Monday, 23 March 2009

Night Mail
(1936)

100%

Oddly-fascinating documentary that finds poetry, music and laughter in the story of the London to Glasgow "Postal Special" – the GPO Film Unit's biggest commercial success. This film elevates watching people work to a new art form and so possesses a number of intellectual pretensions, not least of which is the music of Benjamin Britten and the poetry of W H Auden – a remarkable fusion of music & sound, verse & voice.

This film shows why documentary is such a Cinderella medium since few non fiction works possess its sense of montage as a storytelling device nor its evocative camerawork. They usually merely indulge in the boring relation of facts without the sense of poetry necessary to make them above average or even great. Unfortunately, this tendency afflicts the documentary films that accompany Night Mail on this collection.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Saturday, 21 March 2009

Bête Humaine
[Judas Was a Woman;
Human Beast]
(1938)

80%

In some ways a depressing view of human existence but one that's most often true. The characters are enmeshed in their own problems and believe that scapegoating others and, thereby, creating more problems can provide solutions. They refuse to accept that problems are always caused by a refusal to face problems. None enjoys healthy sexual relations and the sexual jealousy resulting from forcing others to love you leads – inevitably - to murder.

However, the film extracts maximum empathy from the situations presented. Not an alienating experience, but one in which you could easily imagine yourself being caught up in. The feline Simone Simon plays the ultimate femme fatale; sleeping with men in the hope they'll be so grateful, they'll murder her husband! Jean Gabin is her latest snare - a star incapable of giving a bad performance.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Rumble Fish
(1983)

60%

A movie about teenage males that stylishly gets the fact that time seems to be standing still while passing at a rate of knots. Its impressionistic take on youthful ennui tends toward the pretentious since its character analysis is the essential theme of this drama rather than any plot device. Growing up means finding one's place in the world; while avoiding pseudo gang leaders with nowhere to lead one because one possesses a childlike need to be led.

There is also madness here, as a result of loveless childhoods, from this who lack the courage to liberate themselves with a pained obsession with the past; leading to a lack of a future.

Ultimately, this is an intelligent exercise in style (with the addition of pertinent references to Greek mythology) from a great film director treading water. The high contrast photography is crisp, clear and long focused; creating a strong illusion of depth. The performances are excellently charismatic – especially Mickey Rourke as the doomed Motorcycle Boy – and the music toe tapping.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

House of Mirth
(2000)

80%

Subtle story telling of a woman brought down by her own folly, not helped by an unforgiving society; transacting with others but refusing to interact with them. Although the characters think their world entire, they merely manifest a narrow, upper class White culture in which how one is seen is more important than who one is.

Seeking others' acceptance here leads to schizophrenia. Conformance with unwritten social rules is impossible and so designed to keep one focused on others' happiness; yet no one would be happy if everyone actually obeyed such self destructive injunction. Wanting it both ways means playing the public game by rules they privately disobey; desiccated people seeking to make others just as miserable; secretly hating their lonely, mutual dependence on contacts rather than friends.

The apt direction is as emotionally repressed as the characters; the acting variable. Gillian Anderson is an appropriately mannered revelation; proving she can perform beyond an inexpressive persona to reach her character's core.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Peter Shaffer’s Amadeus
Director’s Cut
(1984)

80%

A fascinatingly rich and complex movie about mediocrity and, in religious terms, the faithlessness that accompanies it.

Here, an inferior artist (Antonio Salieri) tries to do a deal with God to provide himself with the superior musical skills of Mozart in exchange for believing in Him. This quintessential lack of faith forms the basis of a tale about the social snobbery and so called good taste mediocrities use to compensate for their lack of ability. Yet using music as a means of gaining favours from God is the false virtue that ensures the favours are never gained.

This story neatly encapsulates the issues of sacrilege, blasphemy and the resultant lack of humility of a man who hates not Mozart but God: For those who cannot create can only destroy.

Ambition is greater than talent here in one who recognises the genius he, himself, lacks. This is a clever riposte to dilettantes who think talent must be hard work and so desire to stifle genuine, facile ability. Leopold Mozart parasites off his son by refusing to allow him to grow up to solace the resentment at his own lack of achievement. Similarly, enviously rationalising fellow composer Salieri blames his own mediocrity on Him rather than his own lack of self respect: His Machiavellian conflict is more with his idea of God than it is with men or Man.

However, there's not enough here about the nature of creative genius – only Peter Shaffer's own envy of greatness. He says it is not genius that is akin to madness but mediocrity – the mad refuse to match ambition with talent (vainly avoiding personal frustration) by achieving the self knowledge (& self acceptance) sanity requires.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Election
(1999)

RATING:100%
FORMAT:DVD



Exceptional revenge comedy featuring the ever excellent Reese WITHERSPOON - ably complemented by an ensemble of superlative character actors. School life in the American West is shown in all its gory detail: Romances between teachers & students; homosexuality; jealousy; social fitting in; and, conflicts between haves & have nots.

This honest depiction of people is ably summed up in the common conflation of morality with ethics, that’s shown, anyway, to be only preaching – not practicing – for most of the movie’s length. The main characters use voiceover to communicate their real thoughts and to show that democratic political life is largely a pointless struggle that only benefits the politicians since it’s not ethical. The only real issue is winning elections, at all costs, not in actually changing anything for the better (or worse). In any event, each character is shown from their own point of view; leaving us to decide whether they are good, bad or just like us.

This veracity is partly a flaw since the comic blandness of most of the characters means the film inhabits a not fully thought out no man’s land between serious drama and laugh out loud comedy. A structural and thematic uncertainty that is largely solved by voiceovers that are often funnier than what we actually see on screen. The attempt to satirize US presidential elections also doesn’t quite strike the right note since this movie is less of a political satire and more of a high school romp about teenage self discovery.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Letter from an Unknown Woman
(1948)

100%

Superlative and profound romance from Max Ophuls (& Stefan Zweig) about lost opportunities and our greatest loves. Joan Fontaine is fantastic as the one man woman whom we see at 12 years of age, 20 and 30. She plays her character in all three time periods excellently and is thus believable in all three. Because it's her story, she has to be that good to command our attention and get us to believe she possess the emotions she claims to feel.

The film's only problem is the spectacle within the spectacle aspect of a story told in the 1st person. We must take the point of view on trust – which, in fact, we do - and yet there is a sense that the director expects too much from his audience in such identification. As if the spectacle itself is the only necessary proof of the veracity of what we see, despite its emotional contrivance.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Friday, 20 March 2009

Elephant
(2003)

80%

As usual, Gus van Sant queries the nature of cinema, itself, by questioning what actually constitutes a film in this impressionistic account of a high school tragedy.

Told from multiple and repeating viewpoints, we witness to the emptiness of a Western culture apparently unable to offer a raison d'être to its young other than the relentlessly obsessive pursuit of materialism. The style is cold blooded because the acts depicted were; making this an excellent marriage of form and content.

Spending so much time simply and repeatedly observing the characters helps the audience to see the victims as people rather than as mere statistics; emphasizing the sheer horror and scale of the tragedy. The long, interleaving takes and general lack of plot advancing dialogue helps convey a sense of pure film as each person moves slowly and inexorably toward a rendezvous with their common fate.

The strongly suicidal aspect of the killings here is brought to the fore in a low key and suspenseful manner especially in comparing actual mass murder with that commonly found in violent computer games. The most troubling aspect of these crimes is that they are almost always committed by affluent Whites who, despite possessing all the privileges that accompany living in discriminatory cultures, choose to throw it all away in a spree of wanton mayhem.

The movie's very existence indicates that when Whites engage in such behavior it is considered unusual enough (even though it's more usual for them to do it) to warrant cinematic attention, since the reasons are deemed non obvious. Yet, on the rare occasions Blacks do the same, the reasons are assumed to be the result of genetic and cultural inferiority – so that the ritualized handwringing and self questioning never then takes place among Whites.

The lack of creative self reflection among Whites themselves is a serious flaw in an otherwise good film seeking to explore a difficult contemporary issue. (There is, for example, no reference to the fact that a Special Weapons & Tactics' police team at a similar incident was stood down because it could have mean upper middle class White teenagers being killed when they are unlikely to have had any compunction had they been Black teenagers.)

That there is something rotten in the state of Denmark is self evident but just what that might be is never explicitly rendered here, so we're left with our own pre existing thoughts on the subject. One of the most horrifying movies you will ever see.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Adulthood
(2008)

60%

Noel Clarke's sequel to Kidulthood sees his hero previously jailed for manslaughter being released and finding that the relatives of the man he killed want him dead as well.

The performances are superbly gritty and accurately capture a time and a place among the poorer sections of West London society. The style is slick and well focused on the plot in hand but the drama doesn't really understand itself. The story feels like a collection of second hand clichés about an ex convict going straight faced with a past he's not allowed to leave behind so that he cannot move forward. Worse, these are inadequately integrated into a comprehensive thematic concern with the ethics and morality that separates the men from the boys. This is more about fear of adulthood than an embracing of it.

A related problem is that Noel Clarke has cast himself in a role that requires him to become something of a martyr. This intimates narcissism on his part rather than an in depth exploration of such a character, which partly spoils the denouement. This is, in fact, rendered a little contrived and artificial as he cannot get over the fact that he's playing the part of a man who's playing the part of a tough criminal who's trying to find a new act.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Strada
[The Road]
(1954)

RATING:100%
FORMAT:DVD



Giulietta MASINA, the greatest tragi-comic actress of them all, stars in this superlative tragi-comedy. Part Harpo Marx, part Stan Laurel & part Charlie Chaplin, she brilliantly essays the role of an unworldly naïf as a mixture of child woman and pixie. Her emotionally-expressive, clown like acting serves the drama well as she appears alternately pathetic and profoundly spiritual in a film that is as much about performing in our everyday lives as it is about those who make a living from being performers.

Richard BASEHART and Anthony QUINN are also excellent as men who either recognize the faults in others because they do so in themselves or as those who refuse to see faults in others to avoid seeing their own.

This humanist masterpiece has few equals, especially with the sheer simplicity of its plotline; offering few distractions from the movie’s central premise that includes sexual jealousy, Christian spirituality & alcoholism.

The central couple are crucially-dependent upon one another, yet the male half refuses to recognize this and so is physically abusive; the female half accepts it as part of her lot in life - with tragic results.

In this tale of the growing pains of a young woman, we are finally confronted with the impossibility of ever evading the human conscience, since it is in everything we do, no matter how tough we think you are.

Nino Rota’s score – as usual – perfectly complements and underpins the emotions depicted by the actors.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Wednesday, 11 March 2009

Shine a Light
(2008)

80%



The ultimate rhythm and blues tribute band, The Rolling Stones, prove geriatric White rockers can still do it and, in the process, continue their work of popularizing the mix of blues and jazz to a receptive, predominantly White audience. Because they aren't Black, The Stones deliver the musical goods to an audience that would be less likely to idolize Black performers for playing exactly the same music; playing it better because it's part of their culture. The Stones love the emotional affect of their music but do not understand from first hand experience the causes of it. For that they would have to be both Black and American. The fact that at one point Mick Jagger calls his audience 'Crackerheads' reveals that he is quite aware of this racial aspect both to their musical choices – appropriated from another culture since White cultural forms lack the necessary urban grit – and to the audience itself; comprised of Whites. Their essentially ersatz quality is why Blacks don't think much of The Rolling Stones.

However, having said that, The Stones very much admire the other culture's music that they implicitly champion in it being rather obvious that they love it through the sheer bravura of their performances. This, despite the fact that they no longer need the money and are no longer hungry for success and fame. They give today's younger performers a good run for their money and Jagger, in particular, is the consummate performer who refuses to bow out gracefully. All this leaves the question: Why aren't pop performers today this good?

Director Martin Scorsese does well to avoid the clichés of performance documentaries, since he has experience of such things, and the style is brisk, focused and to the point with songs interleaved with archive interviews of the band in their heyday.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Equus
(1977)

80%

An overly protective mother, here, means not enough contact for her children with external reality to make that reality real for them; hence, the violent behaviour of the son. This film is all about worship; of pornography, of horses and of Jesus, and of how any idolatry can make us shut out the truth as a substitute for happiness. The iconoclastic cure helps the son take control of his own life rather than to effectively blame the thing worshipped. The Western culture depicted here seeks to avoid pain, which can only be achieved by separating thought from emotion; making emotions causeless and thoughts unwanted.

A stagey adaptation of a stage play about the baleful, sexually repressive influence of Christianity among Western Whites. Such attitudes, learned young, can stay with you your entire life despite the fact that they can never be a fundamental part of yourself since they originated in the minds of others. The disturbing material is thought provoking as it details difficult emotional journeys both for the clients and those acting as emotional travel agents – the psychiatrists.

An uneven film of some brilliance featuring excellent performances from Richard Burton and Peter Firth – the supporting cast is also superb.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

BOSTON LEGAL:
Season One
(2004)

80%

An unusually good American drama-series that is actually more of a serial since its episodes often end on a cliffhanger and issues continue in later episodes. This is not just a dramatic contrivance, but the presentation of real-life ethical dilemmas that make the watching of succeeding parts kind of compulsory.

As usual with US tv, each show has to fit into a predetermined time-frame while the screen goes black at regular intervals for edited-out commercial breaks. It's also replete with annoying shakycam establishing-shots of the city that does little more than irritate to no true purpose. These make each programme appear a little too formulaic for its own good but the acting, particularly of James Spader and William Shatner – along with the quality of the writing – makes the whole thing very watchable. The characters are actually three dimensional and we get to learn more about them as the series progresses. This show is also willing to make the characters unlikable by revealing skeletons in their closet and/or the fact that they are emotionally repressed in some way.

The actresses, however, are the usual tv second-raters who could not make it in the more exacting medium of the cinema; retaining unchanging expressions no matter the emotions the script requires them to evince! (Graduates of the Roger Moore School of Acting!) They merely exist to have sex with the actors as well as to prove that male writers cannot write convincing female parts. Close-ups of hands are designed to conceal poor acting ability but merely serve to reveal it.

The most unpredictable aspect is the humour that springs naturally from the characters rather than being merely a gimmick: A black humour based on experience with real and rather perverse criminals. Surprisingly intelligent and insightful and genuinely comic because it does not try too hard to make you laugh. A series aimed at the more intelligent and well educated viewer that rarely disappoints in any major way.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Tuesday, 10 March 2009

White Like Me
(2004)

80%



Insightful-because-anecdotal look into contemporary White supremacy - written by a White.

Although author Tim Wise lacks first-hand experience of most racist practice (which he admits), he understands that White racism can cripple Whites into never becoming fully human - his basic thesis. He also recognizes - this time from the personal experience of being castigated as a “race traitor” - that a White stepping outside of the preordained attitudes of his culture invites malice from his fellow-Whites for giving the game away.

Moreover, the perspicacity of Wise also reveals White anti-racism and political correctness as largely frauds designed to fool Blacks into believing White racism is caused by Blacks rather than by Whites. (White anti-racism is done for Blacks [or to them] rather than with them because of the implicit belief that Blacks cannot stand on their own two feet, otherwise, and so anti-racist Whites are seeking a gratitude they are not owed.)

This clever book understands the full complexity of the system of institutional racism within which we are all enmeshed in the Western world, yet only posits solutions based on goodwill. Because racism is itself not a function of goodwill these solutions are hardly likely to work since they require Whites to renounce unearned privileges and cut the throat of the goose laying them golden eggs. Because this is rather unlikely, any sincere rapprochement between the two cultures of White and non-White is extremely unlikely. This is why personal friendships between peoples with differing privileges are so fraught because no matter how much a White likes a Black, the White can always turn away from the friendship if they find that the enhanced ability to enjoy the material privileges of living in Western civilization are more to their liking than friendship. (This issue has much in common with other areas of unearned - allegedly genetic - privilege such as social class and gender.)

That a White has the courage to face these issues is little short of a miracle since White supremacy relies fundamentally upon the twin-track policy of denial combined with blaming Blacks for their comparatively-poorer economic situation; ie, collaboration with White supremacy. The most important issue for Whites in dealing with their racism is that of guilt and shame - which emotionally cripples most into inactivity and into accepting a status quo that materially benefits them to the disadvantage of others.

Thus, Whites are trapped within an economic system that denies them self-knowledge, since they can only think about themselves comparatively. They can never know if they are any good at anything because they have been given automatic birthrights against which they cannot test themselves, objectively. Employed Whites can never know for sure if the job they do is because of their skills, abilities and experience or simply because of their skin color. This lack of genuine self-knowledge inhibits personal growth and makes White culture quintessentially immature and ultimately self-destructive.

The point of this book here is that by renouncing the benefits of their racism, Whites will lose their racist privileges and gain a healthy self-respect; while also renouncing the guilt and shame of their unearned position: The same as a recidivist redeeming himself and deciding to go straight.

The author also raises the question of the fact that White self-proclaimed anti-racists are often the biggest racists because of this denial-of-reality. Dealing with issues of employment housing, education and crime, the author shows that White racism is a tax on Blacks and a subsidy for Whites, that ultimately destroys both since Whites become complacent and lazy about the fate of their culture because they assume an allegedly-superior culture cannot fail. Because all Whites benefit from racism, it is hypocritical for any White to loudly-proclaim their abhorrence of it while never renouncing its benefits

For Blacks, books like this can be dull reading since the book contains self-evident truisms that Whites find difficult to face about themselves, yet which Blacks experience continuously. This makes the book longwinded when it should be to-the-point, as only a book written by someone trying to face the truth about himself can be.

White Like Me contains much educated guesswork that never, however, properly considers whether racist Whites can stand on their own two feet without the psychological prop of racism. Wise does not show how this desire for superiority can be effectively renounced. In this, Wise tacitly compares White racists with nicotine or alcohol addicts failing to repudiate their suicidal temperaments because they have nothing else to replace them with. Wise recognizes that White racists desperately try to avoid the inevitable changes in White culture that would be brought about by such changes, because those individuals possess few underpinnings in reality. An obsession with false imperial pride - past and present - based on myths of progress, civilization, liberalism, education & enlightenment now sound like the shrill and hollow delusions they always were.

It is here that the book spoils itself by being angry (rather than suitably tendentious) at the systemic nature of White racism that makes it appear difficult to remove - like a red wine stain from a white blouse - both from others and, most especially, from oneself. Are we all recovering racists, perhaps? Yet, misplaced anger cannot adequately deal with the psychological challenges presented by such racism. Yet this book’s great value lies in its not being a guilt-trip for the author nor an example of whining self-pity that almost all writing about White racism by Whites is.

This is a much-needed book since Whites are more likely to read it when they would ignore the same topic discussed by a Black. Black authors like Frantz FANON, Malcolm X and James BALDWIN are rarely-stocked by predominantly-White libraries, even though their insights into White racism are far profounder than those of Wise. Thus, Blacks will find little here to surprise them about endemic Western racism since it is merely preaching-to-the-converted. However, Wise does honestly deal with his own inevitable “race treason” and, in so doing, implies Whites would denounce a Black author with a similar point-of-view as “playing the race card”, which they could not do to a White author. Thus, paradoxically, Wise fully exploits the racial privilege this affords him to criticize that very racial privilege.

Tim Wise admits he is a not a great writer - and he certainly is not. Nevertheless, his conversational tone and his solid reasoning get him through unmasking the fact that racism is the Whites’ heart of darkness. Would it take, for example, a book written by a man about women to convince sexists to stop being misogynists? Or, can only women write such books?

That racism is a leading pathology in White culture is well-expressed and noted for its honesty. Such a cultureless culture cannot face its past and has no future unless it does so: A culture defined by its negation of others, superficially judged by externals (not inherent) attributes. To define yourself by what you are not is cultural genocide; tempting Whites to fill the cultural void with positive discrimination for themselves - negative for others - that they have come to depend on like a junkie seeking a heroin fix.

A book to help a Martian understand the nature of Whites.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Wednesday, 4 March 2009

Dr. Strangelove
or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
(1964)

100%

The ultimate cold war paranoia comedy that brilliantly sends-up the abstract absurdity of nuclear deterrence through topflight lead performances and quality screenwriting. George C Scott gives the best performance, here, as a not-very-bright military man who prefers to use ten words when one would have sufficed.

Where the film really scores is in its clear-sighted focus on the causal relationship between thwarted sexuality and aggressive military action. The phallic symbols of atom bombs, Nazi salutes and machine guns are on full display as men vie with each other (ultimately) to show not who is the most well endowed, but who is the most sexually-insecure.

Interestingly, Peter SELLERS’ Dr Strangelove is the classic racist who has to try to hide his true feelings while desperately seeking to express them. His attempts to stop his willfully-disobedient right arm from saluting his Fuehrer are one of the many reasons SELLERS was such a superb comic actor.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

House of Mirth
(2000)

80%

Subtle story telling of a woman brought down by her own folly, not helped by an unforgiving society; transacting with others but refusing to interact with them. Although the characters think their world entire, they merely manifest a narrow, upper class White culture in which how one is seen is more important than who one is.

Seeking others' acceptance here leads to schizophrenia. Wanting it both ways means playing the public game by rules they privately disobey; desiccated people seeking to make others just as miserable; secretly hating their lonely, mutual dependence on contacts rather than friends.

The apt direction is as emotionally repressed as the characters; the acting variable. Gillian Anderson is an appropriately mannered revelation; proving she can perform beyond an inexpressive persona to reach her character's core.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Monday, 2 March 2009

Marseillaise

Also Known As/Subtitle:
Unknown
Year:
1937
Country:
France…
Predominant Genre:
Historical
Director:
Jean Renoir…
Outstanding Performances:
None
Premiss:
A news-reel like movie about early part of the French Revolution, shown from the eyes of individual people, citizens of Marseille, counts in German exile and, of course, the king.
Themes:
Alienation
Communism
Courage
Destiny
Family
Friendship
Humanity
Identity
Loyalty
Nostalgia
Personal change
Political Correctness
Self-belief
Self-expression
Social class
Snobbery
White culture
Similar (in Plot, Theme or Style) to:
Unknown
Review Format:
DVD

How Politicians See Things

Elliptical, tableau vivant style narrative with little in the way of developed characters. The archetypes on show, however, provide a salutary history lesson about the French Revolution and, by extension, all revolutions. They do so without the unnecessary distractions of a love story set against the backdrop of a political upheaval getting in the way of the straightforward retelling of historical facts.

This is more of a politicians' eye view of history, seen as struggles between masses of individuals rather than the individuals themselves. The latter are taken as read with little distracting emphasis.

The acting style is overblown to match the hyperbole of the events shown and the emotions they arouse. While the political ideals discussed are presented soundly in terms of a dialectic regarding historical inevitability.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Mischief Night
(2006)

100%

More cultural exposition than story in this very funny race relations', social class and state of the nation comedy. However, trying to pack too much in to its 93 minute running time, the film tends to skate over issues of personal identity and culture rather than fully explore them.

Nevertheless, the movie's depiction of a country sharply divided along racial lines is extremely accurate and very telling, as the turf wars within and between drug dealer gangs matches the racial and religious tensions between the various Asian communities and Whites. Yet, the cultures are also shown as unavoidably mixed.

The humor helps make the movie's more depressing content (junkie mums, pedophiles, alcoholism, etc) bearable; while enabling us to focus on that very content so we can understand it – and ourselves, as British - better.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Déjeuner sur l’Herbe
[Picnic on the Grass]
(1959)

RATING:80%
FORMAT:DVD

Perhaps Jean Renoir was always going to make this film: The impressionistic cinematography being highly reminiscent of his father’s (Auguste Renoir’s) paintings. And the actors shot in natural surroundings amounts to a hymn to, and love for, the nature he feels the genetic engineering story-line inevitably betrays.

A dialectic of many contrasts: Artificial insemination/sexual love; emotion/reason & repression; western civilization/anarchy; life/death; men/women; science/humanism & religion; etc. All false dichotomies satirized by Renoir in saying that “All is explicable to science” is a fascist attempt to reduce “All” to science.

This is bucolic anti-science-fiction in which the delightful Catherine ROUVEL is the Junoesque exemplar of the director’s vision of untamable humanity who convinces the cold scientist to warm up.


Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Contact Form:

Name

Email *

Message *

Science:



No science is immune to the infection of politics and the corruption of power.



Jacob Bronowski… (1908 - 74), British scientist, author. Encounter (London, July 1971).


Sleep of Reason:



The dream of reason produces monsters. Imagination deserted by reason creates impossible, useless thoughts. United with reason, imagination is the mother of all art and the source of all its beauty.



Francisco José de Goya y Lucientes… (1746-1828), Spanish painter. Caption to Caprichos, number 43, a series of eighty etchings completed in 1798, satirical and grotesque in form.


Humans & Aliens:



I am human and let nothing human be alien to me.



Terence… (circa 190-159 BC), Roman dramatist. Chremes, in The Self-Tormentor [Heauton Timorumenos], act 1, scene 1.


Führerprinzip:



One leader, one people, signifies one master and millions of slaves… There is no organ of conciliation or mediation interposed between the leader and the people, nothing in fact but the apparatus - in other words, the party - which is the emanation of the leader and the tool of his will to oppress. In this way the first and sole principle of this degraded form of mysticism is born, the Führerprinzip, which restores idolatry and a debased deity to the world of nihilism.