It was pleasing that Mark finished semester with such a fun class last week, but what was even more pleasing was the superficiality. After a semester discussing and analysing the meaning of film, thoroughly exploring motivations, conflict, symbolism, etc. It was great to just talk about pure aesthetics, film as a visual medium, film, just for fun.
The Matrix was a brilliant example shown, with some of the explosions and fight scenes in that moving serving no purpose but to look cool, and boy do they look cool. Which makes you think about two different ways to get a reaction from an audience. In search of that wow moment, there are two very different ways it can occur. First through plot, a story is unfolded over a film, leading the audience to a conclusion that is expected to astonish. Plot twists are a common method that is used to create that wow moment, with Chinatown and The Crying Game, two examples that spring to mind.
Alternatively, as in The Matrix, the ‘bullet-time’ moment on the rooftop creates just as much amazement in the audience, from just a few seconds of special effects, but it’s so well done, and so innovative that it evokes a string response.
I tried to think of an example from a comedy that was pure entertainment. The one I came up with was the Gutterball sequence from The Big Lebowski. The Coen brothers are masters at creating these modern screwball comedies which leave so much room for zaniness. So when Jeff Bridges was knocked unconscious, the Coens, decided to throw in a quirky dream sequence which serves no other real purpose than to make the audience laugh. Just for fun.
I just watched Gimme Shelter, what an intriguing and amazing documentary.
Two major things struck me about it.
1) Nothing much happened. As far as narrative goes, the film basically chronicles the organization and performance of a free concert in the San Francisco area. The concert doesn’t start until about the 55 minute mark, leaving the first 2/3 of the film about the organization and logistical problems of the event, not exactly the most exciting subject material for a doco, right? But then why keep watching? What do the Maysles Brothers do to make it entertaining to the viewer?
Answer: Music!
Regularly intercut with organizational phone calls are mesmerizing musical numbers, mostly classics from the Stones with one beautiful interlude from Tina Turner, back when she was good!
My favorite interlude was this enchanting slow motion montage set to Love in Vain. Just Gorgeous.
2) The Maysles Brothers interesting method of showing the footage to members of the band. Particularly interesting because of the incident which happened to occur. With the band being at least partially culpable for the violence and disorder, the audience is left to wonder how responsible they feel for the death the took place. Which makes watching those scenes fascinating however Mick and Charlie don’t give much away except sympathy.
3) Oh and just quickly one other thing did strike me while watching the concert. The 60s may have been extremely fun and liberating but it got pretty out of control. The amount of people being stupid and fucking annoying because they were off their heads got pretty frustrating by the end. The amount of times Mick had to stop and ask the audience to stop climbing scaffolding, coming on stage, fighting got me riled up to the point where I just want to yell into the TV…chill the fuck out people you watching The Rolling Stones here. What I wouldn’t give to go back in time and see the stones in their prime. Luckily in the 70s people finally figured out its all about the music!
After missing class I read Mark’s notes to catch up and was very excited (and equally disappointed that I’d missed it) to see George Stevens’ A Place in the Sun (1951) was discussed. This film brought back a lot of memories for me and got me thinking about our relationships with films and how we can be emotionally attached to a roll of polyester.
So the story goes…two years ago I was in San Francisco and I noticed posters for the Noir City Film Festival showcasing 24 classic noir films from the 40s and 50s. I was only new to the genre and was very keen to experience some of the best examples on the big screen. Unfortunately I had largely missed the festival but I was able to rush down on Sunday for the closing night screening of A Place in the Sun, a film that I knew very little about, I had not seen any George Stevens, nor any Clift or Tylor at that point, even though I was obviously aware of them.
So I jumped on the tram and head down to the famous Castro district to the Castro Theatre, a beautiful old theatre with a stunningly ornate ceiling. I got my ticket, but was a little early for the screening, so I wandered Castro St to try and get a vibe of the place and amongst all the rainbow flags I noticed a very small cookie shop just a few doors up from the theatre. Not being able to resist one of my few vices, I walked up to the shop to get a treat for myself. When I was purchasing my white chocolate and macadamia nut cookie, the gentlemen next to me decided to change his trousers in the shop, underwear and all, to which my thought was, welcome to the castro.
I had not long settled in my seat with my cookie and hot chocolate, when the festival director came out to introduce the final film and thank what seemed like 400 people individually. Finally he wrapped up with the line “please enjoy two of the most beautiful people you will ever see on screen”, and boy was he right.
For the entirety of the film I was transfixed with the beauty of these two people, I couldn’t look away, especially in Clifts scenes, where he just captured the internal conflict of the character so well that I too was torn between two lives, two loves, and found the decision for me almost as agonizing as it was for Eastman himself. Taylor was radiantly beautiful in her scenes but somewhat overshadowed performance-wise by the gorgeous Shelly Winters, who sweet and caring Alice, for me, made the film work. Without such humility and support from Alice, it would have been easy to side with the beautiful couple, but Winters made Alice so likable that you could really believe the conflict it created with Eastman.
For the first half of the film I was thinking, this is very enjoyable, but not particularly noir-ish, but then the astounding denouement changed the complexion of the film entirely and turned a nice straight forward romance film in to a darker romance drama with a sprinkle of noir. This unexpected change in narrative really hooked me in and a great deal of the appeal of this film for me lies in the sudden shift in tone of the film, something that always evokes a reaction from the audience, whether it be positive or negative. This was used to great effect in Nash Edgerton short film ‘Bear’, which I saw last night at the St Kilda film festival.
So whenever I see A Place in the Sun mentioned, it always bring backs such a clear and fond memory, which got me thinking about how we have relationships with films, and the truly amazing moments that we share with cinema create a bond with the artwork that we never forget. I will always remember the first time I saw Annie Hall, I watched it on DVD one night, then I just couldn’t stop thinking about it, and couldn’t believe how good it was, so the very next night I watched it again. Still I was unsure how and why this film had such an effect on me, so two days later I watched it again, each time getting more out of it, and each time growing closer to the film, and then the epiphany came, I want to make people feel like Woody Allen just made me feel.
So you can probably tell I like lists, not because the numbers mean anything, because they don’t, but because it gives structure and focus to my thoughts, rather than just, here some shit I like. So after a bit of waffle I will list my personal Top 5 HBO Shows.
So I was thinking about the HBO style of television programming after class and something Mark mentioned pretty much summed up the difference between HBO and the dreaded rest. Most HBO programs don’t have a “Previously On…” prelude to their episodes, and it’s a matter of respect. A HBO show is not one to watch whilst you are doing something else, it’s not one to watch an episode every now and then, it requires the fullest of concentration for 1 hour every week otherwise you will miss important and subtle plot points. HBO know this, and reciprocate, they know that HBO viewers treat shows with respect, but more importantly viewers wanted to be treated with respect themselves, they don’t want or need a summary of last weeks episode to be shoved down their throats over and over, just like they don’t need story line and plot twists to be shoved down their throat, they like to interpret it themselves, and HBO allows them too. E.g. Did Tony’s mother Livia orchestrate a hit on her son in season one of The Sopranos, Tony seems to think so…but the viewer could conceivably see it very differently.
This mutual respect builds such a strong relationship with a show that while you are watching it, it becomes a best friend, and the characters become people you know. You can’t wait to go home every night to see what Jimmy McNulty is doing today, or what problems Nate Fisher will deal with tonight. You go on the emotional journey with the characters, feeling happy when they are happy and sad when they are sad, this is a testament to the brilliant writing of all the HBO series, but sometimes comes at a cost…I won’t tell you how shattered I was when Chris Moltisanti died.
Enough waffle, to the list!
5. Curb Your Enthusiasm
2000-Present
Awkward, Obtuse, sometimes vulgar and often offensive, but I can’t get enough of Larry David’s antics. I love the unashamedly Jewish sense of humour, and the outrageous characters, especially the acerbic Susie Green.
4. Band of Brothers
2001
One of the first HBO shows I watched when I was a teenager, Band of Brothers drew me in with the fantastically recreated action scenes that you really felt immersed in, but what kept me watching was the camaraderie. War buffs Spielberg and Hanks capture the brotherhood of war and makes you realise that they are fighting for each other more than their commanders or their country.
3. The Wire
2002-2008
The most thorough and balanced exploration of a theme I’ve ever seen. David Simon and Ed Burns, both use their experience in the Baltimore police department to create such layered and true to life characters, that you are really involved in their fate. Also the fact that you can rarely predict where the show is going or what will happen to the characters, that you are always actively engaged and never bored.
2. Six Feet Under
2001-2005
Out-in-out character drama about family and relationships. So much to enjoy with so many themes being explored in homosexuality, ageing, love, and of course death, all mixed with a fantastic black sense of humour. Extremely powerful and affecting show, with the episode where David gets kidnapped possibly the best I have ever seen on TV.
1. The Sopranos
1999-2007
Everything you want in a Television show, complex characters, superb writing and acting, layered and twisting plots, with film level production and cinematography. I was so sad when I finished the series because I knew I had no more to look forward, I just wanted to wipe my memory and watch it again. My favourite aspect was the ambivalence I felt towards Tony, at times hating him, at other times respecting him, but always understanding his motivations, if not always agreeable.
All this talk of TV in class and everyone sharing their favorite shows has got me very excited to re-watch all my personal favs over the holidays, which I will list in another post, but it also got me thinking about the difference between Film & Television and how polarizing it seemed to be. I think this is best exemplified by people’s reaction to, or in this case, lack of reaction to Mad Men, one of my all time most loved and respected shows.
With film, there is so much time, effort and money, that goes into the look and production of a film, that even if you fail to engage with the story or the characters chances are you will still get something from the cinematography, art direction, set construction, etc. Conversely, with episodic television, set design and location, art direction and costume are all kept fairly consistent so as to produce content quickly and economically. This also restricts how inventive you can be with cinematography, making most of the camera work fairly systematic. How many different camera angles and movements can you get in Jerry’s apartment?
This paring back of the process leaves TV heavily reliant on character, and as such, heavily reliant on the viewers reaction to the characters, as to whether the show is popular.
So I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised when a number of people in class where underwhelmed with Mad Men, which I thought was just universally respected as television of the highest caliber.
To me, Don Draper is a fascinating character, watching his closeted past slowly revealed and his shame of it, enabled me to better understand a lot of his motivations in the show, gaining a tolerance for his actions to a degree, but still being fucking annoyed when he would succumb to the latest broad willing to open their legs.
It’s always interesting to watch the office politics and relationships, especially when they are so subtly advanced. The regret and repressed desire Pete has for Peggy on comes out every 3 or so episodes, and the sexual orientation of artist Salvatore is a gem of a side plot, except that it’s only addressed maybe once or twice a season!
Which brings me on to Peggy, the most interesting character in Mad Men, not because of what she does or says, but because of what she represents. Her promotion from receptionist to copy writer and the subsequent friction shows how life was for women trying to advance in a male dominated society in the early 60’s. Her occasional trips to bohemian Brooklyn, or underground parties in the village hints at a nascent counter-culture on the cusp of exploding. And her relationship with Don subtly suggests a time where men and women are considered equal in everything that they do.
Other highlights include, set decoration that spot on down to the month sometimes, style and elegance in every costume, historical tie-ins that give such great context, that really helps you get into the lives of the people you are watching, and such mellifluous voices from the majority of the cast, that they almost seem to cast for timbre as well.
But most of these things are only appreciated on a secondary level that you will never get to if you don’t first love the characters, which i suppose is just a matter of taste.
After all, I found Buffy Summers to be a self-centered, whiny bitch, so you can’t please everyone.
So after Mark ambitously attempted alter the laws of the universe and squeeze a 24 minute doco into the last 20 minutes of class…and failed, I thought I would finish the film off at home. So I went to the unfailing youtube and sure enough the film was there under the interesting title of ‘Serial Killer Groupie Sondra London’.
I had already seen the fasciniating and masterful ‘The Thin Blue Line’ and was amazed at how Errol Morris avoided sensationalising any aspect of such a sensational story, and allowed multiple points of view to be explored evenly without confusing the viewer.
But it wasn’t until exploring his ‘First Person’ television series that I began to understand how important picking an engaging subject is in documentary filmmaking. Morris seems drawn to obscure, and sometimes grisly tales of the misunderstood, giving a sane and reasoned voice, to people that otherwise could be written off as deranged by society
Case in Point: Sondra London
A ‘Serial Killer Groupie’ could easily be written off as cuckoo, and understandably so, but when Morris, gives her a chance to express her feelings for the two killers she had relationships with, it becomes clear it’s a tale of love as much as it is anything else.
She admits that the crimes Danny Rolling commited were hideous, almost beyond belief but when asked why she is attracted to serial killers by Morris, she disregards the question as lame, but then when Morris follows up with, why are you attracted the Danny Rolling, she immediately retorts, “That’s different…Danny Rolling is a person”.
So like a good documentary, the viewer is asking many questions to themselves; Is it possible that this woman is so magnanimous that she can look past people faults to see the good in them? How would I react if my loved one commited a serious crime? Is it simply that love is powerful enough break through societal stigmas? Or has this woman genuinely got a screw loose?
Of course there are no answers, we are only left to ponder, but Sondra is certainly in no doubt about it
“My feelings for danny are based on what kind of person he is, it’s not because he’s a serial killer”
Following David’s great blog presentation I decided to watch Paths of Glory, one of the few Kubrick films I hadn’t seen. Already a big Kubrick fan I was actually strongly considering A Clockwork Orange for my presentation but in the end I couldn’t resist Scorsese. I would have shown the amazing sex scene that just made my jaw drop the first time I saw it. Check it.
So I already had high hopes for Paths of Glory and it certainly didn’t disappoint. It was fantastic seeing Kubrick make a classically styled Hollywood drama, showing how versatile he is, and how strong his direction was, even in his earlier days. The long tracking shot through the trenches with the soldiers lined up along the sides (he had to widen the standard army trench by 2 feet in order to fit the dolly in) or the first time we see the ant hill and he pulls back to reveal the pillbox we are viewing it through are touches of brilliance from Kubrick that he would later become well known for.
Adding to the greatness of this film are fine acting performances, especially Kirk Douglas who plays such a restrained and passionate Colonel Dax. He seems to be one of those actors who can say anything with their face. Like Brando you can be totally enthralled by them with little of no dialogue, they just have that intensity.
So I thought I would go through some of my favourite Kubrick films, in the usual list style.
5. Paths of Glory
This was probably my favourite scene from the film, pay close attention to the direction and editing, which are both nailed in this example. First Class.
4. 2001: A Space Odyssey
Such a groundbreaking film with it’s use of music, models, and era crossing jump cuts. Iconic for its transcendent visuals and special effects, audacious for it’s very slow pace and lack of conventional narrative, and just plain awesome for it’s 3 mins of black screen at the start. To quote Justin Timberlake from The Social Network, it changed film making ‘for better and for always’
3. Full Metal Jacket
I’ll never forget the first time I saw it, I was in awe of such gutsy direction starting a film with a 20 minute long, one location scene. Kubrick brilliantly captures the mental side of war with some disturbing characters.
2. A Clockwork Orange
I don’t think I breathed for the first half an hour the first time I saw it. Completely changed the rules for me on how film can be made. Perhaps hasn’t held up as well over time as some of his other work but for pure movie watching experience, it’s one of the most visceral I have ever had.
1. Dr Strangelove: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Just to prove that he can do it all, Kubrick makes one of the best satirical comedies of all time. Brilliantly funny and absurd without dipping into slapstick, also subversive but never takes itself too seriously. Stunning lead performances from Peter Sellers and George C. Scott. Just an absolute classic.
I went in to Written on the Wind (1956) with an open mind because I had genuinely never experienced a true melodrama and was keen to expand my film knowledge and experience. Then i came out thinking ‘Why oh Why did I hate melodrama so much?’ I’ve been pondering this for a couple of days now and I think the answer lies in the type of films I love. Realism, subtlety and emotional depth is usually what attracts me to a film. Unfortunately I found none of these in Sirk’s tale of lust. For me I need to relate to a film, to apply it to my own life, to see something that strikes a chord, that rings true. So I think that’s why i struggled to engage with Marylee or Kyle because they are so far over the top that I couldn’t dream of them actually being a real person.
Ok, so some people enjoy it and laugh at it for kitsch value, purely for silly entertainment and don’t take it seriously. Granted this would certainly apply to some and there were moments I did giggle at, but if i want just entertainment, something superficial I go to television. Cinema for me needs to speek a deeper truth, and not to say that Sirk’s film is superficial, underneath his overt style there is definitely some subversive and satirical ideas being explored, however the artifice distracts from the message for me, and I seem only capable of going along with a films with heavier tone.
So it was a very difficult task to choose one film to talk about for my presentation and just as difficult to choose just a single clip from that film. Honourable mentions go to 2001, A Clockwork Orange, The Graduate and Annie Hall, each of which I strongly considered but ultimately all lost out to the stunning Raging Bull.
Raging Bull for me is the pinnacle of cinema as an artform. It hasn’t dated a day since it’s release and still remains one of the most well made films I have ever had the privilege of watching.
The next challenge was to choose a section of the film to show, that I feel will adequately portray it’s brilliance. There happens to be two scenes in the movie around 2-3 minutes in length that are perfectly suited to such a brief, the first being the magnificent opening credits where Scorsese creates a moment so beautiful and enchanting that you are drawn into the film straight away and ready to go on a journey with complete trust of wherever he will take you.
But the scene I choose was the middle wedding montage, for me one of the greatest moments in cinema.
But first the scene:
The montage takes place over 2 years, 5 fights, 2 weddings, and even introduces a new character.
So why did this scene work for me and how did he do it?
1. Intermission: The montage acts as a sort of intermission in the film, coming just after the first act, after some intense fight scenes, and before LaMotta’s fall from grace, it gives the audience a break from the heavy dialogue and gives them a chance to breath and get ready for the second half of the film.
2. Colour: Deciding to use colour, when the rest of the film is black & white just blew me away on first watch, i was not prepared for it at all. Scorsese used colour for two reasons, firstly to simply make it stand out from the rest of the film, but also to give it some realism because at the time, 8mm home movie cameras were very popular.
3. Juxtaposition: Intercutting between the colour home movies and the black & white fights, is such a wonderfully crafted contrast between the two sides of Jake LaMotta. Going from anger to happiness creates almost a ballad, a strange king of duet between love and violence, two very distinct sides of LaMotta and a major theme in the film.
4. Photography: Scorsese went to great lengths to make the footage a realistic home movie. He used 16mm film to shoot and was unhappy with the initial camera positioning a movement, by himself and his DOP Michael Chapman, and he realised it was because they were to trained in filmmaking, so he gave the camera to some teamsters on the set to give it a real home movie feel. In post-production he also physically scraped the film with a coat hanger to ensure a rough, naturalistic feeling.
5. Music: I don’t have much to say about the music apart from he nailed it. A hauntingly beautiful classical piece from Silvano called Bacarolle, gives the sequence such grace that every time I watch it entrances me from start to finish.
6. Nostalgia: By using all the techniques I have listed, to give a naturalistic home movie feel, Scorsese achieves great emotional depth in the scene through nostalgia. Home movies have such a nostalgic value because they make you yearn for the good times past, they never show the bad times. It comes at a time in the movie where LaMotta has just lost a fight and tension are high in the locker room, then the music slowly fades up and you realise that boxing will come and go, but the people around Jake are whats important, and that is the central theme in the film.
Speaking about performance and acting in class got me thinking about the actors that I love, and the way that I can’t look away whenever they are on screen. Something about them just draws you in and even if they aren’t saying anything, you are still enthralled, see Cool Hand Luke as an example of this. But the actor who keeps me hooked like no other is Robert De Niro, so i thought i would share my Top 5 De Niro performances.
5. The Deer Hunter (Michael Cimino, 1978)
Some consider this film to be an epic portrayal of the psychological effect of war on the working class, i think it’s poorly paced, messily directed and struggled to engage with it on the first viewing. However I could only be impressed with De Niro, who gave a performance that was quiet and anguished on the surface but seething underneath, that kept me watching and saved a film which i could have hated.
4. The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1982)
A marvelously cynical satire exploring the price of fame, with De Niro playing a wanna be stand up comedian Rupert Pupkin. De Niro gets a chance to showcase his jovial side with this complex character while still displaying an obsessive and sinister undertones he did so well with Travis Bickle. Truly on of he and scorsese’s best collaborations with an astounding denoument.
3. Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese, 1976)
A raw, convincing, performance that captured De Niro at the peak of his powers in the 70’s. Playing a psychotic and violent Vietnam veteran, he somehow manages to make the character complex and relatable. A genuine classic for any fan of cinema that should be studied for decades to come.
2. The Godfather, Part II (Francis Ford Coppola, 1974)
Simply a masterpiece of film making and acting. De Niro gives the young Vito Corleone such depth and presence in such a relatively small screen time, that all i could think about when watching the Pacino scenes is when we are going to get the next flashback with De Niro. The fact that the performance was done entirely in italian language only adds to his veneration.
1. Raging Bull (Martin Scorsese, 1980)
One of the all time great performances in one of the all time great films, a stunning achievement in acting to give such a passionate and intense performance without ever dipping into melodrama. His psychical transformation from a middleweight boxer at his peak to an aging, overweight nightclub owner/wannabe stand-up comedian shows his commitment to the craft and gives the performance an authenticity rarely matched in cinema.