1 Inland Empire
2 Breathless - Force Majeure - Kicking and Screaming
3 Melancholia - Sunset Boulevard
4 Mad Max: Fury Road
5 Gone Girl
6 Jarhead - Vivre sa Vie - To the Wonder
6.28.2015
Viewings (6/14-6/27)
I watched many movies over the past two weeks. I've ordered them by the quality of my cinematic experience.
6.27.2015
Timing of Posts
I've fallen behind my self-imposed deadlines by failing to enforce them. My posts are clearly structured as one each week, for the viewings of the previous. I'm not sure what I'm gonna do, but hear this. My nature has caused this site to be structured, but I realize now that I kind of hate that rigidity. I'm drawn to film precisely due to its insights into life, which often surround the imperfections "behind the curtain" so-to-speak. So this blog should evolve, hopefully content-wise especially. My interest in culture is so much larger than simply film, and I hope to somehow convey that to whoever's reading this.
It's amazing, I've once again written myself into a place I wish I wasn't. Let me be clear, don't anticipate postings, because I'm not even sure when they'll come. I really despise writing things when I'm not in the mood to write. So when I'm in such a mood, I don't write.
It's amazing, I've once again written myself into a place I wish I wasn't. Let me be clear, don't anticipate postings, because I'm not even sure when they'll come. I really despise writing things when I'm not in the mood to write. So when I'm in such a mood, I don't write.
6.25.2015
Gone Girl, David Fincher
I initially watched this film in theaters, and loved it. I immediately declared it my favorite Fincher. This month, I impulsively checked out the book at the library, and was not disappointed. Remember the insufferable cliché, "the book was muuuuuch better?" I've always interpreted that to mean, "read the book before the watching the movie." Well, that certainly didn't work for On the Road. In fact, reading the book prior made me feel outright disdain for the film. But seriously, sample size! I shouldn't use that as gospel. Gone Girl, the book, has really made me reconsider my stance on what comes first.
The book was an enjoyable read, one of the best in awhile. The alternating POVs worked well, adding so much to Nick and Amy's characters. Flynn's writing of Amy is amazing (Sorry, I had to). She's one of my favorite characters I've read, sort of a likable version of Cathy Trask. I'm still not sure if I like that comp, but I'll leave it. Nick is an oaf who never can quite shed his oafish-ness. In terms of castings, I actually liked Affleck, Pike and Coon the most, based on their representation of the book's characters. I didn't like Tyler Perry's character as much, but that was mostly due to the deviation from the book. The book really went into Bolt's insane lawyer-ness, and the cool dynamic with Bolt's wife (Their law firm is Bolt & Bolt! Seriously.). Neil Patrick Harris was also good, but the book was betttter... Desi Collings is just that guy. That guy who gets off on the misfortune of women, who relishes playing the savior. A glaring omission from the film is Desi's weird Oedipal stuff with his mom, who resembles Amy. I really didn't like Boney and Gilpin in the film, REALLY didn't like them. Flynn's description of them led me to believe they weren't simply an opportunity to plug in two more attractive faces. I wanted the authentic Missourian look, think Fargo-lite, the McDormand ilk. Gilpin was a nothing. He was the dude bro along for the ride. Boney was the detective detectiving. Gilpin was there simply for the eyebrow raise. Boney was Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive without a personality.
I don't really fault the film for not being a perfect adaptation. I just wanted certain scenes to manifest onscreen, and when they didn't I was disappointed. One scene I wasn't disappointed with (SPOILER INCOMING) was Amy's offing of Desi. It really felt like Fincher, and was unquestionably my favorite part of the film.
Outside of what I've mentioned, there's one reason I loved the book so much more. It's Amy. It's post-woodshed Amy. Actual Amy. Plot-wise, the ending of the book had some more kinks, where both Nick and Amy were essentially battling to control public perception. Amy simply outmaneuvered him. There was also the stronger reinforcement of the idea of compatibility. It became clear to me that Amy and Nick were compatible, something that seemed incomprehensible for most of the story. I can't find any reason to not fully endorse this book. Read it.
The book was an enjoyable read, one of the best in awhile. The alternating POVs worked well, adding so much to Nick and Amy's characters. Flynn's writing of Amy is amazing (Sorry, I had to). She's one of my favorite characters I've read, sort of a likable version of Cathy Trask. I'm still not sure if I like that comp, but I'll leave it. Nick is an oaf who never can quite shed his oafish-ness. In terms of castings, I actually liked Affleck, Pike and Coon the most, based on their representation of the book's characters. I didn't like Tyler Perry's character as much, but that was mostly due to the deviation from the book. The book really went into Bolt's insane lawyer-ness, and the cool dynamic with Bolt's wife (Their law firm is Bolt & Bolt! Seriously.). Neil Patrick Harris was also good, but the book was betttter... Desi Collings is just that guy. That guy who gets off on the misfortune of women, who relishes playing the savior. A glaring omission from the film is Desi's weird Oedipal stuff with his mom, who resembles Amy. I really didn't like Boney and Gilpin in the film, REALLY didn't like them. Flynn's description of them led me to believe they weren't simply an opportunity to plug in two more attractive faces. I wanted the authentic Missourian look, think Fargo-lite, the McDormand ilk. Gilpin was a nothing. He was the dude bro along for the ride. Boney was the detective detectiving. Gilpin was there simply for the eyebrow raise. Boney was Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive without a personality.
I don't really fault the film for not being a perfect adaptation. I just wanted certain scenes to manifest onscreen, and when they didn't I was disappointed. One scene I wasn't disappointed with (SPOILER INCOMING) was Amy's offing of Desi. It really felt like Fincher, and was unquestionably my favorite part of the film.
Outside of what I've mentioned, there's one reason I loved the book so much more. It's Amy. It's post-woodshed Amy. Actual Amy. Plot-wise, the ending of the book had some more kinks, where both Nick and Amy were essentially battling to control public perception. Amy simply outmaneuvered him. There was also the stronger reinforcement of the idea of compatibility. It became clear to me that Amy and Nick were compatible, something that seemed incomprehensible for most of the story. I can't find any reason to not fully endorse this book. Read it.
6.16.2015
Viewings (6/7-6/13)
Once Upon a Time in the West
Primer
On the Road
Alice in Wonderland
Claire's Knee
Nightcrawler
Whiplash
The Searchers
Prisoners
Nine films is too much for one week. I had three regrettable experiences. The first was On the Road, which I'd been looking forward to watch for quite some time. I'd read the book this winter after seeing the incredibly stacked cast for this film. The book was fine, I guess. It certainly portrayed the beat generation in a specific way, one that made me understand the beat's significance. The weird thing about the book is that I didn't relate to anyone, but I really admired what they spoke about at times. The book takes place in almost an alternate reality for me. All of the characters seemed to described peripherally, and Kerouac's style doesn't get inside motives like, say, Steinbeck in East of Eden. This ambiguity doesn't seem as present in the film. The most obvious example is Dean and Carlo's relationship, which I loved in the book. It seemed that they just "got" each other. The film made it completely homosexual, as if that was what mattered. The book also is a reflection of the title, as Sal Paradise being "on the road" is prominently featured. The grind of actually being without a permanent home base is explored. The overall feel of the book is developed through this grind. In the film, the road is minimized, mostly due to time constraints. It seems the film is just hurriedly firing through the main plot points so it can call itself an adaptation. In this way it resembles an empty skeleton of the book, as the plot isn't really changed, it just loses its significance.
The failure of this film really illuminated some issues with adaptations. For this novel to be onscreen, it needs to 4-5 hours at least to catch the spirit of the beat. Another option would be to change the story but still retain the overall feeling that's left. More attention needs to be paid to making an adaptation actual art, rather than a copy of someone else's.
My second disappointment was Claire's Knee, my first experience to Rohmer. I doubt I'll watch another, as this seemed almost to be a farce. It was a parody of Lolita in some ways, and I often found myself uncomfortable. I just don't see the artistry at all.
My third disappointment and final watch of the week was Prisoners, a polarizing film to the critics. The cast is stacked, but the writing is shit. The story has some potential, but it seems they were just accumulating a massive pile of stereotypes and clichés to create a misdirecting story that they think the audience wants. Jackman is Bryan Mills with a lesser skillset. Maria Bello is what everyone thinks the grieving mother is. Terrence Howard is Terrence Howard, who fucking cares. Gyllenhaal is good, nowhere near Nightcrawler good though. His character has solved every case he's been assigned, which, I can tell you, as a watcher of The Wire, is utter bullshit. Please try to make it somewhat believable. Or else showcase his excellent detective skills, which they didn't. I just despised how everyone fit into a caricature. This film isn't something you should experience, it was created almost exclusively to create a tug-of-war within a stupid audience.
I also watched good movies this week! I watched two westerns, a genre I hadn't ventured into in years (Django does not count). Sergio Leone really showed mastery of the genre in Once Upon a Time in the West. His awareness of how the viewer feels while watching seems so great. This is especially present in the opening scene he bathes in suspense. The actual plot was average, I didn't find layers which were concealing greater ideas. It was simply a good western.
The second western I watched was John Ford's The Searchers, which, after half a century has climbed into the top ten all-time consideration according to many critics. Not top ten western, top-TEN. I watched this expecting greatness, and it is. The landscape combined with the Technicolor look is wonderful. The plot is excellent as well, it feels meaningful. I really love all of the characters. I'm not sure if I'll continue in westerns though, at least not Leone or Ford. This is regarded as Ford's greatest accomplishment, and I'm fine if this is all I see.
I also watched Primer. I really adore the writing. For awhile I've known of my love for what sounds smart, and this is not exception. I didn't understand what happened, I doubt I ever will, I'm not sure I care.
And finally! I was able to watch Alice in Wonderland! I've been wanting to see Mia in this for awhile, and she was exactly as I'd hoped. I generally like these type of adaptations just for the light that they show. There's so much hope! I pretty much loved everything for the first 3/4 of the movie with the exception of Johnny Depp, whom I hated. The end kinda went off the rails. We just weren't able logically justify Alice's decision to kill the Jabberwocky. I just didn't see it. That not to fault the story, just the adaptation. The CGI of the Jabberwocky also sucked, but that's just existing technology, so hopefully that's better in the sequel.
My final two watches (not chronologically), were both from this past Oscar season. The first is Whiplash. Chazelle digs deep in this one, exploring what it takes to become great. I liked this film, but never attached emotionally, at least not entirely. I'm not sure what to say about this one. It's good, not transcendent.
The best film I watched this week was Dan Gilroy's Nightcrawler. Lou Bloom is one of my favorite characters in cinema. His obsessive drive to become great, in a capitalistic sense, is riveting. He's an indictment of John Galt. I apologize for that, I know nothing of Ayn Rand. But he gives the people what they want, and what they want is disturbing. His creative vision is unparalleled, and nothing stands in the way of it. His dedication to his craft is enviable. The film surrounding him is also good, but not great. There was no full circle-type evaluation of Bloom to conclude, which is why this film isn't perfect. But it still gets my full endorsement.
Primer
On the Road
Alice in Wonderland
Claire's Knee
Nightcrawler
Whiplash
The Searchers
Prisoners
Nine films is too much for one week. I had three regrettable experiences. The first was On the Road, which I'd been looking forward to watch for quite some time. I'd read the book this winter after seeing the incredibly stacked cast for this film. The book was fine, I guess. It certainly portrayed the beat generation in a specific way, one that made me understand the beat's significance. The weird thing about the book is that I didn't relate to anyone, but I really admired what they spoke about at times. The book takes place in almost an alternate reality for me. All of the characters seemed to described peripherally, and Kerouac's style doesn't get inside motives like, say, Steinbeck in East of Eden. This ambiguity doesn't seem as present in the film. The most obvious example is Dean and Carlo's relationship, which I loved in the book. It seemed that they just "got" each other. The film made it completely homosexual, as if that was what mattered. The book also is a reflection of the title, as Sal Paradise being "on the road" is prominently featured. The grind of actually being without a permanent home base is explored. The overall feel of the book is developed through this grind. In the film, the road is minimized, mostly due to time constraints. It seems the film is just hurriedly firing through the main plot points so it can call itself an adaptation. In this way it resembles an empty skeleton of the book, as the plot isn't really changed, it just loses its significance.
The failure of this film really illuminated some issues with adaptations. For this novel to be onscreen, it needs to 4-5 hours at least to catch the spirit of the beat. Another option would be to change the story but still retain the overall feeling that's left. More attention needs to be paid to making an adaptation actual art, rather than a copy of someone else's.
My second disappointment was Claire's Knee, my first experience to Rohmer. I doubt I'll watch another, as this seemed almost to be a farce. It was a parody of Lolita in some ways, and I often found myself uncomfortable. I just don't see the artistry at all.
My third disappointment and final watch of the week was Prisoners, a polarizing film to the critics. The cast is stacked, but the writing is shit. The story has some potential, but it seems they were just accumulating a massive pile of stereotypes and clichés to create a misdirecting story that they think the audience wants. Jackman is Bryan Mills with a lesser skillset. Maria Bello is what everyone thinks the grieving mother is. Terrence Howard is Terrence Howard, who fucking cares. Gyllenhaal is good, nowhere near Nightcrawler good though. His character has solved every case he's been assigned, which, I can tell you, as a watcher of The Wire, is utter bullshit. Please try to make it somewhat believable. Or else showcase his excellent detective skills, which they didn't. I just despised how everyone fit into a caricature. This film isn't something you should experience, it was created almost exclusively to create a tug-of-war within a stupid audience.
I also watched good movies this week! I watched two westerns, a genre I hadn't ventured into in years (Django does not count). Sergio Leone really showed mastery of the genre in Once Upon a Time in the West. His awareness of how the viewer feels while watching seems so great. This is especially present in the opening scene he bathes in suspense. The actual plot was average, I didn't find layers which were concealing greater ideas. It was simply a good western.
The second western I watched was John Ford's The Searchers, which, after half a century has climbed into the top ten all-time consideration according to many critics. Not top ten western, top-TEN. I watched this expecting greatness, and it is. The landscape combined with the Technicolor look is wonderful. The plot is excellent as well, it feels meaningful. I really love all of the characters. I'm not sure if I'll continue in westerns though, at least not Leone or Ford. This is regarded as Ford's greatest accomplishment, and I'm fine if this is all I see.
I also watched Primer. I really adore the writing. For awhile I've known of my love for what sounds smart, and this is not exception. I didn't understand what happened, I doubt I ever will, I'm not sure I care.
And finally! I was able to watch Alice in Wonderland! I've been wanting to see Mia in this for awhile, and she was exactly as I'd hoped. I generally like these type of adaptations just for the light that they show. There's so much hope! I pretty much loved everything for the first 3/4 of the movie with the exception of Johnny Depp, whom I hated. The end kinda went off the rails. We just weren't able logically justify Alice's decision to kill the Jabberwocky. I just didn't see it. That not to fault the story, just the adaptation. The CGI of the Jabberwocky also sucked, but that's just existing technology, so hopefully that's better in the sequel.
My final two watches (not chronologically), were both from this past Oscar season. The first is Whiplash. Chazelle digs deep in this one, exploring what it takes to become great. I liked this film, but never attached emotionally, at least not entirely. I'm not sure what to say about this one. It's good, not transcendent.
The best film I watched this week was Dan Gilroy's Nightcrawler. Lou Bloom is one of my favorite characters in cinema. His obsessive drive to become great, in a capitalistic sense, is riveting. He's an indictment of John Galt. I apologize for that, I know nothing of Ayn Rand. But he gives the people what they want, and what they want is disturbing. His creative vision is unparalleled, and nothing stands in the way of it. His dedication to his craft is enviable. The film surrounding him is also good, but not great. There was no full circle-type evaluation of Bloom to conclude, which is why this film isn't perfect. But it still gets my full endorsement.
6.08.2015
Viewings (5/31-6/6)
Tokyo Story
Masculin Féminin
Hot Girls Wanted
The 400 Blows
Although not rated the highest, Masculin was probably my favorite film of the week. It was only my second Godard film, but once I get further into his canon, he may become my favorite director. The portrayal of the female characters, whether realistic or not, is highly intriguing to me. Tokyo Story is just a phenomenal portrayal of humanity and culture. Characters try to tow the line between duty to family and societal demands. Strikingly, those with most success find themselves disconnected from family. The portrayal of Japanese culture is also alluring. I watched The 400 Blows because it's considered the defining film of the French New Wave. My overall experience wasn't great, which was equilibrating for me. I've watched too many enjoyable films lately, causing me to wonder if my enjoyment was from some outside environmental factor. But 400 brought it into context.
Obviously, Hot Girls Wanted is not like the other three films. It's a documentary about amateur porn. I found it particularly revealing in understanding females' reasoning for entering that world. It was an experience I found profound because it brought to consciousness what I understood in my fragmented subconscious. I see this world with more clarity now. This film seems like an opportunity for people to learn to empathize with porn actors rather that reinforcing the stigma. This world will remain inevitably, so it's important to eliminate the destructive power relationships within it. Man and woman must be presented as equally human.
Masculin Féminin
Hot Girls Wanted
The 400 Blows
Although not rated the highest, Masculin was probably my favorite film of the week. It was only my second Godard film, but once I get further into his canon, he may become my favorite director. The portrayal of the female characters, whether realistic or not, is highly intriguing to me. Tokyo Story is just a phenomenal portrayal of humanity and culture. Characters try to tow the line between duty to family and societal demands. Strikingly, those with most success find themselves disconnected from family. The portrayal of Japanese culture is also alluring. I watched The 400 Blows because it's considered the defining film of the French New Wave. My overall experience wasn't great, which was equilibrating for me. I've watched too many enjoyable films lately, causing me to wonder if my enjoyment was from some outside environmental factor. But 400 brought it into context.
Obviously, Hot Girls Wanted is not like the other three films. It's a documentary about amateur porn. I found it particularly revealing in understanding females' reasoning for entering that world. It was an experience I found profound because it brought to consciousness what I understood in my fragmented subconscious. I see this world with more clarity now. This film seems like an opportunity for people to learn to empathize with porn actors rather that reinforcing the stigma. This world will remain inevitably, so it's important to eliminate the destructive power relationships within it. Man and woman must be presented as equally human.
6.01.2015
Viewings (5/24 - 5/30)
The Act of Killing
8 1/2
Persona
Breathless
It's rare that I have a week like this one: Three tour de force viewings in a row. I was previously apprehensive about entering into classic cinema, but now I'm on course to to go full criterion. I'm undoubtedly going to watch significantly more of Bergman, Tarkovsky, maybe more Fellaini, and perhaps even Kurosawa. I also hope to continue with von Trier, Vinterberg and more Dogme-type realism.
But my most profound discovery of the week was Godard, specifically the pleasure of the French New Wave style. I expected to respect the film, but I was in no way prepared for the emotional firestorm that it is. My preconceptions about my favorite "type" of film have been shaken. I've never loved something with this level of satire. The archetype of the strictly dark melodramas has been shattered. This moment seems to almost signify a rite of passage for me. I feel like I'm beginning to understand what makes films great.
I'd love to reach this point in books. It'll take some time, but I'd like to begin completing a book every two weeks or so. If I could do this while watching 2-3 movies a week, there could be balance, which is ultimately what I strive for.
8 1/2
Persona
Breathless
It's rare that I have a week like this one: Three tour de force viewings in a row. I was previously apprehensive about entering into classic cinema, but now I'm on course to to go full criterion. I'm undoubtedly going to watch significantly more of Bergman, Tarkovsky, maybe more Fellaini, and perhaps even Kurosawa. I also hope to continue with von Trier, Vinterberg and more Dogme-type realism.
But my most profound discovery of the week was Godard, specifically the pleasure of the French New Wave style. I expected to respect the film, but I was in no way prepared for the emotional firestorm that it is. My preconceptions about my favorite "type" of film have been shaken. I've never loved something with this level of satire. The archetype of the strictly dark melodramas has been shattered. This moment seems to almost signify a rite of passage for me. I feel like I'm beginning to understand what makes films great.
I'd love to reach this point in books. It'll take some time, but I'd like to begin completing a book every two weeks or so. If I could do this while watching 2-3 movies a week, there could be balance, which is ultimately what I strive for.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)