Bertolucci Again

The “Conformist”, is, as I remembered, brilliant. I’m no farther along on deciding if “The Dreamers” is a very good movie that goes off the rails or is a mediocre movie that plays above its skill level. I might revisit the question in light of this post from Filmbrain about a movie Bertolucci made in ’68, “Partner”, coving the same events.

http://www.filmbrain.com/filmbrain/2009/04/2-or-3-things-bertolucci-knows-about-godard.html

Filmbrain includes a clip from the film that is certainly outstanding, but also shows more than a little of what is weird about Bertolucci.

Malle, Moreau, Davis

Cl, do I remember you saying that you are a fan of Jeanne Moreau? I just watched Louis Malle’s 1958 “Elevator to the Gallows” with that fantastic score by Miles Davis. Strange how I can have been a fan of Davis’s music all these years and never have seen this movie. You’ve seen it?

The Visitor

This is by the same director, Thomas McCarthy, who did "The Station Agent" (Erin's pick a while back), which I thoroughly enjoyed. I saw "The Visitor" last night, with sky-high hopes. Alas, this latest effort doesn't hold a candle to "Station Agent." Dang! It has some of the same charm — an unlikely collection of people thrown together to forge unlikely relationships; moments of quiet, poignant humor; insights about how we're all really the same despite seeming so different — but it lacks any kind of forward thrust and becomes fairly tedious about halfway through, in addition to having a kind of naive political agenda and a hugely unsatisfying ending. It's worth seeing for the superb acting of Richard Jenkins in the lead role, but it has little else to recommend it. I think it's garnering a lot of praise, though, so if anyone sees it and concludes I'm full of crap, please let me know.

Bertolucci?

Does anybody have a comment on Bernardo Bertolucci or any of his films? I don’t think I have a steady opinion of him. I’m planning on rewatching his 1970 movie “The Conformist” because Annette Insdorf, in her commentary on “Red” (which is better even than I remembered, btw), brings it up several times. Unrelated to this Kieslowski project, I just watched “The Dreamers” which is certainly good but I haven’t decided if it is great since it obviously is and obviously isn’t. Did I say unsteady?

Last winter I watched “1900” which was rather un-epic for a movie of such scale and duration. My memory of “Stealing Beauty” isn’t very sharp except I remember it was gorgeously shot. I liked “The Sheltering Sky” better than I did Bowles’s book—there’s a good book and movie comparison for you Kc. And I think I fell asleep a third of the way into “Last Tango in Paris” while trying to watch it on cable very late at night.

Anyway, anybody see any of these or other Bertolucci movies?

Cabaret

Has anyone seen this recently? I watched it last night and found it a little cheesier and Liza a little less compelling than I remembered. Granted, I was a kid when I saw it last — I must have been because I had totally missed all the homo clues between Brian and Max and I imagined Liza was a great singer. Liza is just doe eyes with fake lashes, really. Hehe. The story is still good, but, man, would it be terrific as a remake! With a less silly Sally and a more appealing Kit Kat Club cast and an even darker look at the Nazis. I found Joel Grey as the master of ceremonies a little hard to watch. I even fast-forwarded through some of his numbers. I sort of wonder how authentic that was as a 1931 Berlin nightclub act — the sense of bawdiness in the film seemed a tad dreary and unsophisticated.

Atonement

This movie garnered a lot of praise, but I'm not sure why. I haven't read the book, so I can't comment on any aspect of the adaptation. I suspect people like it for its setting: pre-war, super-wealthy Britain — a vast estate with beautiful gardens, lush interiors and gorgeously bored inhabitants — then wartime Britain and France with all the somber hues and pathos. That's all quite appealing. But the story — a young man ruined by a child's false accusation of rape — doesn't really grab, at least not the way it's told. It has initial interest and a lot of potential, but then the film's pacing slows way down and seems to focus on the wrong things. Plus there's a trick ending that seems rather clunkily tacked on. Has anyone seen/read this? Care to comment?

(DW, there's a drawn-out scene on the evacuation of Dunkirk, which I remember from your Proust Questionnaire was the military event in history that most impressed you.)

No Country for Old Men

I finally saw this on pay-per-view last night. I'm eager to see the reaction of someone who hasn't read the book. My main thought was, "This is good, but it's not better than the book; it's more or less a predictable visualization of the book." I wonder what the point is. Is it really an accomplishment? I mean, obviously it's some kind of accomplishment, but what kind, really?

What is the best book-to-movie transfer you've ever seen?

Suggestion

I have a thought for a new (or at least temporary use) for Cinema Chatter. DW and KC have been doing it already -- posting film recommendations. I'm always sorry now to watch a great film and then not have anyone to share it with (I could e-mail you all, of course, but ... not the same.) KC and I were in Liberty Hall the other day comparing rentals, and it reminded me what fun it was to chat up good films.

If you've seen a good movie lately, new or old, why not post something brief about it here? I'd love to know what you're watching and what you thought of it.

A new pick!

Our first film back from hiatus will be "Hotel Rwanda," which has been called an African "Schindler's List," but hopefully won't be too depressing.

Chattered out?

I don't want the film club to die an unceremonious death in the wild blog yonder. I don't want it to die at all! It's been tremendous fun and I've learned a lot and have appreciated everyone's energy and insights — and the sharing of films that it might never have occurred to me to watch. Alas, there's no denying that interest in the blog has waned, so I guess it's time to acknowledge that and lay it to rest. However, if anyone ever has the itch to discuss a film, please let me know, and we can revive the blog from time to time or discuss via e-mail. I'll be game!

Tom and the fellas

What did you think of Tom? I alternated between liking him somewhat (as in "oh brother, what will he say next?") and dismissing him as a selfish egoist. The fact that he didn't have much feeling for Audrey until he discovered that she wanted to preserve his letters for posterity said a lot about him. Clearly, the way to his heart was through his vanity.

Which of the male characters most intrigued you? Tom the intellectual of limited resources; Nick the cynical man about town; Charlie the self-important man of sincerity; or Fred the sleepy alcoholic (I loved the scene where he was dozing in the chair but got excited when he heard the cha-cha music).

Jane Austen takes Manhattan

What do you think is the significance of all the Jane Austen references in "Metropolitan," particularly the ones to her novel "Mansfield Park," where much is made of young wealthy people putting on a play. And don't forget the Austenesque "virtuous heroine." Does our movie have a "virtuous heroine"? Is it an Austenesque satire of the upper crust or something else?

Mabel

Given the title of the movie, Mabel is nominally the central character, but we spend at least as much time with Nick and we see nothing of Mabel during her confinement in hospital. Two things I was thinking about when considering Mabel was first, would she have faired better in a different cultural setting? At times she seems, if not completely happy, at least in pursuit of joy. She wants people to dance and sing, and she plays enthusiastically with children, appreciating their unfettered glee in the moment. If Mabel lived in a more expressive culture, say Spain, would she have faired better? Perhaps escaping the label of abnormal, ill? Second, would she have done better with a more supportive and capable spouse? Likewise, would Nick have avoided his violent disintegration if he had been married to the sort of normal woman he no doubt expected?

Urban Haute Bourgeoisie (Metropolitan)

“UHB” is a delightful coinage. One thing I liked about this movie is how in the frequent discussions of the failure of the UHB, it was always assumed by everyone that the UHB were going to fail as if it was so obvious that you wouldn’t bother to question. Now the old WASP ascendancy had been losing its position for decades, but does that translate into almost certain failure for each and every young UHB? Does this peculiar conceit play an important role in the movie? Does one of the reasons that the movie has such a charmingly light tone come from the acceptance without gloom of these youth that they are doomed?

Irreducible Characters

One of the things that struck me while watching “A Woman Under the Influence” (and was even stronger as I reflected back on the film) was the arc of the character development. These characters are slowly unwrapped for us as we see deeper and deeper into their relationship. We first see Nick in a sympathetic light and only slowly realize that he doesn’t know how to deal with Mabel and her condition and only after that do we see how abusive he is. Likewise, our first view of Mabel reveals her to be full of anxiety and probably fragile. With time we see how poorly she can cope with her life and how debilitating her problems are be they the excessive fixation on her kids or her inappropriate intimacy with strangers. I like this gradual development since it keeps you focused on the characters as individual instead of just pigeonholing them as “abusive husband” and “hysterical wife”.

Are You a Public Transportation Snob?

Well, “Metropolitan” does live up to my memory of it and it is better than “Barcelona”. One thing that impressed me was not just the high quality of the dialog, but that they could pull off such improbable conversations. I had forgotten that Tom was a Fourierist and that there was another kid in the group who also knew about Fourier. That is a completely improbable event, but in this movie, that didn’t matter.

Let this first thread be the what-stood-out-for-you thread.

Metropolitan

For an interim movie, I wanted something a bit lighter than Cassavetes. When my parents were out here last summer we watched a couple of movies one of which was Whit Stillman’s “Barcelona”. I liked it but remember thinking at the time that his other film, “Metropolitan” was better. Time to find out.

This one is on Netflix and might even be in your local rental. I’ll start a thread or two over the weekend and everyone can jump in when they get the chance.

Under the Influence of Cassavetes

Did everybody get a chance to see the film? I watched it on a Criterion disk, but looking at Criterion’s site, I see that they only have released a box set of Cassavetes and not his individual movies. That might be why Netflix didn’t have it. If all of you didn’t see it, we can move on to a different movie.

This can be a first reactions thread. I have been reading about Cassavetes for years in the writings of serious film bluffs and the occasional academic. In such circles he is highly regarded and oft mentioned. But as we found with Netflix, his movies are not much in circulation as general audiences don’t seem interested in watching them. Based on the single one I just saw, I think I have an explanation for that. I found “A Woman Under the Influence” to be an excellent film and I have a high appreciation for it, but I didn’t enjoy watching it. Most movies that I consider excellent I’d be happy to watch over and over even if they are difficult. “Woman” was just too draining though. I plan on watching other Cassavetes work, but it will be a while before I come back to this one.

Mad in the 70s

For several years now I’ve been intending to watch some of John Cassavetes films. But somehow I’ve never gotten around to doing so. Cassavetes might not have produced movies popular with the movie going public, but from what I’ve been reading, he seems to have had a lasting impact on people who make movies and people who write about them.

For our next club film, we can watch “A Woman under the Influence” from 1974. It promises to be an intense movie.

Since we are coming to the end of the year, shall we start discussion of this one on January 1st?

New pick?

Whose turn is it? Driftwood?