversing the typical female object of the male gaze, by instead turning the gaze onto men.

Whereas in the typical narrative structure the women are the focus of the sexual attention and the men are there to interact with the sexual female, withQAF the exact opposite is true. The women are represented as more “home bodies” and hyper feminine and the men as hyper masculine sexual beings. For example, the first time we see the lesbian characters Mel (Michelle Clune) and Lindsay (Thea Gill) it is right after Lindsay has given birth to their son Gus, but the male characters are each introduced in the confines of Babylon surrounded by men in a sexual context. Over the course of the series, Mel and Lindsay’s sexuality would be explored but given the fact that the cast was overwhelmingly male (of the seven main characters only two are womyn) the structure of the show lends itself to the over representation of male sexuality and the marginalization of the female.

However, the concentration of male sexuality, while simultaneously suppressing the female, isn’t just problematic in the representations of gender. It also acts as a potential reinforcement of the stereotype that gay men are more sexually promiscuous than womyn. Mel and Lindsay in their relationship have their indiscretions, but the male characters, particularly Brian (Gale Harold) and Emmett (Peter Paige) and Justin (Randy Harrison), are far more active. The first episode of the first season starts with a voice over by Mike (Hal Sparks) saying point blank “The thing you have to understand is that, it is all about sex” framing both the episode and the series which begins and ends in Babylon, a hotbed of male sexual prowess. However, the same could be said about a wide range of other television programs.

For example, Sex in the City (Darren Star, 1998-2004) features a cast of women whose sexual nature is anything but chaste. It could be argued that both shows do represent an aspect of their perspective communities, there are plenty of gay men and straight women who are sex-obsessed in the real world. However, because of the lack of other programs featuring queer characters shows like Queer as Folk do end up carrying more of an assumed representation than those like Sex in The City. The television landscape is full of programs depicting the lives of straight characters and with that comes a diversity of representation. When you only have one show, it tends to carry more socio-significance.

It could also be argued that the series lacks the depiction of diversity within the queer community. All the principle cast members are young, attractive and affluent. Surrounding the principal cast, there are flashes of socio-economic diversity but not in the core. Given that this single program has the potential to speak for the entire queer community, the stereotypical depiction of queer men and womyn as attractive and affluent potentially reinforces the idea that the queer community lacks the diversity found in the straight community.
Of course nothing could be further from reality, but the fact is that those are two of the stereotypes and myths that surround the queer community. In fact, other shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy (David Collins, 2003 - ) also work to reinforce the idea that (particularly queer men) are young, affluent and beauty conscious and that somehow we are there to “dress the world’s windows”.

While Queer as Folk can be seen as problematic, any criticism should be carefully considered. Knowing that the very nature of the series is already breaking new ground, the use of a race, class and socio-economically neutral cast allows the show’s writers to appeal to the larger audience. Also, over the course of the series, different factions of the queer community are depicted in various plot lines and issues that face the characters, so they are not without representation. By doing so, they were able to bring into focus ideas and conflicts most members of the queer community face. In fact, perhaps the one thing the series did the best was to weave controversial issues into the text of the show.

In the five years that Queer as Folk was on the air, they tackled some incredibly controversial and critical topics that impact the daily lives of queer Americans. It dealt with same-sex marriage, adoption, hate crimes, disease, drug abuse, discrimination, cures for homosexuality, ability for professional athletes to be open about their queerness, representations in media, just to name a few. From the very beginning the show sought to break ground and explore the possibilities of representing the queer community. The expectation that any one text can create a full and complete picture of the world is not only unrealistic but unfair.

Of course any television program, film or advertisement should seek to be inclusive. However, with the factioning of society it is nearly impossible to include every aspect of every community. Particularly when you remember that each program is a commodity in itself that must be sold to a network and continue to draw an audience. The sensitive writers and creators try to do what they can to include as many voices as possible, and the beauty of television is that they don’t have one forty five minute episode to do it in, but several in a season.

The struggle with representation is particularly difficult in a series like Queer as Folk because it represents a community that is under represented in the mass media landscape. Thus, it has the potential of being seen as the definitive representation of the entire queer community, a vision that is problematic at best. Because it exists one step outside of the “normalcy” of the white-heterosexual-Christian-male model it is subject to requirements that other television series, which exist within the model, don’t have to adhere to and that is when the real problems set in. A show like Queer as Folk couldn’t possibly hope to represent the whole queer community any more than Sex and The City could hope to represent the entire straight community, nor should it be seen as such.

In fact, in the realm of media criticism, when we look at television, film and advertisements and question why they don’t feature more diversity, the question should be directed back at our society with equal veracity. Mass media is not just a reflection of society, it is a construct of it as well. Meaning, if media lacks diversity, perhaps it is because we as a culture don’t want diversity. It is no coincidence that most television programs feature white, affluent and attractive characters. They do so because we as a society crave it, and because we have succumbed to the superiority of the ideas they represent.

If we as a society could manage to come together and collectively reject the mass media portrait of our lives then I am sure the media landscape would become even more inclusive. The challenge is overcoming the factioning of our media with niche programming and incorporating those ideas into the mass media fabric. It would be a great day when queer audiences can turn on their television and see their lives being played out on screen like their straight counterparts, not relegated to pay television but on national broadcast television where others might also see and begin to understand in primetime America.

Women Filmmakers: Voices From the Dark

2006-12-07T21:25:00.000-08:00

A quick glance at the titles playing at the local megaplex reveals a lot about the modern Hollywood machine. Often the titles are sequels to previous box office hits with filmmakers hoping to ride the successes of “chapter one” to another mega box office hit. Others are based on novels and the few “original” ideas are only loosely reworked variations of other films. The films tend to feature work from a relatively small pool of actors (both men and women) and tell stories that the studios hope will bring the biggest box office receipts.

Looking at the names behind the titles on the marquees exposes the reality that the already limited stories are being told by an even more limited body of professionals, mostly white men. The films tend to have large budgets and are expected to be neutral enough to draw a large audience and as such, don’t tend to feature voices from cultural minorities seeking to challenge anglo-western patriarchal dominated cultural norms. These films speak to and reinforce imperialistic ideologies by relying on cultural stereotypes and prejudices to marginalize minority voices while reinforcing the superiority of the ideas expressed (McCabe 77). The films produced within the Hollywood machine are seen by millions of people worldwide and by default become our most familiar ambassadors to other lands.

The films in this vein combine to create billions of dollars a year in profits for the studios that produce them. The box office success of these films results in a form of economic democracy, with the pop culture audience voting for the films they enjoy by paying $10 and the industry makes more films like it, further perpetuating the cycle of films that fail to challenge the spectators and creators imperialistic ideals.

Instead, the films from subjugated and minority voices exist into the realm of film festivals and independent theatrical release. Very few of these films are given the attention, marketing and wide distribution that their more culturally neutral counterparts take for granted largely because it is just assumed that the audiences won’t be there to support the films financially. Of course there are exceptions (Sofia Coppola’s 2003 Lost in Translation grossed $106,454,000 in worldwide receipts ) but the vast majority of the films fail to gain the box office success of the other films.

Recently, I had the opportunity to screen three documentary films sharing a common theme, made by women directors. The films all centered on the Palestinian and Israeli conflict, specifically how the women in the two warring nations are working to bring an end to the violence. Each from its own perspective, the films approach the issue with passion and conviction, but not with the intent to provide answers. Instead, the filmmakers work to raise a dialogue between the two sides of the issue.

First, Lilly Rivlin’s film Can You Hear Me? Israeli and Palestinian Women Fight for Peace (2006), documents the women working on both sides of the conflict, trying to win peace not through violence, but through dialogue. The film is by and about the women in the movement. Second, Donia Mili’s Uprooted (2006), expresses the internal struggle between violent and non-violent activism in the quest for Palestinian liberation. The film ultimately asks which form of activism is most effecive in bringing about a solution.

Last, Samira Goetschel’s Our Own Private Bin Laden (2005) documented her journey to better understand the myth behind the world’s most notorious terrorist Osama Bin Laden. As an Iranian immigrant to New York City, she was forced to examine her own Middle Eastern identity after the events of September 11th, 2001. Her film challenges the audience to look inside themselves and find their own fears, hatred and prejudices, something she sees as each person’s own private Bin Laden.

Each of these films was produced outside of the Hollywood system and will most likely only screen in the film festival or art house environment, in part because they don’t fit the typical pop culture standards that viewers tend to want to watch. The perception is that films like these will only attract a limited audience and as such, don’t deserve a wide theatrical release. While this may be true, is the lack of mass appeal of films like these the fault of the spectator or the creators?

Take for example North Country (Niki Caro, 2005) a film driven by a female cast chronicling the first class action sexual harassment suit. This film places female characters in a central role and given the lack of films with strong female leads, the story should have brought out the female audience.

However, what seemed to have happed with North Country is what McCabe refers to as the separation between the spectator and the text writing: “Soon revealed in this investigation into cinematic identification and socio-cultural was a gap between feminism and real women, between political ideology and personal experience, between how feminist theory interpreted texts and how actual audiences made use of them” (38). Essentially, feminist films were being made but they couldn’t break through the popular cultural barrier of the dominant ideology of the spectator and get them to watch.

The struggle to overcome the cultural barriers doesn’t only exist in the context of feminist films. Other independent films llike Jehane Noujaim’s Control Room (2004) challenge the anglo-American audience to see the world from a different perspective. By following the media coverage of the beginning of the Iraq war through the lens of the Al Jazeera news network, it provides a perspective that would otherwise be denied to the American audience. The film comes to a head when correspondent Hassan Ibrahim challenges Lt. Josh Rushing to see the war from the point of view of Arab population.

Rushing doesn’t need to agree with the point of view but he has to understand it before he can realize that there is another valid side to the conflict. Lt. Rushing’s epiphany is seen by many to be dangerous because, by seeking to understand the “enemy” they become human, clouding the relationship between combatants. When the issues surrounding war become clouded, then the systems of domination and power that perpetuate the war are threatened. Noujaim asks us, the spectators, to follow Lt. Rushing’s example and begin to break down the barrier between “us” and “them”. The idea of hearing the point of view of the marginalized is undesirable for most of the population and thus films, which express the minority point of view, aren’t popularly received. It is far easier for the mass population to write off the film as radical or unimportant than to actually engage the film in the dialogue it hopes to begin.

The ability of minority or marginalized voices to express themselves isn’t limited to documentary or fact based films. Fictional narrative films can also challenge our worldview when we are asked to step into the perspective of a protagonist, which may not fit the profile we are accustom to. With her film The Woodsman (2004) Nicole Kassell brought to screen the story of Walter (Kevin Bacon) a man convicted of child molestation readjusting to life outside of prison. Few crimes carry an emotional response equal to child molestation and putting the narrative focus on a sympathetic character guilty of the crime is incredibly courageous.

Like the other films mentioned, The Woodsman seeks to challenge our generally accepted worldview and was produced outside the studio system. Also like the other films, its box office receipts were modest, not even reaching $2,000,000. In fact, if you consider the success of the film in box office receipts, the film failed to bring in even the independent viewing audience. Of course box office receipts aren’t the only way to judge the success of a film, but they do seem to indicate something about our modern culture.

It would appear that mass audiences don’t want their ideologies challenged and that even minority voices for some reason fail to come to their own stories. The films which seem to simply entertain or reinforce current ideologies gain popular support and generate millions of dollars in box office receipts. Consider Jackass: Number Two (Jeff Tremaine, 2006) with its near $76 million box office total with $72 million made here in the United State. If the measure of success is coming to the point of drawing mass audience, I for one am glad that the filmmakers discussed in this essay chose instead to break outside of the system and tell stories that challenge our ideologies.

The women filmmakers responsible for these films took risks to bring the stories to life and the distributors echoed the risk by bringing the films to audiences. Perhaps our culture will eventually come to the point where women filmmakers are allowed to tell their stories and be seen by mass audiences without having to sacrifice artistic and cultural integrity. For now, regardless of box office success, courageous women filmmakers will continue to express themselves and bringing their voice to light from darkened theatres.

Works Cited

McCabe, Janet. Femist Film Studies Writing the Woman Into Cinema. Wallflower: Great Britain

29th Starz Denver Film Festival

2006-11-14T17:15:00.000-08:00

For ten days of every year, my life totally changes. Each November I devote most of my time and energy to one event the Starz Denver Film Festival. Over the past five years, I have worked with the festival in a variety of capacities which allow me a range of free time to enjoy the festival. This is the first year that I have worked with the festival in such a way that allows me to actually see the films and meet with the filmmakers. I can’t believe how lucky I am to be able to take part in this event.

The festival opened Thursday with the new Anthony Minghella film Breaking and Entering (2006) a rather complex film which will most likely take more than one viewing to fully appreciate. He was in attendance to accept the Mayor’s Career Achievement Award and had really interesting things to say about his film.

Unfortunately, I had to work most of the weekend so I didn’t get to screen many films but I did get to meet an incredible artist which set off a whole Hungarian wave at the festival. Vilmos Zsigmond has been the cinematographer on some of the most beautiful films (The Witches of Eastwick, Jersey Girl, The Rose, Deliverance, The Long Goodbye, just to name a few) and is an incredible man, with a inspirational story. I was honored to have a chance to meet with him and talk briefly about his work and his life. I can’t wait to see his next few films.

In conjunction with Vilmos Zsigmond’s visit, the film screened a new documentary on cinematography called Cinematographer Style (Jon Fauer, 2006) which features interviews of some of the most famous cinematographers of all time. The interviews are cut in such a way that by the end of the film, you feel as though you have watched one long interview with a single artist instead of a string of interviews with dozens. While it was a little exhausting watching, the construction was fascinating and worth the time.

Of course there are also parties and lounges to be enjoyed and I even got to have a really interesting conversation with Ian Somerhalder ("Lost", Sensation of Sight, Pulse, Rules of Attraction) about his new work and what it was like to work for Roger Avary in Rules of Attraction (Avery, 2002). And for those of you wondering, yes he is just as hot in person (if you go for that sort of thing).

Next on my list is a lineup of films directed by Womyn that are part of a series of films in the festival focusing on the Israeli and Palestinian conflict. I should have an opportunity to meet with these womyn and report back here later.

Till then, I am off to the movies.

See you in the dark.

29th Starz Denver Film Festival

2006-10-23T22:45:00.000-07:00

The schedule is up and the movies are in! Check out the schedule on the Denver Film Society's website.

Your seat is waiting!

Screen It!

2006-10-07T09:27:00.000-07:00

In doing some back research on reviews for Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005) I came accross a website that has detailed reviews of films for families. Typically these sites cause the hair on the back of my neck to stand up as they pan films because they don't uphold biblical values. I have seen too many websites that tell God fearing Christians that they will be on an express bus to hell if they see a film, particularly Brokeback Mountain, and have admittingly developed a quick reaction to such sites. However, Screen It! doesn't seem to be one of them.

The website profiles films and lists points of concern that parents may have about a film for their children. While I find the lengths they go to a little frightening (more because who has enough time on their hands to figure out how many times "ass" is said in a film) their overall approach to the film seems to be fair. It even lists potential "talking points" for parents to be able to talk to their children about what is happening in the film.

I have long been an advocate of providing parents fair information about the media their children will potentially consume. If we are able to give parents the tools to investigate on their own, then we can stay away from censorship, which is never good. The only problem is, when certain groups gain total control over the bodies that decide ratings, warning labels, etc. they can bring with them an agenda that skews their warnings. It is commonly know that gay content will always receive higher rating warnings than similar or even more tame straight content. Male nudity treated differently from female nudity and such.

In a web world of CleanFlicks (which was recently shut down go us!) and Christian Spotlight on Entertainment it is refreshing to see a site that gives parents tools not answers to their media choices.

The Privileged Lens: An Examination of the Male Gaze in Cinema

2006-10-02T17:42:00.000-07:00

Through the darkness images flicker to life on the screen and the magical porthole of the cinema opens us to another world. Like patrons of Edison’s Kinetoscope, we gaze upon the actions of others as images form to create the illusion of movement, the illusion of reality. The lens acts as more than a porthole, it is a barrier that forever separates us, the audience, from them, the subjects of our voyeuristic gaze. We are safe on this side of the screen for our anonymity ensures our privacy and we are free to look upon the others in any way we see fit. Those on the other side of the lens are there as a creation of the filmmaker and exist only for our pleasure, for us to have the opportunity to gaze up on them with our eye without the fear or guilt of the gaze being returned. What the camera shows us and how it does it form the basis for our cinematic gaze. The gaze can adhere to, or break down the typical mode of vision by reinforcing or opposing social constraints. Being able to recognize how the gaze drives our experience with any given film provides an insight not only into the deeper meaning of the film but of the culture of which it was created.

As with anything in cinema, the camera is neither objective nor neutral. It has an agenda and as Laura Mulvey would assert, a specific gender through which it views the world. In her description of her work Janet McCabe quotes Mulvey: “Unchallenged, mainstream film coded the erotic into the language of the dominant patriarchal order” McCabe continues “Patriarchy encodes a gender imbalance within ways of seeing, in which ‘the pleasure looking has bee divided into active/male and passive/female” (29). This division between the masculine and feminine of film manifests itself in a number of ways. First is the notion of how a story is told, and by whom. Most of the time in mainstream Hollywood cinema, the central hero is male and the women in the film are there merely to serve the advancement of the male character. That is not to say that all female characters lack development, but that their existence is not central to the advancement of the story. A filmmaker conscious of the gender division in passive and active characters can create a film, which treats women heroes with the same diligence of their male counterparts.

Such is the case with Sanaa Hamri’s Something New (2006) where the central character of the film is not a man, but Kenya McQueen (Sanaa Lahtan) a driven woman of color. Kenya occupies the space of the film that would typically be reserved for a male protagonist. She is an attractive business executive on the fast track to great success in her accounting firm. Through the film we follow the development of a romance between Kenya and Brian (Simon Baker) her white, middle class landscaper. Naturally gender isn’t the only conflict at play as they explore their relationship. They have to deal with differences in race, class, education and other issues before they can finally embrace one another and the idea of love. The camera’s gaze follows Kenya as the romance blossoms and we are privileged to her visions, her sexual desire and not Brian’s, which goes against the standard male centered mode of vision and threatens the patriarchal framework.

The patriarchal structure of the film is further threatened with Kenya’s parents Joyce (Alfre Woodard) and Edmond (Earl Billings) where Joyce seems to be the dominating figure in their household, not her doctor husband. Ultimately, Kenya’s father does step in and provide her with the inspiration to move beyond her differences with Brian and embrace their love; a move that sets off a reverse Cinderella sequence in which Kenya runs from the Cotillion climbs into her borrowed chariot and goes searching for her “Prince Charming.” When she finds him, she dresses him and returns him to the ball, completing the active/passive gender role reversal.

The male centered gaze has implications beyond gender roles in the narrative structure of the film. Carried out to its full extent, the male centered gaze can create serious problems with the depiction and objectification of its subjects. McCabe writes: “The active and curious (male) gaze translates the (female) image into the object of sexual fantasy, so granting the voyeur a position defined by control and mastery with its implied separation from the source of erotic stimulation” (29). The camera’s gaze can reinforce and create the societal expectations of beauty and sexuality expected of women in film. In the opening sequence of Lovely & Amazing (Nicole Holofcener, 2001) we see Elizabeth (Emily Mortimer) posing for photographs. The male photographer’s voice is a disembodied God like voice telling her how to pose for his camera. She expresses her discomfort with the shoot stating that she doesn’t fell like herself; to which the photographer replies coldly “who does?”. Elizabeth is exposed physically and emotionally in front of the camera as an object of the male gaze with the flash of his camera continuing even when she has clearly stopped posing.

Elizabeth’s profession as an actor is critical to how her character embodies the unrealistic expectations of the idealized male gaze. Her chosen career depends on her ability to hold the male gaze, something which she is apparently not able to do when she is denied a role acting opposite of hunky male star Kevin McCabe (Dermot Mulroney) because she didn’t meet the physical requirements of the part. This rejection calls into question her beauty in a crisis of self-image that culminates in her asking Kevin to catalogue her faults. This scene does two things. First, the man with whom she has just had sex confirms her insecurities about her beauty created by the criteria of the male gaze. Second, it allows Kevin the rare opportunity to bypass the lens and affix his gaze upon her in first person. He takes her piece by piece and describes how she essentially doesn’t fit the fetishised ideal of beauty. Holofcener works the presence and the negative impact of the male gaze into her film while she simultaneously defies the patriarchal structure by creating a story in which all the active characters that drive the story are women.

Jane Campion takes both the patriarchal and male gaze even further in her thriller In the Cut (2003) when she takes on a male dominated genre and subject matter and turns it to the woman’s story. Her film deals with several of the complexities in gender and film but most specifically, sex. Like both Hamri and Holofcener’s films, Campion does not present a single tracked film which seeks to only subvert one aspect of the male dominated cinema. Through her central character Frannie (Meg Ryan), Campion is able to explore intense sexual material without hanging the entire films narrative on the exposures. When she stumbles upon the sexual act in the basement of the bar, she is compelled to stay and watch the sexual act unfold before her. The camera flashes to details in both the man and the woman and we but we are still only left with glimpses of their identities.

In his review of the film Douglas Park writes: “Her moment of fascinated sexual gazing at Rodriguez [Nick Damici] /Malloy [Mark Ruffalo] receiving fellatio-inverting the cinematic male gaze-triggers her involvement with Malloy”. Campion also works with the concept of the male gaze in how she uses selective focus and objects to obscure the camera’s view. During her masturbation scene, Frannie fantasizes about being watched by Malloy but when it comes to being exposed to the camera, her nudity is obscured by blurred focus. The audience is denied what her fantasy is allowed, the image of her nude body. Later, when we are allowed to see her nude body, it isn’t an event of fetishistic voyeurism, but a natural state of nudity shared by Malloy who lies in bed, as exposed as she is. The gaze even plays into the slang of the films title itself. Ultimately, the male gaze is punished when trapped with the murderer (Rodriguez) is confronted and killed by it’s subject Fannie.

In their own way, each of the films described here challenge the concept of male centered cinema. Whether challenging the active/male passive/female narrative drive, the patriarchal structure or the fetishising male gaze, these films provide another porthole through which we can see the cinematic world. Filmmakers can either reinforce or subvert the gender roles in the cinema and even the culture as a whole. The cinema can be a way to learn about each other as people but we must realize that the way in which images are captured, where they turn our attention, can have significant negative impacts as well. The challenges of lens perspective aren’t limited to gender. It can also create gazes defined by class, sexual orientation, race as well as colonial views. The power to transport us to other locations, times and realities is power behind cinema but the possible consequences of how we view those worlds holds the potential for instablility.

Works Cited
McCabe, Janet. Feminist Film Studies, Writing the Woman Into Cinema. Wallflower Press, London. 2004.

Films Referenced

In The Cut (Jane Campion, 2003)
Lovely & Amazing (Nicole Holofcener, 2001)
Something New (Sanaa Hamri, 2006)

Jet Li’s Fearless (2006)

2006-09-27T22:40:00.000-07:00

Huo Yuan Jia – China
Dir: Ronny Yu
Chinese with English subtitles
IMDB
Trailer

This film has been billed as Jet Li’s final martial arts film and I don’t think he could have picked a better project. Jet’s portrayal of Huo Yuanja, the real life founder of the Jin Wu Sports Federation, transcends the action on screen and the loosely assembled fight sequences of the film to become a film about vengeance, excess, honor, and discipline as do many other films of the genre. In the context of a rigged contest, Fearless brings to the table issues of the western intervention into Chinese culture and the negative impact the intrusion brings with it. Still there is even more to the film that is played out not in the expertly choreographed fight sequences or the story but in how the film is actually made and how it tells yet another story not in words but the native language of the cinema, the image.
The film begins as it ends with a challenge to defend the honor not only of his sporting federation but of his fellow countrymen. We then go back several years in time to see how he got to the place where he is, a journey that takes us through his relentless quest for power and fame and the final collapse of his entire world. It is here that the film makes a drastic change that is one of the most brilliant aspects of the film. Up to now, the film completely lacks the quiet contemplation and cinematic language of Chinese cinema. The fight sequences are built with the short shot, quick edit tactics that we as western audience have become inundated with in our cinema.
Hou is a man obsessed with vengeance and the excessive lifestyle that seems to run in conflict with what we should be seeing in this type of cinema. The acting is incredibly western as well as the dialogue to the point that it felt unnatural to be watching the film in the original Chinese. It seemed like an American facsimile of a Chinese film and was almost physically uncomfortable to watch. Then it suddenly changes.
Huo has hit rock bottom and his lifestyle has cost him everything, his western excessive lifestyle. In that moment, the film transforms itself into a totally new film. The camera slows down, the acting more subtle, pace deliberate and dialogue much more meaningful. Huo runs from his life and reestablishes his connections to not only his lost self but his lost culture as well. Eventually, he leaves the country and returns to his life in the city to find it totally changed and polluted with Westerners.
Here the two worlds collide and the tension builds until it is played out on the ring and the final battle. Ultimately, he gives his life for the great of the people and they cheer his name as their victor. The film is a fascinating view of the changes the people of China face with continued pressure for westernization and the change and loss of their traditional culture. Ronny Yu manages to take the conflict between West and East and put it in the context of a film that more than talks about the differences between the worlds, he shows us in the very way the film is made.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (2006)

2006-07-12T22:46:00.000-07:00

Dir: Gore Verbinski
IMDB
In theatres July, 2006

Verbinski’s much anticipated sequel to the Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) falls, as many sequels do, a little short of it’s predecessor. All the players from the first film are back for another go at adventure on the high sea. This time Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) sets out to try and save his love Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley) from execution. In order to do so, he must find Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) and get something from him that will in theory set them all free. That is the basic thread of the film, though there are several other plot lines that are at times a little confusing and difficult to follow.

The most important thing to remember going into the film is that it is not a complete film in of itself. It is merely the first half of the second and third films. Much like the Lord of the Rings (Peter Jackson, 2001 – 2003) trilogy, the films are meant to be seen as one piece and not two separate films. So, it doesn’t end it merely pauses as we wait a year for the second half. I am sure that Verbinski didn’t know for certain that sequels would come of his first film, but seeing it in this way almost separates the films into two separate instances.

The release strategy is not the only thing that separates Dead Man’s Chest from Curse of the Black Pearl. Even though the principle characters and actors are all the same, they seem to have taken on new characteristics as they further their development. The sense of distrust and lack of honesty only really hinted at in the first film, runs rampant in the second. Relationships are called into question and in the end, the audience is left slightly confused.

It is also important to know that it is really only the first part of two because the setup to get the action rolling takes up most of the film. Verbinski takes his time getting the characters where they need to be and the luxury of a 150 minute run time means that he can explore multiple story lines that would not normally be allowed in a shorter film. The third, and hopefully final, film of the series will determine whether or not he is successful.

Dead Man’s Chest also introduces a whole new villain in Davy Jones (Bill Nightly) to which Jack owes a great debt, and a set of supernatural pirates to crew his damned ship. Unlike the Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) crew, his is more believable to be of the sea and the effects used in their creation were spectacular.

Dead Man’s Chest is not without it’s flaws, but still worth seeing. Any fan of the first film will most likely enjoy the second film and will wait with baited breath for the second half of the journey already started.

Ultraviolet (2006)

2006-07-12T22:21:00.000-07:00

Dir: Kurt Wimmer
IMDB
On DVD

Like a film student shopping with his parent’s American Express credit card, Kurt Wimmer manages to pack in more useless effects in ninety minutes than I ever thought possible. The script is nearly incomprehensible not only in story line, but in spoken dialogue. Not since, well never, have I ever felt more pain for the actors forced to speak the dialogue that was written for them on the page.

At moments the film obviously cuts to entire animated sequences that really should have made up the entire film. Like George Lucas, I don’t know why Wimmer bothered to use any real actors. The characters were so digitally altered that he should have just animated the entire thing and called it good.

Whatever attempt to bring some sort of message to the film was lost in a sea of effects and disorienting camera. We have no sense of where we are or what we are doing. There are so many film techniques in this film it is almost as though Wimmer was working from a checklist that a freshman film school teacher had given him. I have no doubt that on his desk sits a copy of the bane of cinema Syd Field’s Screenwriting (as he wrote the screenplay as well as directed) the book that I attribute to single handedly destroying Hollywood cinema.

Typically I can bring something positive out of every film that I see. Either it touches some part of me that enjoys some guilty pleasure or I can file it into the category of simple entertainment. With Ultraviolet this is simply just not possible; I can’t enjoy the experience when a filmmaker is so clearly insulting my intelligence for ninety minutes straight.

The only positive thing to come out of this film is a 90% rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a $10 million loss at the box office. Every existing print, DVD and VHS of this film should be destroyed lest it be the only thing that survives the Armageddon providing some future archeologist the basis for judging our civilization.

Don’t believe me? Don’t Just take my word for it….

"Ultraviolet wants desperately to be a provocative, high-concept action thriller. It is apparently trying to say something about fear and terrorism, paranoia and racism. But it looks more like a shampoo commercial." -- Christie Lemire, A.P.

A Prairie Home Companion (2006)

2006-07-07T18:27:00.000-07:00

Dir: Robert Altman
IMDB
In Theatres Now

After over thirty years on the air, the Midwestern radio program “A Prairie Home Companion” is being taken off the air by a larger corporation that no longer sees the need for a program of its old values.

This is Robert Altman’s best film in a long time. He captures the heart and soul of an entire generation through the lives of the characters on stage. Altman choreographs a cast including powerhouses like: Meryl Streep, Lily Tomlin, Tommy Lee Jones, Kevin Kline and Garrison Keillor as the big screen answer to his radio self, between beautiful images and sound design that only the master could create.

A Prairie Home Companion exists in that space where past, present and future collide with life and death and where people sing. It is a wonderful celebration of Americana and the past that made this nation great, a past that we are often all to eager to sweep under the carpet and declare dead in the face of progress. It is a film about death and the remembrance of those who have passed and what happens to what they leave behind. The radio show is dying but so are those in it, and their stories their lives will have to live on with those who will come next, but the question is, will they remember.

Leaving this film makes you want to do two things: write a check to NPR to make sure that future generations will be able to enjoy the real show for decades to come and seize each moment in life as your last, not just to live but to be alive. There is a difference.

As Guy Noir reminds us in the last shot “gather ye rosebuds while ye may.”

Devil Wears Prada (2006)

2006-07-05T21:21:00.000-07:00

Dir: David Frankel
IMDB
Currently in Theatres

Andy Sachs (Anne Hathaway) has applied to be an assistant to the notorious Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep) the head of a major fashion magazine. She hasn’t lived in New York long enough to shake her North Western college years and is desperately looking for work. She knows little about fashion and nothing about the magazine or the woman she has applied to work for and yet she is still willing to do the work that needs to be done in the hopes that after a year with Miranda, she can position herself in line to get the job she really wants, to be a journalist.

On the surface, the film is about the choices and sacrifices we make in the pursuit of our dreams and how much we can change in the process. There is no doubt that by the end of the film Andy has changed from the beginning of the film; whether she has changed for the better or has sacrificed too much of her life is debatable, but she has changed. Below the surface, though not far, it is a film about the fashion industry and the roles it plays in the larger society.

The film doesn’t deviate much from a textbook Hollywood film but it does maintain some grounding in reality, largely due to the performance of Meryl Streep. Through her we see the absolute venom that is Miranda; a woman who isn’t cruel because she thinks of it but just is. Miranda’s nature is to be a demanding woman who expects everything from everyone and wouldn’t think of anything less. The cast is quite well rounded by Stanley Tucci, Emily Blunt and Adrian Grenier who plays Andy’s boyfriend that feels left behind from the new Andy.

The Devil Wears Prada is a smart comedy that manages to stay on this side of campy while still providing a host of takeaway lines. It stays away from being too preachy about the fashion industry, something that it could have easily done and definitely entertains.

Banlieue 13 (2004)

2006-06-29T22:06:00.000-07:00

English Title: District 13
Dir: Pierre Morel
IMDBCurrently playing at Starz Film Center

The year is 2010 and the Parisian government has given up on District B13. They have decided to build a wall around the crime ridden neighborhood and isolate it from the rest of the city. Inside the walls crime and violence rule supreme and one of the crime lords has a new weapon that could kill millions and a prisoner that needs to be freed. Damien (Cyril Raffaelli) and Leïto (David Belle) have to team up to rescue both the weapon and the woman.

This is a perfect meld of the Hollywood and French traditions. The fighting sequences are done in a Ong Bak trend of action movies and involve the two main actors jumping off of buildings and using all things around them to maneuver through the landscape. David Belle founded a new type of sport that involves martial arts and running over, under, on the side of and next to anything that stands in the way. Both actors are highly trained athletes and their physical abilities get them out of sticky situations.

The film follows a different structure than many American audiences are familiar with. There are really only three sequences in the entire film (a run time of 90 minutes) where the first two really set up the characters and the third deals mostly with the actual story at hand. The two protagonists of the film only interact for the last third of the film and it almost feels like three films woven into one. As a whole, the film is a great experience and will likely appeal to an audience that would not typically sit for French cinema.

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

2006-06-29T21:01:00.000-07:00

Dir: Alexadre Aja
IMDB
Available on DVD

A family is traveling to California and decides to take the advice of the creepy gas station owner and take a shortcut that could cut “a couple of hours” off their trip. As they travel along the dirt road, they are stopped by a group of hill people that have been genetically warped by the nuclear testing in the area that terrorize the family.

It is not often that I take the time to write about a film that I did not like but, I didn’t want to pass up this opportunity. I found the story to be incredibly predictable and unfulfilling. The inspiration obviously came from the horror films of the 50s but it fell short of even the worst of them. There were times when they tried to make a point but, like many films it doesn’t quite manage to find a good way to communicate it without pounding it over your head.

What is even more surprising is that the director made what is possibly one of the greatest contemporary French thrillers Haute Tension (High Tension, 2003) and has not signed on to do the sequel The Hills Have Eyes II (2007). I don’t know for certain but it wouldn’t surprise me if Alexandre (who also wrote the script) tried to make a different film but got caught up in the Hollywood studio system and ended up with something that just didn’t work. I am excited to see his future work to see if it is more in line with High Tension or The Hills Have Eyes.

Transamerica (2005)

2006-06-29T18:50:00.001-07:00

Dir: Duncan Tucker
IMDB
Available on DVD

Bree Osborne (Felicity Huffman) is a pre-operative transsexual a week away from her final transformation. She has but one obstacle to overcome, a son she didn’t know existed. After receiving a call from Toby (Kevin Zegers) she travels to New York to bail him out of jail and satisfy her therapist. What she finds is a young man who supports himself by hustling and lives in a drug infested apartment with several other people. Though, as he points out to Bree he does have goals and ambition. Fearing he would not accept her, Bree poses as a missionary sent to straighten him up. Ultimately, she ends up taking a cross country trip with her son and in the process she learns a lot about who she really is and about the son she didn’t know she had.

The beauty of the film is not in what is, but what it isn’t. This film does have a transsexual character but it is not just a transsexual film. The journey that Bree takes is a journey that we all at some point find ourselves traveling. She is on a quest to find herself and the person she truly is. It isn’t about the exterior physical identity, but the character of the person inside. The film never falls into the trap of artificial drama that could easily come with a film of this type. Not to mention the wonderful performances by Zegers and Huffman.

Les glaneurs et la glaneuse (2000)

2006-06-29T18:31:00.000-07:00

English Title: The Gleaners and I
Dir: Agnès Varda
IMDB
Available on DVD

When Agnès Varda set out to make a film about gleaners, she had no idea how far the idea would ultimately take her. In her quest to capture the stories and lives of those who live off the fruit of the land that most of us have discarded as trash, she extrapolated the idea to other types of gleaners including herself as a gleaner of images. This film is an often very personal look at the filmmaker and her subjects. While she still maintains some distance and impartiality there are moments of deep intimacy. During her journeys between shooting locations, she captures images of her own hands and while many of her tangents seem unrelated, you soon realize that they all connect together for a higher meaning.

The Gleaners and I is a good example of how video can really work for a filmmaker. Angès is able to leave behind the large crews required for film shooting and get more personal with her subjects. There is a courage and tenacity found in Agnès’ work that few other filmmakers today posses. Varda is one of the most influential female filmmakers of all time (generally thought of as one of the top three) and this film is just another reason why she deserves all the attention she has.

Nuit et Brouillard (1955)

2006-06-25T10:15:00.000-07:00

Dir: Alain Resnais
IMDB

I don’t think anything I can write can do justice to this film. It is one of the most powerful films that I have ever seen and it has stuck with me more than any other film of the Holocaust. It is a relentless account of the events that took place during the Second World War and should be seen by everyone. Not only does Resnais remind us of the horrors that took place, he asks the most important questions of all: “Who is responsible and, who will keep it from ever happening again?” The film is only a half of an hour long, but it is the most important thirty minutes of cinema that most of us will ever witness.

Gimmie Shelter (1970)

2006-06-25T10:10:00.000-07:00

Dir: Albert and David Maysles
IMDB

The Rolling Stones had decided to try and recreate Woodstock by giving a free concert in December of 1969. With the help of the infamous Melvin Belli (attorney) the Stones were finally able to secure a location and put together a force of hundreds to get the venue setup with only hours to spare. They had anticipated a large crowd but like their east coast predecessor, the crowd soon grew larger than they had ever dreamed. When the concert started, over 300,000 had gathered to hear the Stones, Jefferson Airplane, The Grateful Dead and the Flying Burrito Brothers play in what would become the most infamous concert of the decade.

The Maysles brothers were working on a new type of documentary film without narration and with as little manipulation as possible. Instead, they placed the camera, several actually, in various places about the concert and let you decide the meaning behind the images that they captured. They were able to film the Stones before the concert and had unlimited access during the show, as a result they were able to capture the events with great accuracy. What they captured was not only a momentous rock concert but the death of a decade. Even though the concert was only a few months after Woodstock, the end result was totally opposite.

At some point it was decided that the Hells Angels would provide security for the event, a decision that would prove to be deadly. Over the course of the afternoon the feel of the concert slowly degraded into utter chaos where a Hells Angel, right in front of the stage and camera, stabbed one man to death. The film goes beyond the simplicity of a concert film in a structure that stacks several layers of meaning between concert footage. If there is one film that sums up the end of the 1960s in America Gimmie Shelter is definitely it.

Apt Pupil (1998)

2006-06-25T09:38:00.000-07:00

Dir: Bryan Singer
IMDB
Available on DVD

Todd Bowden (Brad Renfro) a high school senior discovers that one of the people living in his town is Kurt Dussander (Ian McKellen) a wanted Nazi war criminal. When Todd confronts Kurt, they strike a deal where Kurt will tell him all the gruesome details of his time as a Nazi and Todd will continue to keep his secret. What follows is an often complicated twisting of youth and the monsters we usually meet in our darkest nightmares. The film is based on Stephen King’s novella of the same title.

This film is an interesting look at the power and draw of true evil. The draw is created not by a monster from some other form of reality but the monstrous nature of man. Kurt Dussander was personally responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people and he shows little remorse for his past. His character embodies the power that was held by those he fought for in the war and his draw to the young Todd is almost that of a mentor and apprentice. The performances of Renfro and McKellen are outstanding and they bring a certain verité to the characters, though the film as a whole does fall a little short. Director Bryan Singer does manage to capture the evil of the Holocaust but in the end doesn’t push the edge quite as far as he could have. Still, it is a powerful film and a frightening insight into madness.

Triumph des Willens (1935)

2006-06-19T11:11:00.000-07:00

Dir: Leni Riefenstahl
IMDB

This is perhaps one of the most widely contested and yet respected non-fiction films of all time. While Riefenstahl had over twenty films to her credit (either acting or directing) this is the film she is most known for, and with good reason. The film chronicles the 1934 gathering of the National Socialist German Workers Party in Nuremburg Germany and firmly solidifies not only the propaganda of the Nazi Party but much of it s visual stylistics as well. As a director, Riefenstahl had total control over the event and was able to choreograph all the marches and speeches to fit the needs of her camera, resulting in a film that feels more like a Busby Berkeley musical than the heavy handed propaganda of the Third Reich.

It is not easy to separate the art from the message and that is the greatest power of the film. Perhaps more than any other work of art, Triumph des Willens challenges us to decide if we can appreciate her stunning visuals without being caught up in what she is actually filming. Make no mistake, the film clearly glorifies and even deifies Adolph Hitler in an attempt to further his image and support. The film is loaded with men, women and children waving the symbol of the Nazi party and saluting him with the frightening “sieg heil.” However, the way in which Riefenstahl captures the images, edits them together does manage to make for a beautiful film.

This film is a little long and is often very difficult to watch. I would recommend turning the sound off occasionally and just watch the images as they go by and realize that the emotional manipulation you are feeling is entirely intentional. It is difficult (read almost impossible) to not get caught up in the emotional response that we have to the images of the Nazi rallies that we have developed since the end of the war, and that often clouds the viewers ability to appreciate the filmmaking. This film is definitely not for every one.

If you just can’t bring yourself to watch this film, and I understand if you can’t, then I would recommend watching her Olipiad films (there are two films and I have only seen the second, which I understand is the better of the two). These films were shot during the 1938 Olympic games held in Germany and while the Nazi influence is shown through the games, the main focuses is the athletes and allows you to see her filming technique (which is truly beautiful) and not have to wade through Nazi propaganda to do so. Another interesting film to check out is Die Macht der Bilder: Leni Riefenstahl (“The Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl”, Ray Müller, 1993) a documentary on Leni Riefenstahl, which provides an fascinating look at the woman behind the camera.

Mildred Pierce (1945)

2006-03-30T22:43:00.000-08:00

Directed by: Michael Curtiz
Available on DVD

Mildred Pierce (Joan Crawford) is the perfect wife. She spends her life doing what she can for her two daughters and keeping a tidy house while still finding time to make cakes for the neighborhood. When she confronts her husband about his infidelities, he leaves her and their two daughters to fend for themselves. She begins the difficult task of trying to find work, which for a woman who has spent her whole life as wife and mother proves to be a difficult task. Finally, she is able to find work at a diner and meets Ida Corwin (Eve Arden) who teaches her the ins and outs of the restaurant business and eventually becomes her business partner when Mildred decides to open her own restaurant. From there her life becomes more complicated as she tries to balance family, business and love. However, in true noir fashion, nothing is as simple as it seems.

The film is a perfect example of the Film Noir depiction of how the relationship between men and women changed during WWII. While the men were off to war, the women were put to work building the equipment they needed to fight. Once the war ended, the women were expected to return to the home and continue being nothing more than housewives and forgetting the taste of independence they got during the war, something many women were not happy with. Films of this era were clear about the consequences of going out of the home and returning to work, and Mildred Pierce is no exception.

Rear Window (1954)

2006-03-30T22:09:00.000-08:00

Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Available on DVD

L. B. Jefferies (James Stewart) has broken his leg and is only one week away from getting out of his cast and his wheelchair. Through the rear window of his apartment he has the perfect view of the backs of the neighboring windows and through their frames, a view into the lives of those who live inside. He spends his days and nights learning the lives and habits of those who surround him. It all seems like innocent fun until he witnesses what he believes to be a murder. In the process of investigating the proposed murder he convinces his uptown girlfriend Lisa (Grace Kelly) and his nurse Stella (Thelma Ritter) but the person he needs to believe him the most is Det. Lt. Doyle (Wendell Corey) who is a harder sell.

This film is a clear condemnation of the hysteria over neighbors spying on each other in the height of the communist scare. Jefferies puts together a case for murder without ever actually seeing anything, his entire case is based in assumption and in his mind, he has convicted a man of murder without ever seeing anything but what happens in the window of the man’s apartment. There is also a clear statement about neighbors and the loss of contact to those we live closest to but know absolutely nothing about. The climax of the film features classic Hitchcock suspense that will keep you guessing to the very end who is right.

For What It's Worth

2006-03-05T10:41:00.000-08:00

My Oscar Pics:

Leading Actor – Phillip Seymour Hoffman
Supporting Actor – George Clooney
Leading Actress – Reese Witherspoon or Felicity Huffman 50/50 on this one
Supporting Actress – Michelle Williams
Animated Feature – Howl’s Moving Castle
Art Direction – Good Night, and Good Luck
Cinematography – Brokeback Mountain
Costume Design – Mrs. Henderson Presents or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory 50/50 on this one too
Director – Ang Lee
Documentary – March of the Penguins
Documentary Short – The Mushroom Club
Film Editing – Munich
Foreign Language Film – Tsotsi
Makeup – The Chronicles of Narnia
Music – Brokeback Mountain
Music (Song) – “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp”
Best Picture – Brokeback Mountain
Animated Short – The Moon and The Son: An Imagined Conversation
Live Action Short – Six Shooter
Sound Editing – King Kong
Sound Mixing – Walk The Line
Visual Effects – The Chronicles of Narnia
Writing Adapted – Brokeback Mountain
Writing Original – Good Night, and Good Luck

Also check out the Independent Spirit Awards Winners.

A Plea for Independent Theatres

2006-03-01T20:45:00.000-08:00

Thank you Girlzoot for posting so regularly on this site and keeping it alive while I have been overwhelmed with school. I would share some of the writing I have been doing for school with you all but I am sure that an eight page analysis of Barton Keyes in Double Indemnity (Wilder, 1944) would bore you all to tears.

I am writing today not about any specific film, but about the film industry. The state of independent arts is fragile. As a culture we are placing less value on truly original ideas that force us to question our world, values and beliefs. The films that are being produced by the major studios have become a long string of sequels and films based on existing material.

Moviegoers are noticing. In spite of large box office receipts, attendance to most theatres is down. While content and quality aren’t the only things contributing to this fall in the box office, I can’t help but notice that film festival attendance is up world-wide. There are now more chances to see films that would not normally be seen in larger theaters with film festivals and smaller art house theatres.

However, small theatrical venues are fighting uphill battles. They are often older venues that don’t have the glitz or glam of new multiplexes and have very little to no marketing budgets. Remember, the trailers you see on television, posters on the sides of streets and large full-page ads are for the most part not paid for by the theatres, but by the large studios that invest millions of dollars in marketing. In fact, more is spent marketing a large theatrical release than the entire budget of smaller more independent films.

Now, two recent developments have shown a possible trend in the art house community. The Weinstein Company closed Wellspring a small, independent film distributor and will now focus on direct to DVD sales of films. In the past few days Comcast Cable announced a deal with IFC (Independent Film Channel) to begin offering it’s customers the opportunity to rent films through on-demand services the same day they are released theatrically. If these trends continue, they may sound the final death knoll for many already struggling independent theatres.

With the advancement of home theatre technology it may seem like watching a film that doesn’t have big budget special effects or intense sound design at home is just as good as seeing it at the theatre. I know that I often find it difficult to make it down to a theatre because I just don’t have the time. It is easier for me to throw a DVD in my computer and watch it at home, but now we have to ask ourselves: “What are the potential consequences?”.

Here is my plea. If you have never been to an independent theatre, go to one. If you don’t know what film to see, check out their websites, and do some research. Look to people around you and ask them what you should see. Tell you what, start with Brokeback Mountain, don’t see it at the multiplex see it at the art house, that is the theatre it was made for. Come down to your local FilmCenter and see a classic film.

I know that it can be intimidating and frightening to come to an art house theatre for the first time, the titles are odd and a lot of the films aren’t in English, but most are so worth it. Naturally, the Starz FilmCenter is closest to my heart and a place that I really believe in, so I would prefer you make the trip to downtown and visit us but, if you can’t, then go to one of the other art houses in town.

Think of them like the Zoo or Museums. You would never be content watching a lion on your TV, or only seeing pictures of your favorite paintings and you shouldn’t be content being stuck watching your films at home. Get out of your house and get to the theatre before they are no longer there for you to go to.

Thanks for

Mystery Screening

2005-11-04T13:00:00.000-08:00

See it, be it, live it. Sunday, November 13th. Tickets here.

Shhhh.... its a secret. Spread the word.

Brokeback Mountain

2005-11-04T12:54:00.000-08:00

Brokeback Mountain (2005)
Dir: Ang Lee
IMDB
Tralier
Release: Closing Night Film for Starz Denver International Film Festival theatrical release in December 2005.

This year the Starz Denver International Film Festival will close with Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain. This is one of the most beautiful love stories I have ever had the pleasure of being a part of, and that is exactly how you feel when you watch the story unfold.

The Story

Ennis (Heath Leger) and Jack (Jake Gyllenhaal) are two Wyoming cowboys who are sent to guard a flock of sheep atop Brokeback Mountain in the summer of 1963. Separated by occupational duties, they managed to find commonalities and ultimately love.

At the end of the summer, they are forced to go separate ways and on to separate lives. No matter how their lives change, their passion lives on through brief encounters in the mountains of Wyoming.

The film follows their lives and the evolution of their love over decades to its final conclusion.

The Film

At its core, this film is about love, passion and the wilderness. This story encompasses all the big themes of life with grace and depth. Regardless of their genders, Ennis and Jack’s love transcends politics and every the forces of society. This is not a standard gay film, something I find incredibly refreshing. It doesn’t ignore the realities of these two specific characters and the situation that they are in, it just lets them be as they are two people in love each other.

Lee’s respect and admiration of the western landscape is clear in his visual choices. Like any good western, the landscape becomes its own character and man’s interaction with the world around him is a central theme in their lives.

Brokeback Mountain is above all an incredibly powerful love story. It stops short of all stereotypes that it could so easily fall into, and instead develops its own language, the language of Ang Lee. It is deliberate and organic, soft and harsh, quite and loud, in short everything a film could be.

Brokeback Mountain screens only once at the Starz Denver International Film Festival on Saturday November 19th where Ang Lee will be presented with the Mayor’s Lifetime Achievement Award and will be interviewed on stage after the film. Tickets are available at the Starz Film Center or at Denver Film and can be purchased for the film only or the film and reception.

The Exorcism of Emily Rose

2005-09-15T06:46:00.000-07:00

Dir: Scott Derrickson
IMDB
Trailer

I love horror movies, probably more than any other kind of movie. I watch as many as i possibly can on the off chance that one will scare the shit out of me as much as one of my very first horror films, The Exorcist, did. So far, close, but no luck. My very favorite are the ones based on true life events. That is why I saw The Exorcim of Emily Rose.

I walked into the theatre to watch this movie hoping that it was all of the above. It was and it was not, but never disappointing. Let me start by saying that this was in no way a horror movie, I kept waiting to wet myself from fright, but it was not to come. What is was, however, was a very engaging spiritual thriller. By the time i realized this, I was so wrapped up in it that I was not going to let go.

The basic storygoes like this: Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter) is a young college student who, after a failed exorcism has died from the demons, (yes demons plural, there are 6), that inhabit her body. What follows is her family priest, Father Moore, being accused of killing her through neglect. The balance of the movie is his trial and her story as told through the eyes of her family friends and Father Moore(Tom Wilkinson). The good father wants nothing more than to tell Emily's story. He feels that by doing so, the world will know that the spiritual realm exists. The Achdioses wants to spare The Church embarassment and shame, so it hires superstar attorney Erin Bruner (Laura Linney).

Bruner is not a spiritual woman, in fact she is an admitted non-believer. Her part of the story revolves around her lack of faith and having to deal with the fact that she what she does not believe in may be real. She takes the case only because she is offered partnership in her firm. She keeps it because, above all esle, she finds herself believing in Father Moore. Her counter part in the film is Ethan Thomas (Campbel Scott).

Thomas is a religious man, "methodist I, think" yet he seems to have even less faith than Bruner. It is proven time and time again that his faith is truly in science and the law and anything outside of that is nonsense. We do get to see in him a spritual conflict in which he must reconcile his faith with his beliefs. (he never does). He is faced with all the mythology of his religion potentially being real, and in the end becomes desparate to disprove it.

This movie blends internal and external conflicts beautifully. It explores faith and pits science and modern faith against it's own mythology.

While everyon in this film gave good performances, the heavy weights were by far the four lead roles: Father Moore, Bruner, Emily, and Thomas. Linney and Wilkinson have an amazing chemistry, even though linney plays a non-believer, there is a palpable spiritual relationship between her and Wilkinson. You actually feel them grow from client and lawyer to teacher and student, to friends. Campbell Scott also gives a solid performance, reminding us of the tangible part of our world, pleading with us to hold on to it. Carpenter, now here is a girl that knows how to be posessed. What more can i say about her? She was great.

On to what i truly love about any and all movies: Visual. This is an overall dark film. lots of cool blue and hot red lighting. What impressed me the most about the visual aspect of this film is the lack of special effects. I like special effects as much as the next guy, but i think that too often, filmmakers rely on them to tell us what they don't know how to. What many other filmmakers would have forced down our throats with SF, Derrikson and his crew do with make up and camerawork. It feels more real, because we are not forced to watch Emily turn CGI and back to show her demons. It is a successful way to use the few effects that they do use and a convincing experiment in storytelling.

Overall, this film is a must see. In fact, bring a friend, grab a soda and leave in throws of a spiritual conversation that is not about condeming us homos.

Watch it, Enjoy it, and Think about it.

Val

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

2005-07-26T10:48:00.000-07:00

Dir: Tim Burton
IMDB
Trailer
Release: Wide theatrical release July 2005

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory brings together one of my favorite filmmaking teams (Burton / Elfman / Depp) in away that only the three of them could manage. The film is a totally different adaptation of the Roald Dahl story from the 1971 version. With the only real similarities lying in the spine of the story, and even that deviates somewhat. I read the story again right before seeing this film and aside from the end, some of the back-story, and the end Burton’s vision holds close to the original text.

The Story

Eccentric chocolate maker Willy Wonka (Johnny Depp) decides to invite five lucky children to his chocolate factory for a personalized tour and a special prize for one of the five children. Charlie (Freddie Highmore), is one of the lucky children who gets to come to the factory. Charlie is quite poor and shares a small one room home with his parents (Helena Bohnam Carter, Noah Taylor) and his four grandparents who share one bed (David Kelly, Liz Smith, Eileen Essell, David Morris).

Along the tour, the four other children break various rules and are punished in ways that only could happen in Wonka’s strange world. As each child exits the story, the Oompa Loompas (all played by Deep Roy) sing a wonderful song that talks about how horrible each child is and the lesson learned from each of their demises.

At the end, Charlie is the only boy left who gets the extra special prize, the opportunity to run Wonka’s chocolate factory.

The Film

This film is pure Burton through and through. From the very first sequence I was reminded why I fell in love with Burton’s films. His vision of the chocolate factory was as magical as it was frightening something I believe Dahl intended in his original story. Burton is very aware of how to use color, shape and texture and how these elements work together to form a visual rhythm that his fans adore.

Depp’s interpretation of Willy Wonka could not be further from Gene Wilder’s in the 1971 version of the story. Depp plays the character as a truly eccentric Wonka who has lost all touch with the real world and has enveloped himself in the fantasy of his own factory. Depp’s performance is filled with a lot more humor than I remember Wilder’s and though Depp is a little more bitter, he seems softer than Wilder’s Wonka.

Any fan of Burton’s will probably go back to the theatre to see this film more than once (as I plan to do) just to get a chance to spend two more hours in his universe, something we haven’t really been able to do since, Batman (1989).

Oh, anyone up for opening night of Corpse Bride?

Ночной Дозор (2005)

2005-07-26T09:58:00.000-07:00

English title: Night Watch
Dir: Timur Bekmambetov
IMDB
Trailer
Release: Rumored January 2006 US Release
Language: English and Russian with subtitles.

I was able to catch a way advance screening of this film and I was quite impressed by the use of CGI effects and the overall story. The film is an adaptation of the beloved Russian Sci-fi Fantasy novel by Sergei Lukyanenko, and is one of the first big budget special effects films out of Russia. After much searching Valium, has not been able to find an English translation of the novel, which is a shame because I would really like to read it.

The Story

Thousands of years ago the forces fighting for light and dark agreed to a truce, establishing a balance between the two powers. Now in modern Moscow, there are still soldiers that fight for each side within the terms of the truce with the light patrolling the dark and the dark patrolling the light. In the world created for this story there are those who are in touch with the struggle between light and dark known as the Others. When an Other is created, they must choose if they will fight for light or dark, and thus their allegiance is created.

There is a prophecy that declares there will be an Other born who will choose light or dark and will offset the balance, once again starting the war between the two. This first installment of the trilogy introduces us to this chosen one and ends with his decision.

The Film

I was taken by complete surprise by this film. I had no idea what film I was going to be watching and I must say, I was blown away. I am a big fan of stories that involve mythical and magical creatures and their incorporation into modern society. From the first battle sequence to the last scene, I was mesmerized, almost too much to be able to actually run the film.

Bekmambetov’s use of CGI imagery is totally appropriate. Instead of the story relying specifically on the effects, they add artistic imagery that really helps set the tone of the film. I am also quite pleased to see that the use of big budget Hollywood style effects, did not remove the cold Russian filmmaking sensibility. I am excited to get a chance to see the next two films in the series, hopefully they will all make it to a US release.

Fantastic Four (2005)

2005-07-15T22:05:00.000-07:00

Dir: Tim Story
IMDB
Trailer
Release: Wide theatrical release July 05.

The latest in a long series of comic books brought to big screen, The Fantastic Four probably won’t disappoint. I am not a comic book person, it seems like I am the only one of the people I know who has never really even read one, but I know a little bit about movies. I see a lot of them, and as a whole, this one was not that bad.

The Story

Victor Von Doom (Julian McMahon) is the President of a failing company. When his old friend Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd) comes to him with an idea of using Doom’s space station as a way to test the affects of a passing solar flare, Doom sees it as a way of boosting his stock value and agrees to allow the experiment. Doom and Richards are joined by Doom’s love interest, Sue Storm (Jessica Alba), her brother Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) and Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis) on the space station.

When the cloud approaches Earth far earlier than expected, they are not able to protect themselves in time and are exposed to the full power of the passing flare and their genetic makeup is completely rearranged. It is not until a few days later when they are recovering that they discover their new powers and thus are reborn as the Fantastic Four. Ultimately they must face off with Von Doom who has become even more evil with his powers.

The Film

This film felt like what it was, the first in a franchise. While there are good action sequences, the main purpose of the film seems to be an introduction to the characters for those of us who have not read the comic books. The last battle of the film functioned as way to get the four to accept who they were and that they could use their powers together for good. It did not give a sense of conclusion, but of a beginning.

I liked the playful way that the characters began to explore their powers and their limitations. Plus, even though love interest plot lines usually make me sick, I wasn’t bothered by it here. The film was entertaining and I felt good leaving the theatre. Though why they kept insisting on dressing Johnny Storm, I will never understand. He was just fine when he wasn’t wearing many clothes, they could have kept that up. Which actually brings up an interesting point, it is not often in today’s films we see a topless hairy younger man and it was appreciated.

See this film on the big screen with good sound, it deserves it.

War of The Worlds (2005)

2005-07-15T21:16:00.000-07:00

Dir: Steven Spielberg
IMDB
Trailer
Release: Wide release.

H.G. Wells’ story is once again brought to life on the big screen in a bigger, louder, and longer version than the 1953 version.

The Story

An alien race has been watching the progression of man kind on Earth from our very beginning. They have finally decided that we must be exterminated as a race and activate long buried ships located all over the planet in strange lightening storms. Once the machines are brought to life, they blow everything up killing everyone before they use them for fertilizer to grow strange vegetation. We follow Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) and his two children Rachel (Dakota Fanning) and Robbie (Justin Chatwin) as they try to make it to Boston where the children’s mother is.

The Film

This film almost seems as though they convened a focus group that tried to find the elements that a summer blockbuster hit would have to have, and then tried to incorporate them back into the story. There is everything from family tension, explosions, aliens, space ships, bad weather, chase scenes, slight social commentary and even a sinking boat. Though I have to say that I think Spielberg’s inclusion of the sinking boat was really a fuck you to James Cameron and his way of saying, “see… I can sink a boat too.”

I also feel that Tom Cruise is far too famous of an actor to play a simple dockworker from Jersey and I really found his presence in the film to be quite distracting. As far as acting goes, Fanning seriously blew Cruise out of the water, thus proving that Spielberg still possesses what is possibly his greatest talent, directing children.

I really appreciate the time that Spielberg took to let us spend some good time with each of the characters; I only wish that there could have been a little more variety to the scenes. It felt as though every time they were in some sort of situation they had to get out of, it was the same. Also, because he took his time for most of the film, the ending was a bit rushed. It was almost as if he realized that the film was already nearing two hours and that he had to just end it.

However, all that being said, I actually did enjoy it. I think that it is a great summer film that while not substantial, provides an entertaining way to sit in air conditioning for a couple of hours.

Baby Face (1933)

2005-07-15T21:02:00.000-07:00

Dir: Alfred E. Green
IMDB
Release: Limited release at the SFC July 16th (4:00 and 7:00) and 17th (2:00).

As the showcase film in the Starz Film Center’s Summer of Preservation series, Baby Face is a great American film from the “pre-code” era of filmmaking. In 1930 the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) agreed on a production code that all films would have to adhere to. The code is known as the Hays Production code and it addressed how sex, violence, culture and purity should be portrayed in film. The introduction of sound meant that filmmakers could potentially create even more provocative or suggestive films and the MPAA wanted to censor what directors could and could not do.

The code was not really enforced until 1934 when the United States Government noted that the MPAA was not able to reign in out of control filmmakers and threatened to do it for them. It was then they decided that the MPAA began to strictly enforce the code. However, some films were allowed to get away with quite a bit in the four years that the code was only loosely enforced. Films such as: I’m A Fugitive From a Chain Gang (1932), Scarface: The Shame of A Nation (1932), and Baby Face (1933). These films were released with only a few changes that were required by the censor board, but may not have been released at all after 1934.

The code was strictly enforced from 1934 to the 1950’s when directors began to challenge it. Then in the 1960’s directors and studios began to fully challenge the idea of the production code (Hitchcock’s 1960 Psycho) and by 1967 the code was abandoned and replaced with the modern MPAA Ratings Scale. The story of the Hays Production Code is full of examples of American culture and attempts at censorship.

Unfortunately, there are a significant number of films from this era that have been forever lost. It is quite an opportunity to be able to see a fully restored print of any film from the pre-code era, much less one that has been restored to its original version, without any changes required by the MPAA. Such is the case with Baby Face. When the Library of Congress restored this film, they found original sequences that were cut from the film and never before seen theatrically. Those scenes were restored and included in this print of the film.

The Story

The story of Baby Face is simple. Lily Powers (Barbara Stanwyck) plays a down and out woman who upon the advice of the only man in the world she trusts, Alphonse Ethier (Adolf Cragg), moves to NYC to utilize her best asset to move ahead in the world, her body. She gets a job working for a bank and begins to sleep her way, quite literally, to the top of the bank. Ultimately, she must decide what she loves more, a man or her possessions.

The Film

The film overall while good, is not the best film I have seen from the pre-code era. The film is wonderfully shot, and well acted, it just falls a little short. It is however, wonderfully enjoyable and I must say I fell in love with Lily Powers. Anyone who is interested in the history of film, or who just likes to see a good film should not miss Baby Face this weekend at the Starz Film Center.

Also, the film curator for the Library of Congress and SFC Director of Education Howie Movshovitz will be present at the July 16th 7:00 PM screening for a Q&A session. I highly recommend coming to that screening early so you can get a chance to learn about film preservation from perhaps the Nation's most important preservationist.

Read the text of the Hays Code Here

Star Wars III (2005)

2005-05-25T18:32:00.000-07:00

IMDB

Twenty eight years ago, not even a year old, my parents took me to see Star Wars. I quite obviously don’t specifically remember this, but I am pretty sure that it was one of the very first films I ever saw. At such a young age, I had no way of appreciating the spectacular advances in the science of making films that were present in A New Hope. Way too young to realize that the next two films (Return of the Jedi and The Empire Strikes Back) would become a voice of a generation who had desperately needed to come out of a time of war with some hope that we could survive as a nation.

Those who saw Star Wars as children were born in an age after man had walked on the moon, and at the time of the fertile birth of space exploration. Building large space craft and encountering strange and exotic species were beyond the dreams of the fifties and before, they were a real possibility. Technology was really beginning to take off and change the very world we live in.

Star Wars also gave us hope that we too could all become special. That deep down inside of us was a long lost Jedi master who only needed to find the right master to bring us to our potential. I think this is the appeal of Star Wars to those who may be called geeks or nerds; if the geeky android mechanic farm hand can save the universe, maybe we can too.

It is no secret that I have not been a big fan of the last two Star Wars films released. I won’t go into great detail on why I was disappointed but let’s just say that the disappointment was strong enough that I was not willing to stand in line, fight the crowds and pay to see Revenge of the Sith. However, when I made the journey back to my home town and saw that it was playing in the very same theatre where the journey began for me, I could not resist the urge to complete the circle. So there we sat, perhaps even in the very seats my newlywed parents sat in, and I watched the end of a saga.

The Story

In the final presentation of the series of prequels, director George Lucas attempts to bridge the original Star Wars series with the new Star Wars series. In this film, we see Anakin Skywalker’s (Hayden Christiansen) transformation to the dark side and the birth of the character of Darth Vader (voiced by James Earl Jones). We also see how Senator Palpatine ( ) comes to rule The Republic and it’s eventual turn into The Empire, as well as, the death of nearly all of the Jedi Nights and the assassination of the Jedi council. Essentially, we see everything we need to see to get us to the point of the story where A New Hope comes in.

The Film

I hate to admit it but, Lucas did manage to bridge the films fairly well. There were significantly more influences from A New Hope in this film in everything from costume to ship design. In a way it is kind of evolution. For instance, you don’t actually get to see an X wing fighter, but you see the ship that clearly inspired it. At the end of the film we see Darth Vader standing on what I believe is the very ship he is standing on the first time we see him in A New Hope. The last installment of the series, actually made me want to go and watch A New Hope again. In fact, the similarities were so striking at times, it really elicited for the first time the same feelings I feel when watching the first three films.

However, Revenge of the Sith, is not a great film overall. In spite of its near greatness, it still falls flat. Revenge is plagued with all the same acting problems, over use of CGI and just plain bad directing that dominated the last two films. There are times where it seems that Lucas was out of town or something and the film gets so close to greatness then something happens and it just ruins the moment. I found myself trying hard to just let these moments (which I have waited so long to see) happen, but I just couldn’t.

A lot has been said about the political subtext of the film and how it mirrors today’s political climate in our nation. The line that is credited with being the most obvious is in which Anakin says to Obi-wan “either you are with me, or against me” which is pretty close to things President Bush has said over the war on terror, but I think there is a clearer subtext than that. The line that gets it for me is actually Padme’s (Nathalie Portman) response to Palpatine’s charge to hunt out and destroy the traitorous Jedi Nights, “so this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause”.

The film goes on to clearly show that those who supposedly stand for liberty, democracy and freedom can do so in the very same breath with which they destroy it. Perhaps today’s youth will grow up, look back on Episodes I through III and realize that while it was set “A long time ago, in a far away place” the story might have been a little closer to home than they imagined.

Gong Fu (2004)

2005-05-19T23:22:00.000-07:00

IMDB

The Story

Set in 1940’s China, the “Axe Gang” has overrun most of Shanghai except for some of the smaller poorer neighborhoods. When the wanna be gangster Sing (Stephen Chow) enters the small village of mix matched residents who are ruled by a overbearing Landlady (Qiu Yuen) and her husband the Landlord (Wah Yuen), he discovers the true nature and identity of the residents. Hiding in the village are some of the worlds best Kung Fu Masters disguised as a tailor (Chiu Chi Ling), a donut maker (Dong Zhi Hua) and a regular guy Coolie (Xing Yu).

After the initial fight between Sing and the villagers the leader of the Axe Gang (Hsiao Liang) sets his sights on defeating the village and taking over its operations. The rest of the film is really a series of incredibly well choreographed fight scenes and some incredible humor. Eventually the good guys win with a few surprises and the realization of Sing’s true power and path in life.

The Film

I have not had this much fun at a film in a really long time. When I left the theatre, I really wanted more. The film is wonderfully directed by film veteran Stephen Chow and is a perfect example of what CGI can accomplish in a film. There are a lot of special effects but they are used with incredible care and attention. The fight sequences were amazing with one of my favorites being the night fight involving the Gu Zhen (an amazing musical instrument).

Chow’s vision in creating an alternative world where heroes are made from ordinary people is wonderfully entertaining. This film is funny and beautiful, plus it reminded me once again of my desire to learn how to speak Chinese.

Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galxy (2005)

2005-05-19T21:31:00.000-07:00

IMDB
Trailer

The Story

Based on Doglas Adam’s book of the same title, Hitchhiker’s Guide is a loosely assembled tale of Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman) and his journeys through space. His best friend, Ford Perfect (Mos Def) rescues him right before the destruction of the Earth to make way for an intergalactic bypass. From there, they encounter several strange and wonderfully colorful inhabitants of the galaxy. The journey gains some purpose when Arthur Ford end up with the president of the Galaxy, Zaphod Beeblebrox (Sam Rockwell) decides to try and find the ultimate question of the universe. It all ends with a happy ending that only makes sense because of how little sense the rest of the film makes.

I haven’t read the book so I don’t know how accurate the story is to the book but in spite of it’s wandering nature, the story in the film holds together nice enough for me.

The Film

I was very impressed to see that Jim Henson’s Muppet Workshop is still working in film. It was quite refreshing to see totally non-humanoid creatures that were not simply crated in a computer program. Seeing actual objects being photographed was incredibly refreshing. That is not to say that there were little to no CGI in this film, in fact it was full of CGI. However, it seems that director Garth Jennings really chose to use his special effects tools wisely. This perfect combination of models, muppets, CGI and live action makes this film the perfect answer to Star Wars Episode III.

Some viewers have been critical of the films apparent lack of focus and wandering nature. I imagine that the books are quite similar and I think that it really worked for this particular story. The whole film is full of small items that make little to no sense (the importance of a bath towel) but because of the specific story being told, they don’t have to make sense. They just are.

I appreciated the narration and use of the actual guide as a, well guide to the film. Some of the most comic moments of the film came directly from the guide itself. Adapting a book to film is always a challenge and nearly impossible to please fans of both. The written word is so different from motion picture that some things just can’t make the transition to screen. There will always be those who don’t feel that any film will do justice to a book, particularly one as large scoped and insane as I am sure Hitchhiker’s is.

Shortcut to Nirvana: Kumbh Mela (2005)

2005-04-02T08:36:00.000-08:00

Dir: Maurizio Benazzo and Nick Day
Release: Currently playing at the Starz Film Center.
Languages: English / Hindi
IMDB
Official Website

The Story

This is a documentary film about the Kumbh Mela, a huge Hindu gathering that takes place every 12 years in India. It is reported that the Kumbh Mela is the worlds largest and oldest pilgrimage dating back to circa 30 B.C.E. and has involved as many as 70 million people at each gathering. The festival takes place at the junction of the two holy Indian rivers, Ganges and Yamuna. There are several thousand Gurus whose followers setup camps devoted to their spiritual leaders where they are feed both physically and spiritually. The culmination of the festival is a bathing ritual in the river Ganges where the pilgrims bathe in the glory of the most holy of all rivers. The festival lasts for eight weeks, three of which are covered in this film.

The Film

This documentary is not tightly held, in fact it is a rather loose journey through the festival. The directors speak to several Guru and spiritual leaders showing the diversity at the festival and of the teachings in each sect. However, there are some major themes that run through each sect including: the desperate need for world peace, the importance of truth in spirituality, introspection and internal happiness. I was amazed at overall message of peace and love and it was amazing to me how different it was from many other religious gatherings.

While the production value of the film was moderate, it is completely appropriate for the subject matter and its spontaneous documentary nature. Leaving this film, I felt calm and I wanted to learn as much as I could about the festival and the people who attend. If you enjoy documentaries on spirituality and different cultures, this is your film. It is currently playing at the Starz Film Center through Thursday, April 7th where it will move to Boulder.

You I Love

2005-03-09T21:54:00.000-08:00

Ya lyublu tebya (You I Love) (2004)
Directed by: Olga Stolpovskaja, Dmitry Troitsky
IMDB
Trailer
Release: Currently under limited release.

I have not had the opportunity to experience much Russian film with sound. The silent Russian filmmakers invented many of our still used film editing techniques and established many of our rules for filmmaking. I was quite happy to get the chance to see a new Russian film particularly one with a gay plotline.

The Story

Timofei (Evgenny Koryakovsky) is an ad executive who while out to lunch meets a beautiful woman Vera (Lybov Badmaev) and ends up having lunch with her. They begin to bond over the lunch and a relationship soon develops between them. After taking her to work one night, Timofei literally runs into Uloomji (Damir Badmaev) with his car. Realizing that Uloomji is without documentation, and after failing to be able to get him medical attention, Timofei takes Uloomji home with him. In the middle of the night Uloomji wakes Timofei by accidentally knocking over the sofa that he is sleeping on drawing him out of his bedroom. They share a brief moment of tenderness and the attraction between them becomes apparent.

After only sharing brief touches, Vera comes back to Timofei’s apartment and catches the two of them together. What develops from here is a fairly complex relationship between the three complicated by Uloomji’s family and acceptance of everyone’s sexual identity. The story takes place in modern Moscow and we are given a possible glimpse of what life can be like for those living in the freed city.

The Film

There are many themes explored in this film that go beyond the simple story of a man learning to live with his love for both a man and a woman. From the very opening sequence, food plays an important part in the film. The first encounters between Timofei and Vera involve colorful rich foods in wonderful settings. The theme of rich colorful foods is even carried into their first sexual encounter when just after having sex, Vera takes a bite out of a ripe green apple, an apple that is the same shade and color as the apples in Timofei’s bed sheets. The food seemed to relate to a decadent and luxurious feeling that matched his relationship with Vera a feeling that was matched by her beauty and femininity.

In contrast, Uloomji’s presence is marked with strong masculine influences. The sofa that he sleeps on is covered in an animal skin. His hat that he wears almost throughout the film is fur and he works in a Zoo tending the animals. The first true sexual experience that they have together was filmed as a beautiful mix of lust and raw sexual power that was not shown with Vera. It was almost as though Timofei was exploring both sides of not only his sexuality but also his personality. Both the masculine and feminine aspects of life and sex appeal to him and his nature.

Additionally, there is also a strong theme of social change and conflict between the modern city and rural Russia. Once Uloomji’s family finds out about his sexuality, in a wonderfully funny scene, their reaction is less than acceptance. As opposed to Vera’s friend who reacts to Timofei’s relationship with men by simply saying that she sleeps with women. When Vera asks why, she responds essentially; “Why not?”

I was incredibly impressed with the directors and you could tell that the film was directed by both a man and a woman. The two worked incredibly well together by balancing the masculine and feminine aspects of love. This is an incredibly powerful first film for the filmmakers. I was also impressed to learn that the actors playing Timofei and Ulooji were first time actors. I thought the cast performed incredibly well and there was a great deal of screen chemistry between them. Overall, I truly enjoyed this film and would recommend it without reserve.

Shaych

My Oscar Picks

2005-02-25T00:01:00.000-08:00

Some of these are ones I think will win, while others are those that I hope will win:

Leading Actor - Johnny Depp "Finding Neverland"
Supporting Actor - Jamie Foxx "Collateral"
Leading Actress - Kate Winslet "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"
Supporing Actress - Cate Blanchette "The Aviator"
Animated Feature - "The Incredibles"
Art Direction - "The Phantom of The Opera"
Cinnematography - "The Aviator"
Best Costume - "Lemmony Snicket"
Directing - Martin Scorsese "The Aviator"
Best Editing - "Finding Neverland"
Best Makeup - "Lemony Snicket" Thought "Passion of the Christ" wouldn't surprise me
Music Score - "Harry Potter"
Adapted Screenplay - "Sideways"
Orignial Screenplay - "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"
Best Picture - "The Aviator"

I have not included all the awards because I don't know about the rest... but for what its worth those are my predictions.

Shaych

I Shot Andy Warhol (1996)

2005-02-11T23:39:00.000-08:00

Director: Mary Harron
Release: Available on DVD
IMDB

I love films about crazy artists and those who surround them. It makes me dream of the days when I can walk around and just let my internal filter go and be who I really am without having to worry. Watching any portrayal of Andy Warhol, this time played well by Jared Harris, always makes me wonder if Warhol was a little ahead or behind the rest of the world. It is quite obvious that he didn't usually operate on our plane of existence, but I am not quite sure where he was when he wasn't here.

The Story

The film follows the life of Valerie Jean Solanas (Lilli Taylor), and her struggle to get her artistic voice heard. In the beginning she writes a play called "Up Your Ass" that she wants Andy Warhol to produce. Warhol reads the play but he and his "consortium" believe the play is too dirty to produce. Then throughout the rest film, she writes what is to be know as the SCUM manifesto and tries to recruit other womyn to her cause of ending the male half of the species. Ultimately, she looses control of her life and her art and decides that the solution is to, shoot Andy Warhol.

The Film

Let me first say that this is just about as good as acting gets when it comes to Lilli Taylor's portrayal of Valerie. Her natural ability to assume this character was amazing. Additionally, while Harris' Warhol was not the best I've seen (see David Bowie in Basquiat) I was still impressed by his take on Warhol. Overall, I really enjoyed the film. If you are a fan of artists and art, then you will love it too.

Orlando (1992)

2005-01-20T23:40:00.000-08:00

Writer/Director: Sally Potter
Release: Available on DVD
IMDB

My first film of Sally Potter’s was her newest film “Yes.” When I met with her in Telluride, I was in complete awe at her writing ability and her clear focus of vision. Now, after seeing Orlando, I hope that I can once again meet with her to discuss this film. I think that I have to add Sally Potter on my list of favorite directors.

The Story

Based on Virginia Wolf’s novel Orlando, the story follows a mythical character who lives for 400 years as both a man and woman. We first find Orlando (Tilda Swinton) in Elizabethan England where he is made a favorite of the Queen. He is given the title to a home with the promise that he will never age, never fade and never die. The rest of the film follows Orlando as he eventually becomes a woman and ultimately writes a book about his/her life.

The Film

I was incredibly impressed by this film. I really think that Sally Potter understand image and word and how they work together and the importance of both. Her ability to meld word and image as poetry is simply amazing. Even when there is no dialogue, the action in the scene seems to form poetry on its own. The most apparent example of this was the winter scene where almost all the actors were on ice skates, a choice that allowed them to seem as though they were floating across the ice. There also seemed to be a color tonal change as the film progressed, the most significant of which was when Orlando made the transition from male to female.

I was also quite impressed with the way that Potter transitioned through time, though I wish that she would have spent a little more time getting us from the 1850’s to modern times. I haven’t read the book so I don’t know if the choice of not focusing on the fact that Orlando was essentially immortal was a choice of Wolf’s or Potters, but either way, I really thought it was a wise decision to make. Orlando seemed to be a wonderful character who lived with the circumstances that he/she is given.

I can’t wait to see her new film “Yes” again and I hope to be able to see many more films by this wonderful director.

Black Narcissus

2005-01-17T20:45:00.000-08:00

Black Narcissus (1947)

Dir: Michael Powell / Emeric Pressburger
Cinematographer: Jack Cardiff
Art Direction: Alfred Junge
Written by: Micheal Powell / Emeric Pressburger based on the novel by Rumer Godden
Awards: Alfred Junge: Best Art Direction Academy Award
Jack Cardiff: Best Cinematography Academy Award
Release: Available on DVD
IMDB

I recently had the chance to see a newly restored print of this film and I must say that watching it on DVD on any size screen or television, can not possibly do true justice to the film. One of many films that Powell and Pressburger directed together, this is by far my favorite. This is perhaps even my favorite special effects film of all time, even though it was made almost 50 years ago.

The Story

The story follows 5 Anglican Nuns, led by Sister Clodagh (Deborah Kerr), as they take over a Himalayan mountain palace in order to turn it into a school and hospital for the natives who live in the valley below. In addition to having to battle the cultural differences and the elements that come along with living at 9,000 feet in elevation, they have to face their own demons. Their relationships are made even more complicated by the introduction of Mr. Dean (David Farrar), their hunky link to the General who gave them the palace. Rounding out the cast are; a crazy caretaker (May Hallat), a young general (Sabu), and a confused teen Kanchi (Jean Simmons) to create the story on which the story is built.

The Film

The first time I saw this film, it was poorly projected on a screen in a classroom and I was blown away by the stunning visuals of this film. Even then, the visual elements of the film were spectacular, though only when projected from a 35mm did I realize how amazing they really were. The fact that the film takes place in the Himalayan mountains lends itself to large mountain landscapes and sweeping views of the valley below. However, what Alfred Junge managed to pull off in the art design of this film is something short of an absolute miracle. His influences are found in everything from the created mountain range to the very walls of the palace.

The most impressive thing of all is that the film was shot almost entirely at Pinewood Studios in Middlesex, England. The only scenes not filmed at the indoor studio were the valley scenes that were shot in the garden of a retired English General. Working with Powell, Pressberger and Cardif, Junge used a combination of rear projection, glass painting and matting to create the mountains and the palace. I have never seen any film that used these elements in a more effective and realistic manner. Something that apparently the Academy agreed with when they presented Junge with the Academy Award for Best Art Direction.

In addition to the special effects designed by Junge, Jack Cardiff’s cinematography and lighting design was some of the best work I have ever seen. The film was shot using Technicolor standards, though they often pushed the boundary of what Technicolor was capable of. In fact, they pushed it so far, that the Technicolor lab would frequently call the filmmakers and tell them that the previous days work was ruined and had to be re-shot. The one aspect of the color of the film that probably troubled the Technicolor technicians the most was the way that they allowed the colors to bleed into each other and create seamless pools of light and color.

The detail of color and lighting design is even reflected in the nun’s white habits. In fact, the nuns habits were never white but instead shades of cream that were made with a specific fabric that picked up the light of the room and allowed them to change ever so slightly in tint from shot to shot. In his autobiography Powell writes about how he and Pressburger wanted this film to be a symphony of sight and sound, something that they were definitely able to accomplish through sophisticated parings of picture and sound. I recommend seeing this film in any way that you can. While the visuals are best on film on the sliver screen, they are not completely lost on your screen at home.

Blade Trinity (2004)

2004-12-14T14:44:00.000-08:00

Dir: David S. Goyer
Release: Wide Release (12/8/2004)
Trailer
IMDB
Genre: Vampire, Comic Book

I am not sure exactly what I was expecting when I entered the theatre to see Blade, but whatever it was, what I actually experienced was far, far worse.

Synopsis

In the third installment (and please G-D let it be the last) of the Blade series, Blade (Wesley Snipes) is framed by the vampire coalition headed by Dannica Talos (Parker Posey) in order to capture him and finally kill him. However, their plan is thwarted by two members of another vampire hunting group, Abigail Whistler (Jessica Biel) and Hannibal King (Ryan Reynolds), when the two rescue Blade from his police imprisonment and begin to work together in defeating the greatest, first and most perfect vampire Drake (Domic Purcell). Their plan involves using a special weapon that will not only kill Drake but any other vampire in the area. In order to deliver the weapon they head directly to the vampire headquarters and fight the great battle. There is no guesswork in knowing that the "good" triumphs over the "evil" in the end and Blade rides off into the night ready to continue doing battle with the vampires of the world.

Analysis

I really enjoyed the first Blade and even most of the second film. I am not sure if I am just in a different place in my life or if this film was really that different from the other two. I really felt that Wesley Snipe's performance was not up to the character. I know that Blade is supposed to be hard and serious person but I think he Snipes could have been replaced with a mannequin and no one would have noticed. The pacing and delivery of dialog seemed amateurish and forced. This was most evident to me in the scene between Blade and Whistler (Kris Kristofferson) where I almost could feel every line and cut.

I think that just about the only performance in the film that I really enjoyed was Reynolds'. His character provided some entertainment and relief from the otherwise plain and predictable film. Besides, his being topless and quite attractive helped immensely, thus proving that putting a hot naked man in a film helps.

Overall, I suppose if you are a fan of the Blade series you have probably already seen the film, if not, wait until it comes out on video and then have all your friends over to have a whole MS3K party with it.

See you in the dark,

Shaych

A Home At The End Of The World

2004-11-29T13:00:00.000-08:00

The touching story of 3 outcasts learning to love, fit in(out), and live. Producer John Hart made brilliant decisions when choosing director Michael Mayer and keeping Author Michael Cunningham as screenwriter. The script is tight, being witty intense and upbeat all at the same time. Despite being a sad story you are not left feeling down at the end, but rather uplifted.
The casting is perfect for my picture of the characters. Robin Wright Penn shines in her clever, free spirited Claire. The character is complete and well thought out. She owns the role in her own saucy way. Newcomer Dallas Roberts is comletely at home as Jonathan. he seems to fit well with the uptight, yet fun-loving Jonathan. I would expect to see great things from him in the future.
The biggest surprise for me, however, was Colin Farrell. He was actually acting and he only lost his american accent for a brief second in the entire piece. He was more than convincing and crazy intense as Bobby, a lost soul floating who remains almost creepily positive despite a life of loss and heartache. This is likely the best I have ever seen from Farrell, and unfoutunately it may be the best i'll ever see from him. He just doesn't get enough roles like this that truly let him act.

Overall the film was well done. The DP was great. there are shots where you just want to hold the characters and make their pain go away. The pacing is nearly perfect and dialogue sewn up tight. I definately reccommend this film to anyone who has ever been outside of the norm and those who want to know what it feels like (as it does give the insight or maybe it's just that i've been on the ouside and the film really worked for me).

A Home At The End Of The World is not onlu a must see, but a must own.

PL

After the Sunset (2004)

2004-11-18T23:11:00.000-08:00

Dir: Brett Ratner
Release: Wide Release 11/12/04
Trailer
IMDB

So I am a total sucker for heist films and "After the Sunset" definitely fills the need. In this film directed by action director Brett Ratner, we encounter FBI Agent Stan Lloyd (Woody Harrleson) who has tracked his arc h-nemesis Max Burdett (Peirce Brosnan) to a beautiful island where he is living with his beautiful woman and partner in crime Lola Cirrillo (Salma Hayek). Agent Lloyd is certain that Max is on the island to complete his set and streak by stealing the third Napoleon Diamond off of a cruise ship that is only in port for 7 days. Well, I don't really have to tell you the rest of the story because we have seen it 100 times. Needless to say, in the end the good guys get what they need and the bad guys, well there really aren't any so it doesn't really matter.

I must admit there wasn't really anything outstanding about this movie but it served its purpose. I love heist films because they usually take me to exotic places and make me forget about my boring life. They distract me with beautiful people pulling of crimes with ingenious plans and get away with it all. I love a film where I can root for the bad guy, a.k.a. "The Thief," and not feel bad for it. This is why I will probably see just about every heist film made for the rest of my life. I just freaking like them.

Please Mr. Lucas, don't make me hate you.

2004-11-12T17:53:00.000-08:00

I have seen the trailer for Star Wars Episode III a number of times now, and all I can hope is that the film is half as good as the trailer. As a child, I grew up with Star Wars. They were pure movie magic and if I had to pinpoint the moment in my life when I thought I wanted to make movies, it was watching Star Wars. The latest two installments have been, to say the least, very disappointing.

It seems that George Lucas has become so focused on special effects that he has lost any interest in making good movies. For me, this is the most crucial installment of the new films. This is where we see the birth of Darth Vader (the greatest sci-fi villain of all time) and the change of the whole feel of the universe. I am expecting to be disappointed with the film, but somewhere deep inside me would love to be happy with the film. Basically, I hope George Lucas doesn't make me regret ever having seen a Star Wars film, which is exactly what is going to happen if this film is as large of a disappointment as the last two have been.

I Heart Huckabees

2004-11-04T23:44:00.000-08:00

I Heart Huckabees (2004)
Dir: David O. Russel
Release: Currently in limited release
IMDB Link
Trailer link

Wow, this movie is described as an existential comedy and that about sums it up. I just came from the film and I really think that I will need a day or two (and even possibly a second viewing) to fully process everything that I experienced. I can’t really write too much about story without ruining the film but I will share some of my other observations.

They could not have cast this film better. I really loved the chemistry between Catherine (Lilly Tomlin) and Bernard (Dustin Hoffman). The only better cast and written character in the film was Cahterine Vauban (Isabelle Huppert) as the dark morose “life sucks get over it” French connection.

There is a particular effect used in the trailer that is also used in the film that could have easily gotten old but was always used effectively so I can’t complain.

There are a number of incredibly funny moments woven artfully with moments of spiritual and emotional enlightenment. If you enjoy a good laugh, meaningful dialogue and superb acting then you will enjoy I Heart Huckabees.

Yes

2004-10-30T22:57:00.000-07:00

Yes

Title: Yes
Dir: Sally Potter
Release Date: Unknown at this time.
IMDB Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381717/

POSSIBLE SPOILERS

I am almost ashamed to admit that "Yes" was my first film of Sally Potter's however, after having seen it, I will see more.

The story follows She (Joan Allen) and her affair with a dark stranger He (Simon Abkrain). She is an accomplished scientist who struggles with her religion and cultural heritage as an Irish woman raised in the United States. Her marriage to her husband Anthony (Sam Neil) has reached a point where the two of them are barely even speaking when she meets He at a party. The film reaches an amazing climax with a heartbreaking conversation between He and She where the differences in their culture and lives (he is Lebanese) take center stage. This conversation is possibly one of the most beautiful and well acted scenes I have seen in an incredibly long time. The film is full of conflicts resulting from religion, politics and love.

What has really continued to stick with me is the writing. Sally made a very brave and wonderful choice to write the entire film in prose. I was able to meet her when the film screened at the Telluride Film Festival and when she was asked about this decision she simply replied “I wrote the film thinking wouldn’t it be wonderful if everyone talked like this.” Because all of the dialogue is in prose, the writing ads a significant layer to the complexity of the film. If someone would have told me that the film I was about to see is written entirely in prose, I would have not have thought I would enjoy it. In fact, I probably would have been worried that the dialogue would be intimidating and confusing but nothing could be further from the truth.

Her use of words and image were simply breathtaking. The performance of the entire cast was amazing. This film is an absolute must see.

House of Flying Daggers

2004-10-30T22:53:00.000-07:00

House of Flying Daggers (Shi mian mai fu)
Dir: Yimou Zhang
Release: U.S. Limited release 12/03/04
IMDB Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0385004/

As some of you reading this know, I have only recently come around to watching martial arts films. Like it or not, it was Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon that got me started. Now, I must say, I am becoming a fan. While I have begun to appreciate the action sequences in the films, what I have come to love is the imagery. The excellent use of color, texture and cinematography in these films is superb and House of Flying Daggers is no exception.

The story line was believable to a point, but close to the end it really began to fall apart. Though I must admit I was so drawn into the beauty of the film, I often forgot to read the subtitles. From the very beginning Yimou Zhang creates a beautiful world full of color that both seems to conflict and coordinate with itself. The beauty of the mise en scene extended beyond color and ventured far into the world of texture. The entire film was an acrylic painting in motion.

As well as beautiful image, the sound design of the film was superb. There are entire sequences where the image and sound blend so well I almost forgot I was watching a film. Every sound detail was attended to; down to the far off noises of a forest. In certain sequences, the sight and sound were so strong it was almost as though they provided inspiration for taste and smell. There were times when I could almost taste a scene.

If you are to see this film, see it on the largest screen with the best sound you can. It will truly envelop you in a world created by Yimou Zhang.

Jesus Titty Fucking Christ

2004-10-30T22:27:00.001-07:00

Jesus Titty Fucking Christ
10/30/04

Title: Team America: World Police (2004)
Release: This film is currently in wide release in U.S. theatres.
Rating: R
IMDB Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/

Team America: World Police was not as funny or exciting as I had hoped. I must admit I have only recently become a fan of Matt and Trey (I actually saw the movie South Park before ever seeing an entire episode of the television show), but I really expected more. These two can have their way with today’s most serious political topics while still making a point, a skill they did not really use in Team America.

Overall I think that they were rushed. I had heard that they didn’t fully realize the challenges of working with the marionettes (which I can fully understand) but it seems that they let the story and humor suffer to hold true to the vision. I would almost have preferred a lower budget and simpler type of animation and more content than the elaborate sets and sometimes dozens of puppets at a time. (Though I will say not enough films are made using marionettes.)

In spite of some of the letdowns of this film, there were a number of things I really enjoyed. For instance the line I used for the title of this post and the simplification of the world into three categories; dicks, pussies and assholes. I also really got a kick out of the obvious play and spoof on the typical action film we have all developed a love/hate relationship with. The musical numbers were good with the “montage” song being my favorite by far.

If you are a fan of Matt and Trey, you have probably already seen the film. If not, I might wait for it to be at the $1 house.

Film Commune

2004-07-31T21:15:00.000-07:00

A place for people to talk and bitch about movies.