|
SCREENING LOG
-9/20-9/26, 2004
Back to 2004 Index
Les Modeles de Pickpocket (The Models of Pickpocket) (2003,
Babette Magnolte)
This film not listed on IMDb
Would you believe that Marika Green looks as beautiful now
as she did in PICKPOCKET? And she must be 60! She's now blonde
and maybe had some work done on her face, but her eyes are
even more expressively beautiful than they were when she was
acting for Bresson. But wait until you see what happened to
Martin Lasalle. The biggest mystery left unanswered by the
film is why Martin Lasalle spent four years in New York studying
Method acting with Lee Strasberg after PICKPOCKET -- I can't
think of two acting styles that are more incompatible! As
for what the film has to say about Bresson, it doesn't really
offer any insights that Bressonians don't already know. But
what it does (quite wonderfully) is offer a new perspective
on the somewhat controversial issue of Bressonian acting,
which some people find stiff and overly deliberate, by asking
the actors what they felt about their work with Bresson. All
three of the actors in this document testify that they were
profoundly moved by the experience of having to perform so
deliberately, with such attention paid to their words and
gestures, that it gave them a new philosophy not only about
movies but about life. Anyway, I've seen two documentaries
on Bresson (the other dated from 1980 or so) and this is a
much better and more moving work. yes
Tartuffe (1926, F.W. Murnau)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0017448/
yes (#3 for 1926 between THE BLACK PIRATE and ANEMIC CINEMA)
The Thief of Bagdad (1940, Tim Whelan, Ludwig Berger,
Michael Powell)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033152/
YES (#4 for 1940 between HIS GIRL FRIDAY and THE GRAPES OF
WRATH)
Chaudhvin Ka Chand (1960, Guru Dutt, M. Sadiq)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053706/
yes (with severe reservations)
The Parson's Widow (1920, Carl Dreyer)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011607/
YES (#2 for 1920)
Berlin Alexanderplatz (1980, Rainer Werner Fassbinder)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080196/
It's a work that demands a certain degree of attention and
commitment (perhaps even faith) on the part of the viewer.
There was something about it I didn't quite trust, a kind
of threshhold that one has to cross in order to embrace what
the work slowly has to reveal. Perhaps in this sense it is
the quintessential Fassbinder film. With Fassbinder I feel
that he is always challenging the viewer to embrace him and
the uncomfortable experience of humanity he presents; he makes
it difficult to do so, and even more difficult not to do so.
Even with that as a provision to bear in mind, I stil may
not have been in the right frame of mind to fully let myself
go inside this experience. Basically I had to take a two hour
lunch break one day every week for the last ten weeks, to
go to the library to watch two episodes. It was on special
reserve which meant that I could only see it on the premises,
or else take out a special request to borrow it (and I have
enough things to watch at home). I guess also because Fassbinder
walks a very thin line between making these characters sympathetic
and human (painfully human!) and yet having them commit acts
that are either horrific or stupid.
My reactions to Biberkopf & Co. kept shifting from bleeding
heart liberal to moralistic conservative and back. I actually
didn't find the style excessive (until the epilogue) -- the
colors were garish and lurid but not really excessive, there
was a deadpan quality to the tone that kind of glazed over
everything (including my eyes at some points).
I was never bored by it, but only until episode 11 (approximately
675 minutes into it) was I really blown away by what I was
watching (when Franz almost kills Mietze). That scene really
shook me up, and it sent shockwaves throughout the entire
experience of watching it. It was my favorite part of the
whole endeavor, and yet it was not pleasant to watch by any
stretch of the imagination. I still don't know what I think
of the last 120 minutes. In one sense it goes off the deep-end
in ways that would make Ingmar Bergman's wackier exercises
in self-pity look tame in comparison; in another sense it's
fun to see him finally cut loose after 15 hours of stoic compositions
and low-key misery. A very weary YES, 10 weeks in the making
(#2 for 1980 between RAGING BULL and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK)
Kandahar (2001, Mohsen Mahkmalbaf)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0283431/
no
Sylvia Scarlett (1935, George Cukor)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0027067/
YES (#2 for 1935 between THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and RUGGLES
OF RED GAP)
Leaves from Satan's Book (1921, Carl Dreyer)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011000/
I'm not sure if Dreyer really added that much to Griffith
-- if anything his narrative is a step backward from the non-linearity
of INTOLERANCE to a conventional linear mode. But I guess
Dreyer was sticking to the idea of Satan's progress over history
-- it's just that Griffiths' idea of endless, circular time
is far more radical. But I did like how Dreyer's depiction
of Satan as a compulsive victimizer, exploiter and parasite,
sets a model for other characters (mostly the male ones) throughout
his filmography. yes (#3 for 1921 between THE KID and TWO
WISE WIVES Il
Mi Viaggio in Italia / My Voyage To Italy (1999, Martin
Scorsese)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0173772/
yes
Blind Husbands (1919, Erich von Stroheim)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0009937/
yes (#5 for 1919 between SPIDERS and DUD LEAVES HOME)
A Tale of Two Cities (1935, Jack Conway)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0027075/
yes (#10 for 1935)
Tokyo Godfathers (2003, Shogo Furuya, Satoshi Kon)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0388473/
yes
Back to 2004 Index
|
