Friday, March 22, 2013

Hindsight as Foresight

Another Iraq war post - sorry about that. This one is something I posted in real time, on AOL, March 19, 2003. I wish I had found this the other day... this was a response to some dipshit comparing the invasion of Iraq to Normandy - I have never been one to suffer the abuse of history gladly....
Attacking Iraq is a pointless, cowardly act of bullying, a more or less willful distraction from any of the things that might in fact give our nation pause (from Al Qaeda to the economy to North Korea to Israeli-Palestine relations to the rest of the list), which comes at the end of a disgraceful season of diplomatic incompetence, that not even dirty tricks (bugging the UN?), bribery (what, 26 million for Turkey?), backstabbing (ask the Kurds), threats and insults and raw plain stupidity (all those idiots, right up to the house of representatives, renaming French Fries and french toast) could save from complete failure, leaving us alone, with one lame duck ally willing to do anything besides line up for the photo ops and payoffs...
It has been an odd week - I have been going back and forth with someone on Facebook about the war. This person is trying to justify the support for the war - how everyone thought Saddam had WMDs, both parties, how he didn't remember any arguments against the war, how all this talk about how bad it was comes from hindsight - I don't know. It wasn't hindsight - Stephen Walt points to this ad - signed by 33 international security academics - that lays out the case against the war, succinctly and absolutely accurately. Alex Pareene notes how The Washington Post and NY Times, even while pushing the war on the front pages and editorial pages, were publishing other stories - reported, in ways that didn't fall apart the way Judy Miller's did. Bill Moyers offers a collection of Iraq stories. There was enough info, in 2003, to doubt the government's case for the war. An awful lot of the information was speculation, probably on both sides - but when you found things that were based in solid reporting, they tended to point against the war. Things like the stories about Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda - those were debunked long before the war started, but were being repeated right up to the end. It made you wonder.

I mentioned how weak the arguments for the war seemed at the time - how they were built on metaphors and analogies, hand-waving, moving the goalposts around, and so on. They were narratives - stories - and that air of inevitability, the image of unanimity, was part of the narrative. As were the Serious people on TV, the Serious Liberals, too, forced to support the war - while the anti-war side wasn't suppressed exactly, but all too often was represented by hippies in the street - by movie stars and Noam Chomsky or something like that, at least as straw men. It was all so well orchestrated....

Enough. Though the fact is that it remains a haunting question - the means by which the country was taken to war, and especially the ways fairly widespread doubts about the war were submerged - not suppressed exactly - but somehow forgotten... It's a lesson of some kind. But one that even now seems to be submerged - brooding about the war seems even now to be something for lefty bloggers and repentant liberal hawks - the public and the politicians still seem quite unwilling to admit any of it happened. We shall see.

Reelin' in the Years Indeed

After a week of melancholy and angst, I am back for another go at the happy Friday Ritual of the Random Ten. Though before we get to the random ten, look what I found! (It was Nancy Nall who posted it.) Donnie and Marie, on ice, doing comedy, with a Steely Dan!



What might be most amazing is that despite the efforts of all involved, they can't ruin the song....

And so - iTunes, what have you for us today?

1. Boris - Czechoslovakia
2. Johnnie Taylor - Jody's Got Your Girl and Gone
3. Rites of Spring - Other Way Round
4. Jane's Addiction - End to your Lies [oh yeah - they still exist, don't they?]
5. Mogwai - Emergency Trap
6. Big Star - St 100/6
7. Bee Gees - More than a Woman
8. Jay Farrar - Angel's Blues
9. Motorhead - Bite the Bullet
10. The Sensational Alex Harvey Band - Shout

So - video? It is hard to imagine anything more 70s than the Osmonds - but this live Johnnie Taylor clip might make it. Certainly goes a long way toward redeeming the decade from the horrors of ice skating mormons.



though - speaking of the 70s - I think the Dan needs to state their own case.... maybe with the guitarists purple velvet pants.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Iraq Plus 10

Today marks the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq War, one of the worst foreign policy disasters in American history. Not the worst - Vietnam killed 55,000 Americans and god knows how many Vietnamese, tore the USA apart, gave us Nixon in place of LBJ, corrupted almost every piece of American society, made us hated in the world - Iraq did plenty of harm, but Vietnam beat it across the board. But I will leave Iraq ahead of the Mexican-American war and the War of 1812. The former may have actually done the country more harm (being a fairly direct antecedent to the Civil War), and it was a vile act - an unprovoked act of conquest ("one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation" said Grant), all the worse for being waged in order to extend slavery - but, unlike Iraq or Vietnam or the War of 1812 (for the most part), it was a fairly spectacular victory, and wicked or not, success has to count for something. And the War of 1812, though a stupid war and a complete disaster for the USA, didn't do too much harm - the British had bigger fish to fry and dropped it, and we managed to win a battle after it was done, so I guess it isn't in the running... No - Iraq gets that second place.

But that's the best you can say about it - not quite as bad as Vietnam. A war started on false pretenses, that never really promised any benefits for the US or the world - Saddam Hussein was irrelevant in 2003, there was nothing to be gained by fighting that war. A war that weakened the much more useful endeavors in Afghanistan. That cost us support around the world for everything we did. Costs thousands of lives, trillions of dollars - of our money, never mind the harm we did to Iraq to no end. And did it all for nothing - there were no benefits to starting it, and no unexpected benefits emerged along the way. We conquered the place easily enough, but screwed things up as soon as we marched in. We were diminished by the war in every way - our actions, particularly things like Abu Ghraib (though that started before we went to Iraq); our political discourse - the cowardly reaction of the political classes, accepting the war, congress abdicating its responsibility, the press taking no responsibility, the public accepting the thing... We have not recovered from Vietnam (I'm not sure, sometimes, if we've recovered from the Mexican-American war) - we will be a long time recovering from this disgrace.

I remember the beginning of the war - walking through the Public Garden, with helicopters flying overhead, circling downtown, as if they were afraid that millions of hippies would come out of cold storage and take over the city. It was unsettling. I joke about hippies, but what were those helicopters there for? There might have been protests, though I didn't see them that day - but what difference did a bunch of helicopters make? I felt instead that this was something officials felt they had to do - we were at war - there should be helicopters circling the city, cops in riot gear, sirens. You had to act like there was a war going on....

I don't mean to turn this into a kind of media critique, though I suppose it's inevitable. It was a war for the media, and by the media. The blogs were all shivery about it, after months and months of anticipation and debate. Perfectly sensible liberals defending the build up to war, though a lot of them seemed to drop out in the last month or so before the event. Exciting footage on TV (I guess it was exciting - the news channels seemed to think so) - sensible people on TV, sensible liberals! Bill Clinton! talking about how important this was, gosh, what if Saddam has something? All of that surrounded by a steady pulse of uneasiness - elevated terror alerts at opportune moments, that kind of thing.

It was very strange. I remember arguing about it, mostly on AOL - the arguments for the war seemed so completely nonsensical. The claims about Saddam's threats were so obviously exaggerated - there was plenty of information around, from far more credible sources (like the actual UN inspectors), that he didn't have any weapons of mass destruction - and there was nothing, anywhere, to indicate that he had any connection to Al Qaeda, that he planned to cause any trouble to anyone (other than his own people) - it was maddening. And so many of the arguments, even in the public discourse, consisted of magic thinking, metaphors - anticipating Tom Friedman's Suck. On. This. moment - showing the world we meant business. So much of it was like that - all about messaging - sending a message to the terrorists that we were big and bad and were gonna kill a bunch of the bastards! Which depended so much on analogies and metaphors - the smoking gun is a mushroom cloud stuff - the people I was arguing with on AOL were particularly awful, constantly comparing Saddam Hussein to Hitler, to a naughty child, to a gangrenous limb, on and on. It was hard, in real time, in 2003, not to see the war as a piece of theater - as what Friedman said it was - going somewhere and picking someone out and beating the living shit out of them, just to show we'd do it.

In other words, terrorism. And, as is almost inevitable, terrorism never works - the people you use it on take note and get you back when the chance comes. Or, sometimes, get back at someone else... but it doesn't work. Victims of terrorism harden their hearts, at least against the users of terror.

And - I know it is bad form to say I told you so, but - Tom Friedman's still employed! So - sorry - I did tell you so, as did quite a few other people, many of them in positions where they should have been listened to. And a not insubstantial number of protestors. Who were right. So I will end with something I wrote on AOL, April 12, 2003:
We might want to hold off a bit on claiming Iraq has been "liberated" - currently they are simply conquered (though not quite pacified) - maybe we should find out who ends up in charge before getting too celebratory. Let's face it - the odds that Iraq will come out of this better off than they were under Saddam are probably about even - they are that high primarily because they may not have us for an enemy any more. Their new rulers are not likely to edify the gentle of heart.
I mean - we could see the rest of it coming. I could, and who am I? It's kind of the point I was getting at with the comments on the media, on the symbolism of the war - the pro-war side treated it as though it were a gesture. The anti-war side didn't have all that much special virtue, maybe - they just treated it as real actions in the real world involving real people. Which is a lesson we fucking well ought to learn.

Monday, March 18, 2013

A Personal Aside

I am not the most prolific poster ever, but this week is worse than usual, and the reason, I'm afraid, is worse yet. One of my closest friends died last week - suddenly, an aneurism, and young. Today would have been his 51st birthday. We met in college, he lived next door to me in the dorm, and we hit it off quickly, as we were both history nerds, politics junkies, baseball fans and gamers. After college, he stayed in the area, and we shared apartments or lived up the street, and continued to get together to go book shopping, watch baseball or play games. When he moved back home to Pennsylvania, we stayed in touch, playing games online, getting together every year or so with as much of the old gang as we could find. It is unimaginable to think I won't see him again.

A couple of my friends drove down to PA for the service - a long, tiring drive, but a chance to remember him, see his family, remember how generous all of them were, remind myself too that all of our families liked him as much as we did. We will miss him.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Jean Brodie Quiz

Time for another quiz from Dennis Cozzalio - this one Miss Jean Brodie’s Modestly Magnificent, Matriarchally Manipulative Springtime-For-Mussolini Movie Quiz. I have managed to finish it in record time, I think! only 2 days since it was posted! I feel so proud.

1) The classic movie moment everyone loves except me is:

A: This is one of those questions that I will be able to answer 3 months from now when someone will say how much they love that scene in X, and I will think, Christ, that is a stupid scene, and then I will remember this quiz and say, I wish I had remembered that back in March. but I don't remember it now, so I have to let this one go.

2) Favorite line of dialogue from a film noir

A: There are lots of famous lines - though the one that seems to me to get the essence of noir is the last line in the Killing - “what’s the difference?” Hayden's delivery is part of it, obviously.

3) Second favorite Hal Ashby film

A: Shampoo (Harold and Maude is number 1)

4) Describe the moment when you first realized movies were directed as opposed to simply pieced together anonymously. *

A: There might be two answers here. One might not be what you are asking - I because an auteurist because of Howard Hawks. I noticed that he had directed a number of completely different films I loved - Bringing up Baby, Scarface, The Big Sleep, Red River - and thought - you know, these films have nothing obvious in common, but they all play alike - how does that work?.... The other is a bit strange: I believe it is true that I made a film before I had ever actually seen one. It’s not quite literally true, even in the narrow sense of seeing a film as film, projected - I saw home movies and 8 and 16 mm films in school and church and what not. But commercially, I did not go to the movies - but I made one, in early high school, along with my Sunday school class - a Christmas film. I played Joseph. 8 mm with post synch sound (which didn’t work too well because the tape player had a dying battery.) So - my point being - I knew more about how films were made (at a pretty basic, crude level) before I had seen enough films to have any other ideas about them.

5) Favorite film book

A: David Bordwell’s Ozu book

6) Diana Sands or Vonetta McGee

A: Vonetta McKee

7) Most egregious gap in your viewing of films made in the past 10 years

A: Given my loyalty to Hong Kong films in the 90s, I find it very troubling that I have seen so few in the 00s and 10s. 2-3 Johnny To films is about it - which itself is very disappointing to me..

8) Favorite line of dialogue from a comedy

A: This is a very tough one, but I might as well go to the top: “Gentlemen, Chicolini here may talk like an idiot, and look like an idiot, but don't let that fool you: he really is an idiot.”

9) Second favorite Lloyd Bacon film

A: Footlight Parade (after 42nd Street, of course)

10) Richard Burton or Roger Livesey

A: Burton

11) Is there a movie you staunchly refuse to consider seeing? If so, why?

A: There are no lack of them - it would take an act of god to get me to watch any of the 50 million superhero films that come out every month, just to name one current trend I want no part of.

12) Favorite filmmaker collaboration

A: I'm going with Tabu, Flaherty and Murnau.

13) Most recently viewed movie on DVD/Blu-ray/theatrical?

A: DVD is Creation, the Paul Betany Darwin movie. Now that I think about it. Theatrically, it’s been a Chilean weekend, as I saw Night Across the Street yesterday and No today.

14) Favorite line of dialogue from a horror movie

A: As a line - “are we not men?” - takes the prize - the whole sequence maybe. “What is the law?” I’m afraid a lot of the things that come to mind for horror films are really comedy lines - Herbert West’s “You’re not even a second rate scientist!” or Dwight Frye’s delivery of “It’s a very fresh one!” Though I suppose Karloff’s “We belong dead!” would be another strong contender.

15) Second favorite Oliver Stone film

A: Probably Salvador. (After Platoon.) I don’t really like Oliver Stone.

16) Eva Mendes or Raquel Welch

A: Raquel Welch.

17) Favorite religious satire

A: Life of Brian is the runaway winner.

18) Best Internet movie argument? (question contributed by Tom Block)

A: The good ones tend to be over films or filmmakers - working out differences between the good and the great, usually. Someone upthread mentioned arguing about the Thin Red Line - I was in some of those; and Magnolia; and since then, you get the same thing, directly or indirectly, over various films and directors - Malick, Lynch, Anderson and Anderson, Tarantino seem to be frequent subjects for debate. Usually fairly informative and engaging. More general topics tend not to be quite so edifying.

19) Most pointless Internet movie argument? (question contributed by Tom Block)

A: every couple years I seem to run into another argument about auteurism. No thanks! (Not that I have ever been able to not have an opinion.)

20) Charles McGraw or Robert Ryan

A: Robert Ryan

21) Favorite line of dialogue from a western

A: “When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.”

22) Second favorite Roy Del Ruth film

A: Employee’s Entrance (after Blessed Event) - hey, maybe “go ahead, shoot! What are you, yellow?” ought to be my favorite line. Warren William is a good one. (But yes, Lee Tracy is better.)

23) Relatively unknown Film or filmmaker you’d most eagerly proselytize for

A: Well, let’s just say Blessed Event and leave it at that.

24) Ewan McGregor or Gerard Butler

A: Ewan McGregor

25) Is there such a thing as a perfect movie?

A: Rushmore?

26) Favorite movie location you’ve most recently had the occasion to actually visit *

A: I saw Rubberneck last week - saw it at the Brattle - I can. There is also a scene at Kendall station. Though this whole thing might be a bit odd, since a couple scenes in Mystic River were shot in the building where I work, so - you know, every day.

27) Second favorite Delmer Daves film

A: Dark Passage. (After 3:10 to Yuma)

28) Name the one DVD commentary you wish you could hear that, for whatever reason, doesn't actually exist

A: the Marx Brothers’ commentary on Duck Soup?

29) Gloria Grahame or Marie Windsor

A: Grahame, isn’t it? She is something.

30) Name a filmmaker who never really lived up to the potential suggested by their early acclaim or success

A: David Gordon Green is an obvious example; there might be better, but he is the obvious one.

31) Is there a movie-based disagreement serious enough that it might cause you to reevaluate the basis of a romantic relationship or a friendship? *

A: I am not sure I can think of anything. I’m pretty forgiving.

Friday, March 08, 2013

Friday Random Ten

Hello again. Been another one of THOSE weeks, hasn't it... oh well. Lousy weather, cold and either rainy or snowy or both, windy and miserable anyway - I am tired and out of sorts and so I shall not bore you with much. Skip to the music! Here we go, without much fanfare...

1. Morningwood - Nth Degree [oy]
2. Iggy Pop - Baby
3. Xiu Xiu - 20,000 Deaths for Eldelyn Gonzales, 20,000 Deaths for Jamie Peterson
4. Starflyer 59 - All My Friends Who Play Guitar [christian shoe gazer rock? could be worse...]
5. Patti Smith - Dancing Barefoot
6. John Hartford - Indian War Whoop
7. Neil Young - Like a Hurrican (unplugged) [pump it Neil!]
8. Beck, Bogart, Appice - Oh to Love You
9. The Doors - Back Door Man [they never seem to come up here...]
10. Yardbirds - Someone to Love

Well then - video? it's feeling very Canadian out there, so here's Old Neil, the very performance, I believe... playing that beautiful pump organ.



Slightly off the list - here are the feelies covering the other great song on today's list, back in 1987....

Friday, March 01, 2013

Friday Random Music

This is a very welcome Friday let me tell you. It has been a long, tiring week - for good reasons, as well as bad - the good, some cousins in town, and a very fine time had by all; the bad - oy - rain, sleet, wind, and a variety of system outages at work, culminating yesterday in E-mail outages - which comes damned close to shutting down the company... I hope for a restful weekend - one with some good films to see... Stoker opens - that's to the good.

Oh - and happy birthday to Jacques Rivette!

On to the music - there might be some movement on this score in the coming weeks - if I ever listen to the new Nick Cave or Atoms for Peace or Richard Thompson or Pere Ubu records I have recently acquired. One would hope - that is a stellar lineup, with a couple of my All Time Absolute Favorites in there, and Cave not far from that himself... but time will tell. Today - we've got the shuffle to keep us entertained.

1. Bob Dylan - The Times They Are A Changin'
2. Spirit - Morning Will Come
3. John Parish & Polly Jean Harvey - That Was My Veil
4. Mission of Burma - Train
5. Peter Laughner - Rock it Down
6. Nine Inch Nails - A Warm Place
7. Decembrists - Sons & Daughters
8. The Carter Family - Sea of Galilee
9. Snuff - I Can't Explain
10. Zulus - Gotta Have Faith

That brings back memories - the Zulus were ubiquitous in Boston in the late 80s, and I saw them half a dozen times, easily. Alas, they were not documented so well as they could have been - I cannot find video of that song, which was usually the show ender - so... this works, Directly From Our Heart to Yours...



And - another singalong, like You Gotta Have Faith.... the Decembrists:

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Donald Richie Appreciation

I am sorry to say that a month into my resolution to write Favorite Director post every month, I am already off track. I don't have any good reasons - at least I can come up with a decent substitute though. Donald Richie's death is important to note. He was a giant, obviously, in the process of bringing Japanese films to the United States - opening for this country what I have to consider one of the three truly consistently great film cultures (along with the US and France.) He championed Japanese films, he wrote about them, providing excellent introductions to a number of the most important filmmakers - in the age of DVDs, providing the voice for many commentaries on Japanese films. I am fairly certain that he would have been the first writer I read on Japanese films, and always there as a guide. He was not, I have to admit, the most important critic of Japanese films I read - I was much more influenced by reading Audie Bock and Noel Burch - but he was still very important to me, as well as crucial to the world of film.

My favorite of Richie's books was, in fact, The Japanese Film - I found a used copy of the 1959 edition, and read it with delight. It's a great book, well researched, well written, comprehensive, covering film as art as well as the history of the industry, which was very useful information. It reminded me of Andrew Sarris - sharing Sarris' auteurism, and willing to do the work, seeing the films, tracking down the industrial information (something Sarris did less of, but is a big part of this one.) A very useful reference. And a fascinating document, especially that 1959 edition - that puts it right on the cusp of something. It's right on the edge of the new wave revolution, well into the critical part of the change - by then, the French had established a lot of the premises of the new wave: championing directors, genre films, pictorialism, realism, trash (all at the same time) - elements that seem to be just outside Richie and Anderson's book. You can see too that the critical divisions that would form over Japanese films were appearing. The French had formed opinions by then, based, I fear, on a very scant exposure to Japanese films - they had already taken sides for Mizoguchi and against Kurosawa. Not so Richie and Anderson. They did not share the French passion for taking sides - they praised Mizoguchi and Kurosawa - and of course they had seen more than just the festival films, and knew, for example, that Ozu was in their class as well. But they were also pretty clearly in awe of Kurosawa.

Though what is even stranger to read now, after the fact, is the way they characterize the Japanese film industry in 1959. They lament that no new talents have emerged since Kurosawa and Kinoshita (and their treatment in Kinoshita is interesting itself; he has been somewhat forgotten, surpassed in reputation - certainly availability in the states - by the old guard (even Naruse), by Kobayashi and Ichikawa, by their successors - Oshima and Imamura, even Shinoda, Tesugahara, and Suzuki, are all far more available.) They lament that the system does not seem likely to produce any new talent soon - that it is stagnating - that there have been no more movements lately. All this is in 1959 - and 1960 saw 3 revolutionary Oshima films, a couple Yoshida films, Pigs and Battleships came out in 61, etc. The 60s were a burst of energy - the Ofuna new wave - Imamura, the revitalization of some of the older directors in response to this - an increased sense of command by some of the directors they mention (Ichikawa and Kobayashi especially) - they said things in 1959 that by 1961 would sound insane.

But thinking about this - another superb book on Japanese film, Mitsuhiro Yoshimoto's Kurosawa book, suggests that the discovery of Japanese film in Europe and America begat film studies as a discipline. It showed a mature industry/art that existed outside western culture - that could not be studied along with Welles or Godard without positing a different way of studying film than through culture. This was, you could say, the time when film had to be taken seriously as an art - treated, in fact, as an independent art, the way music or literature or theater were. Japanese film was a surprise - it showed a different way of doing things, though not unrecognizable - it certainly fit the theories of people at the time - Mizoguchi was tailor made for auteurists. So was Ozu, when they found him. But maybe even more than this - the attention given to Japanese films in the west was reciprocated by attention to western films (and theorists) in Japan. These things indicated an exchange of information between Japan and the rest of the world - an exchange going both ways. So while in 1959 the Japanese filmmaking system seemed increasingly static - bureaucratic, commercial, slow to change, with no way out of the cycle it was in - the mere presence of Americans writing about Japan indicates contact with the rest of the world - and Japanese were reading Americans. And while it is true that Ofuna new wave came out of itself, without a lot of push from the west (Oshima and Imamura and others were independent and tough and had their own ideas) - but they were able to piggy back what they did on the French new wave (they stole the word!); they did what the French did - they started theorizing their work. They connected what they were doing to the rest of the world.

And that brings us back to where we started - because Donald Richie was as important as one man could possibly be in making that connection.

And now? in his honor - and since this is, in fact, meant as a kind of series of lists - here is a list - the 10 Best Japanese films... sort of. I limited myself to one per director, to get past Ozu, which is always a challenge....

1. Early Summer - Ozu
2. Seven Samurai - Kurosawa Akira
3. The Pornographers - Imamura
4. Ugetsu Monagatari - Mizoguchi
5. Late Chrysanthemums - Naruse
6. Fires on the Plain - Ichikawa
7. Ceremony - Oshima
8. The Emperor's Naked Army Marches on - Hara
9. Charisma - Kurosawa Kiyoshi
10. Fighting Elegy - Suzuki

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Oscar Talk and My Category Favorites

I guess the Oscars are here, but since I don't intend to watch them, and barely even think about them, I suppose it best to do as I did last year, and use this as en excuse to offer up my favorites of 2012, in various categories. Though I suppose I could speculate on nominations...

Best Picture - somehow they managed, despite nominating 9 films, not to nominate the two best films of the year, The Master and Moonrise Kingdom. We are off to a bad start. Of the films nominated - Amour is very much the best; Lincoln is the most logical and appropriate pick (since it is the Oscars) - but I rather fear Argo will win. Harmless, but rather inane pick. I've somewhat moved away from my old idea that the worst film nominated will always win - I didn't see Life of Pi or Les Miserables - but the latter sounds like it's the worst film on the slate. Though Silver Linings Playbook annoyed me no end... I don't think it can win though, thank god. Not even sure how it got nominated, even in this context... The other nominations are pretty decent, though missing the two Andersons' pictures is unforgivable. I listed these back at the beginning of the year, though lots of films have come out since, so....

My top 5:
1. Moonrise Kingdom
2. The Master
3. Amour
4. Barbara
5. Oslo: August 31

Director: again, they're missing the Andersons, so who cares what they say? oddly - they are also missing Bigelow and Tarantino, who make very strange absences. Behind Russell and Zeitlin? how? Anyway - I rather assume Spielberg will win, and wouldn't complain if he did. Haneke, obviously, is in another world from this bunch, but what can you do?

My choices:

1. PT Anderson - reversing the usual order of the Andersons...
2. Wes Anderson - not that anyone else is getting between them.
3. the Dardennes, Kid With the Bike
4. Christian Petzold, Barbara
5. Haneke

Actor: I would think Daniel Day-Lewsi will win again; I would rather hope so. Though I will say, here at least, they nominated by favorite of the year - Joaquin Phoenix should win, and while I doubt he will, it is not completely impossible.

My choices:
1. Joaquin Phoenix
2. Denis Lavant
3. Daniel Day-Lewis
4. Anders Danielson Lee (Oslo: August 31)
5. John Hawkes [how did he get forgotten?]

Actress: not a bad set of nominations, though acknowledging the existence of The Impossible causes me pain... of the nominations - I guess I hope Jessica Chastain wins - she is genuinely extraordinary.

My Choices:
1. Greta Gerwig, Damsels in Distress - been a while, but really, she's the best performance in the best role of the year.
2. Isabella Huppert, In Another Country
3. Jessica Chastain
4. Emanuelle Riva
5. Nina Hoss, Barbara

Supporting Actor: this is odd - it is probably possible to make the case that Christophe Waltz is in a supporting role - but Philip Seymour Hoffman? it's a co-lead; how do you get around that? Anyway - it does make a tough choice.... the Academy is probably going to give it to Waltz, and that makes sense, I guess. I do like all the nominees, though, except maybe DeNiro - though he's good, the role is kind of stupid.

1. Philip Seymour Hoffman - though I think this should be a lead...
2. Christophe Waltz
3. Leonardo DiCaprio - hell, Samuel L. Jackson should be on here too maybe...
4. Bruce Willis, in Moonrise Kingdom
5. Edward Norton - or him...

Supporting Actress: I am blessed not to have seen Les Miserables, so I don't know what Anne Hathaway did - she seems to be the favorite though, and who am I to gainsay it? of the nominees - I would probably vote for Jacki Weaver, who's about the only thing I really liked about Silver Linings Playbook...

1. Annaleigh Tipton, Damsels in Distress
2. Jacki Weaver
3. Frances McDormand
4. Amy Adams
5. Tilda Swinton

Original Screenplay: Well, Wes Anderson got a nod here. I don't know who's going to win this - Amour is in French; Django Unchained would be an odd choice - it's amusing, but very weak for Tarantino; Flight - doesn't seem to be getting much attention (I didn't see it); Moonrise Kingdom, though the best film, seems a very long shot - leaving Zero Dark Thirty - which would be a deserving winner (I'd settle for it, that is) - but the backlash against that film is very strange... I don't know.

1. Moonrise Kingdom
2. Damsels in Distress
3. The Master
4. Amour
5. Zero Dark Thirty

Adapted Screenplay: I hope Lincoln wins; it should, though you never can tell...

1. Killing them Softly
2. Oslo: August 31
3. The Deep Blue Sea
4. Lincoln
5. Cosmopolis

Cinematography: I can never figure out what the academy is thinking in this category, so who cares what they think? I think:

1. The Master - this was something of a show stopper - it was a bit mindblowing in 35, and then I saw the 70 mm version...
2. Zero Dark Thirty
3. Moonrise Kingdom
4. This is Not a Film - cinematography should serve the work of art; what you make of it, what you use it for, is as important as the raw beauty or the technical elements of the photography. This is an extraordinary film...
5. Django Unchained

Music or Score: I'm not worried about the academy, partly because I don't want to care about eligibility. So just the votes - though this is hard: I have a harder time holding the music of a film in my head than most other elements... until I have seen it a few times, so - the ones I saw 3 times (plus) each tend to end up on top...

1. The Master (Jonny Greenwood)
2. Moonrise Kingdom
3. Damsels in Distress

And a couple more - I sort of assume Amour will win Foreign Language film - it should. It's rather startling to see a really good and important film nominated here... Documentary Feature - How to Survive a Plague would be a very deserving winner - that was a great film. 56 Up is better than any of them, but of course it's TV... Editing - Moonrise Kingdom, dammit. Animated feature - I even saw most of these. I would vote for Brave, I think - though they all seemed to be decent, but a bit underwhelming, films. Still... I have no idea what's going to win, though.

And now? I will finish up with 10 moments - because - I should... for the moment, I will generally limit myself to one moment per film...

1. The Master - the first processing between Freddy and the Master - though you could say the jail scene, Freddy's processing montage after he gets out of jail, Freddy and the master in England, especially the Master singing to him, Freddy and Doris' mother... there's so much...

2. Moonrise Kingdom - also full of shots and bits, that are maybe less show-stopping than in the Master, but that all connect and intertwine - picking one - might be a simple one - Edward Norton trying to do his audio journal, and too depressed to speak.... or Bill Murray snatching the tent away... or the policeman and Sam bonding over a burnt sausage and beer...

3. Amour - when Emmanuelle Riva refuses to drink, and Jean-Louis Trintingant slaps her - I would prefer to forget that moment.... there's also his shame and horror when his daughter visits, near the end - another moment of almost unbearable devastation.

4. Holy Motors - the accordions, of course

5. Damsels in Distress - another one full of joy - though I think the people jumping off the Ed building might be the peak...

6. The plot summary of the imaginary movie at the end of Argo - I guess it's completely made up, but damn, that's a cool moment...

7. How to Survive a Plague has a moment - a cut, from 1996, when all of the activists in the film thought they were going to die, very shortly - to the present, with all of them still alive. It's quite marvelous...

8. The crab eating scene in Beasts of the Southern Wild...

9. In Another Country - another film full of little moments - the lifeguard singing to Ann... or trying to read her note... the drunken seduction on a beach... though the winner, I think, would be the "something interesting" moment, that goes so hilariously wrong.

10. I'm going to end with two films I disliked quite intensely - but both have moments that almost made them worth seeing: first - the guy singing grand opera in the shower onstage in To Rome with Love - Woody Allen can still make a joke once in a while, a damned good one even.... and "You aren't being ironic?" in Dark Horse - Todd Solondz tries so hard to make you squirm - and once in a while, I admit it, he manages it...

Friday, February 22, 2013

Friday Music

One of these weeks, we might get some variation - there are a bunch of records in the pipeline that I will or have bought - new Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds, new My Bloody Valentine, new stuff from various Radioheads, a new Richard Thompson record (that one I have already) - there's hope! though looking at that list of artists - holy cats, I feel old... But none of that today - today, we're going right back to the old shuffle... enjoy!

1. Harry McClintock - Big Rock Candy Mountain
2. The Germs - The Other Newest One
3. George Michael - I want your Sex
4. The Fall - The Man Whose Head Expanded
5. Meat Puppets - Look at the Rain
6. Jacques Brel - Ces Gens-La
7. Minutemen - Suburban Dialectic
8. Mats Gustafson - Where's the Air?
9. Jimi Hendrix - Love or Confusion
10. Yoko Ono & Yo La Tengo - Hedwig's Lament/Exquisite Corpse

And video? oh what the heck - I swear I won't tease you, won't tell you no lies... who doesn't want a live George Michael clip?



Speaking of the 80s... I probably post this every other month, but here's the Meat Puppets doing a nice version of Look at the Rain...

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Up Up Up

Coming late to the Up films is certainly intimidating - every 7 years, a new one comes out; every 7 years I tell myself I should see it, but should watch them all first - every 7 years I end up not watching the old ones and then skipping the film because I haven't seen them. In between - I see clips, I don't know if I have seen any of the films anywhere on TV, I don't remember ever sitting through any of them, but watching them, there were certainly lots of familiar moments. And, instead of taking advantage of the 7 year reprieve to catch up - I forget about them until the next one comes out.

Well - 56 Up is out - this year I swore, a bit in advance, that I would watch them all - but I managed to wait until a week before the thing opened without doing anything - and then we got 2 feet of snow. And that, my friends, is why they invented Netflix.... And so: 56 Up: it is fairly pointless to try to review these films in isolation (which is why I am not doing so) - this one in particular seems very - what's the word? - static? It's very much a continuation of the last one - most of them are roughly where they were 7 years ago, in their circumstances, in their location. This can be good or bad, obviously. It's not so good for Jackie - it's something of a miracle for Neil. (It's the first time since 14 that he's been in the same place he was 7 years ago...) Jackie has had a hard time of it, with bad health, and misfortune striking her not-quite-in-laws, and austerity doing what austerity does (making grandmothers suffer) - though he sons seem to be doing okay, so maybe things will be all right. Lynn also suffers from the recession, though maybe more from the longer term decline of good government - she had been a librarian for 30 odd years, and then got laid off, even before the crash, I think. I can't resist a bit of politics here - putting librarians out of work is a fine recipe for national decline. England is done and we ain't far behind...

Sorry. This one is most notable for getting 13 of the 14 who started the show back. (Though "started" isn't quite it - the conceit really starts with 7 Plus Seven - Apted took over, he started revisiting the same kids every 7 years - and he narrowed the number down to 14, at age 14, there...) John is still around - he skipped a couple of them, but seems to have settled in as a regular again. And Peter is back - the other Liverpudlian, last scene bitching Thatcher in 28 Up, and catching holy hell from the Murdockoids, and running for cover... He has a band to promote - one is tempted, I suppose, to rolls ones eyes - but I am not really bothered by it. The series demands a lot of its participants - why shouldn't they try to get something back? And maybe more to the point - back at 28, he named, along with the 1977 European cup final, being on stage with his band as the happiest moment of his life. It's like with John and his Bulgarian charity and ancestry - it's a part of their lives. It is what they do, who they are - it probably goes down easier when its Tony talking about his acting work, because Tony is always in the shows, an enthusiastic and charismatic figure - but if it brings them back, then it's more than a fair trade, I think.

All right. The hardest thing to do with these films is write about them in terms other than the people - and that involves, well - 13 different 56 year olds, documented across 8 movies - a cast rather expanded by spouses and kids and such - by now, Susan, Paul's wife, or Debbie, Tony's wife, are almost characters as much as their husbands - and others, Rupert and Jane say, are constant presences in most of them. There's a lot to keep track of, and a lot of stuff going on. Still - it's worth trying to pull out some of what the show is up to, how it works. It started with a political edge - out to show the continued pernicious influence of the English class system; it evolved - into a sociological study (though not systematic enough for scientist Nicholas, you may remember from 21 Up), and into a story about how these people live. Though it is also definitely about How We Live Today.

And it is also a work of art. Apted got lucky in his subjects - many of them turned out to make very interesting case studies; almost all of them have remained fairly appealing television subjects - and a few, I think, have emerged as absolutely compelling dramatic characters or performers. Neil, I guess, is the obvious case - he has had a rather astonishing life - decades of misery that then morphs into local politics, and what seems to be a fair degree of satisfaction. His dramatic arc is paired with his own willingness to talk about his life, to analyze himself and the world. He makes great television, no doubt about it. He's not the only one, though - Tony is a joy to watch - charismatic, funny, ambitious in his way, driven enough to get what he wants, and realistic enough to accept what he is. There is a lot of talk, on the show and about it, about the three rich kids laying out their lives at age 7 and 14 - but so did Tony: he wanted to be a jockey - he did; if he didn't succeed he'd be a cabby - he did; he wanted a pub - he had one; he wanted to act - he acts. Some things he's a major success at - some he's able to tick off the list - but he did them... I think Apted also lucked out with Nick - the farmer boy turned nuclear physicist. With John - who in his youth, at least, was willing to play the upper class twit for the amusement of the viewing public. (And whether he meant ti all or not, you could see him calculating - you could see him taking positions to be perverse, to shock, to play the part.) In his maturity, he's far less irritating or thrilling, but still a fairly interesting character - unlike his fellow twit Andrew, who grows up to be a bore... Finally - in terms of who comes off best in the series -= there is Bruce - a lonely little 7 year hoping he can teach the uncivilized to be "more or less, good." - and growing up to be an inner city teacher, then just a teacher - but always, from 14 on - a smart, thoughtful, fascinating interview subject, who is also, in a very understated way, far and away the funniest person on the show. "The village socialist..."

There is that. And there is Apted's shaping of the show. It is a masterpiece of editing, of course - you notice it more in the early ones, where he was probably still trying to score political points - there's an almost savage transition in 28 Up from Andrew's "I've been lucky" to Neil, at close to his lowest point. But it's not all political, and over time, you come to appreciate his transitions in an almost formal sense - they shape the material, and their occasional explicitness helps to keep that act of shaping visible. It's a very self-conscious show, as it must be - the participants talk about it, quite a bit in the last couple - and Apted's sometimes overt manipulation of imagery serves that purpose too. As does his manipulation of the introductions - watching all these films in a week makes it clearer - the use of familiar clips, their slight reordering or recutting, the occasional recombination of visual and sound, and so on. This is a show about change over time, and over time, it becomes a show about memory, about how we shape and reshape our lives - and Apted makes the point formally, in his shifting use of all that footage, and its connection with the current state of his characters.

And still: when it started, it was meant as a political show - especially by Apted. And though that focus has changed over the years - Apted's original point has been made pretty clearly, I think you'd have to say. His point is that the class system was alive and well, and your life was fairly determined by your station when you were born - and it's hard to argue with that. A couple people have gone far - Nick and Sue, you could say; and Neil, though he's a different case, having been pretty obviously derailed by his health... Some characters have moved up financially (Tony especially), some have moved physically - but for all that - it is most notable how little class mobility there is. A couple things come to mind. Here is one: of the kids on the show - all the rich kids except Suzy went to University (she just ended up marrying well.) None of the poor kids did. The middle class kids went, one passing, one dropping out. Okay. They are all older now, they have kids of their own, all of them - and of those kids - all the rich kids' kids of university age went to university (I think; the ones who talked about it.) One - 1 - of the poor kids' kids has gone.

Here is another thing that comes to mind. Bruce taught in the East End for a long time, in poor schools. Lynn, meanwhile, was working in the libraries of the schools in the East End. Both, that is, working in the same school systems of the same part of London. In 49 Up, Bruce had moved off, to teach at St. Albans; while Lynn was still in Bethnel Green, worrying about her job - which she lost by 56 UP. Now it seems to me that all along, Apted has been very enamored with Bruce - that he has shown him in a very good light. Through most of the series, I think he took Lynn's work for granted - but in 49 Up it felt different. He dwelt on her job, her place in the school system - showed her working with handicapped kids, talking about her work with them. It felt as though he had suddenly noticed - maybe because Bruce had left - that she was doing pretty much what he was doing all those years. But he had his Oxford degree and the chance to go wherever he wanted. When she lost her job - she was done. And there, I imagine, is where the politics lingers - and why the class rigidity the series set out to explore remains, as bad as ever - maybe worse. There is a lot of talk about opportunity in the series - and there you see it. Both in the way he is able to move on to something else - and in the way - well, you don't really have to worry about St. Albans school cutting their librarians.

I could go on about this a while - I maybe should, but I suppose this is not the time. But - England does not seem to be getting better. They seem, in fact, to be getting more American - one of John's lines way back in 21 Up. But opportunity, social mobility, call it what you want is not getting better here - I believe it is declining, relative to mobility in the past; and relative to Europe. What is different in the US from the UK seems to be that here, the classes are not so defined - it might not be so obvious, from your accent or the type of school you went to, what your class is; but that's because class, here, is driven mainly by money. And that comes up in these films - that while the class distinctions they grew up with seem less obvious, the class system based on money is stronger than ever. And - I don't think you could dispute that. I can't dispute it here - most people in the US live roughly the way their parents did. And I think this is more true now than it was 40 or 50 years ago - my parents' generation, I think, had a lot more chance to change their status - to go to college, to increase their financial circumstances, to move, physically - than my generation had - and I think it is probably getting worse for the next generation. Maybe - they are just coming of age now. So - I guess their fates are up in the air. But judging from these films - they better get used to living with mom and dad, cause it's gonna take some doing to move out.

Friday, February 15, 2013

Friday Guitars

I believe it is Friday once more. Last week's snow has been steadily melting; there is some threat of more this weekend, but nothing too interesting. What is left is all crusted over; you could probably walk across it. I remember when I was a kid - that always seemed to happen after big storms - you'd get a day of rain and then it would get cold again, and you could walk all over the place on top of the snow... falling through just raised the stakes a bit. Great fun. Great sledding, too, especially when it got really hard and would support you on top....

Enough weather. A satisfactory movie weekend appears in the offing, with Tabu and 56-Up coming. Sooner or later there might be some interesting music too - I keep reading about new Nick Cave and My Bloody Valentine records, though I have yet to see them; I did get a new Richard Thompson record, not that I have opened it yet.... As for today - I think we will stay with our old standby, the Random Ten. iTunes?

1. Nina Simone - Jelly Roll
2. Wilco - Hummingbird
3. Lift to Experience - The Ground too Soft
4. Love - Can't Explain
5. Damon & Naomi - House of Glass
6. Replacements - Shooting Dirty Pool
7. Heroin - Undertaking
8. Meat Puppets - Automatic Mojo
9. Danielson - Hosanna in the Forest
10. PJ Harvey & John Parish - Leaving California

Video? First, let's go off list - here is some vintage live Feelies - noticed a lot more of these old shows on YouTube lately....



And - another band with a strangely truncated career, Lift to Experience - live in Paris...

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Snowy Snow



Yeah, it's been an adventurous weekend. The storm delivered all that it was promised to be, have to say that - couple feet of snow - piled up in quite impressive drifts - huge snowbanks - a mess. I went out into it yesterday, while the snow was still coming down, before much of it was cleared up - the roads were all plowed, but not sidewalks, there was snow everywhere. It was impressive. My front yard for instance - almost bare grass, and what must be a 7 or 8 foot drift...



One effect of all the wind was that there wasn't a lot of the kind of picturesque snow you associate with winter - evergreens laden down with slow. It all blew off - except in a couple neighborhoods with a bit more shelter.... Still:



It was odd. The city shut down early Friday - the streets were nearly empty by noon, though it really didn't start snowing hard until evening. I guess it makes sense to get everyone out of the way for when it did come down - I don't doubt that if they had left the rads and such open until 8, people would have been out driving to 8, probably out to midnight. That probably wouldn't have worked out so well. Things are still shut down (I'm off soon to find out how shut down they are), but in general, in the city at least, things are just - shut down. Nothing really bad seems to be happening. Not here anyway. The plows were out yesterday, and had the roads cleared before the snow stopped, even most of the side roads; by the time I got home, the sidewalks were cleared - you could see the crews out shoveling and snow-blowing around all the apartment buildings all morning. Days like yesterday, I feel a lot better about the rent and taxes I pay. I'd say I got my money's worth.



And so? I wasn't alone out there - people walking around, taking pictures, walking their dogs, skiing, snowshoeing, sledding - might as well enjoy it, right? it's here and it's gonna make the commute a living hell for a few days... might as well have some fun first.


Friday, February 08, 2013

A Blizzard of Music

"Nemo"? Please god... everybody's hoping it's "historic" - what's that, top 10 all time? With heavy winds, up to hurricane strength - brrr!

I should add that that's a fun list to look at. I remember a few of them, some very well. I was in Maine in 1978, and don't remember much about The Blizzard (#2 on the list), except that it obliterated beaches, ruined more than one of the fishermen in our town, and sounded a lot more fun in Boston... I was in Maine in December 2010 (#10), as well, so didn't get the city experience, but that was a big, fun snowstorm - being on vacation made it all quite enjoyable. Hang out with kids, who know how to enjoy snow - all good... Of the ones here: the strangest thing - the February 2003 storm that is listed as the heaviest snowfall in the history of Boston - I have forgotten, almost completely. I found a note somewhere that mentioned it, noting only that, even with 2 feet of snow on the ground, I was expected to go to work. Must have been some blizzard.... now - January 2005 (#5) - I remember well: I spent the storm on the computer, doing work for a class - writing about Samuel L. Delany and editing a collage of video to the tune of "Natural is Not In It." (I see I also found time to make fun of David Brooks and little Bush.) That is to the good. The 90s storms - I don't remember the one in 1994 specifically (#9) - but there was a lot of snow that winter, and I remember that. I remember the other two very well - the other #10, in 1996, I remember because I took a long walk along the beach in the middle of it. Very nice. But the big one - the definitive storm, really, of my days in Boston - was the April fool's blizzard of 1997 (#4).

You remember storms that time of year, obviously, but this one hit all the markers. Lots of snow - and a hard, vigorous snowstorm at that. And the very nature of the beast - a major blizzard overnight and all through the morning, then it stopped - and by afternoon, was sunny and the temperature well into the 40s, maybe the 50s. 2 feet of snow, and spring! And - it was a storm full of anecdote, for me. I saw Rebel Without a Cause Monday night (see? I remember the day of the week!) - remember walking home from that, in howling winds and snow - but very happy to have gone. Tuesday morning, I got up and got dressed and despite all the snow in the ground, went in to work - which, somewhat surprisingly, was closed. (The office had a bad reputation for staying open in all kinds of conditions. Probably not deserved - they closed for the real storms, and there aren't as many of those as you think, but you know how it is...) So I walked home, in the blast of the storm, because - I grew up in Maine and I love snow. So there. I stopped to buy pancake mix on the way, since who doesn't want to eat flapjacks in a blizzard? Home - and then I went out again, after the snow started, and wandered around town in the surreal, and quite wonderful, balmy winter wonderland. It was - a very good couple days.

Not losing power puts you in that kind of mood. In this day and age, really, that's pretty much all there is - if the power stays on, weather isn't going to do me much harm. That is a luxury for which I am grateful. (And, of course, I continue to hope the trees stay up. But they've stayed up through 2 hurricanes and a couple blizzards while I've been here, so I guess I should be all right....

ALl right - music: which, though it is too easy - how often do you get a big snow storm on a Friday? So you're getting snowy music today!

1. Black Sabbath - Snowblind
2. Captain Beefheart - Steal Softly Through Snow
3. Dirty Three - Ashen Snow
4. Frank Zappa - Don't Eat the Yellow Snow
5. Mercury Rev - Snowflake in a Hot World
6. The Pop Group - The Snow Girl
7. Pere Ubu - Snowy Livonia
8. Mono - Ashes in the Snow
9. DAvid Sylvain - Snow White in Appalachia
10. Galaxie 500 - Listen! The Snow is Falling

Video? I will have to settle for Dean and Britta, rather than Galaxie 500 (or Yoko), but I want a live version:



And - I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss diabolical influence, but - I don;t have this on iTunes, but... who can resist a shitty Styx video? not me!



Friday, February 01, 2013

Friday Music Post (post post post...)

February - winter's back, after a brief absence - not as bad, I suppose, as last week... Anyway - off we go! Randomly...

1. Radiohead - Bones
2. Six Organs of Admittance - Spirits Abandoned
3. AC/DC - Get it Hot
4. Otis Redding - Mr. Pitiful
5. Xiu Xiu - Pox
6. Echo & The Bunnymen - The Cutter
7. Outkast - a Bad Note
8. Jeff Beck - The Morning Dew
9. Sonic Youth - Quest for the Cup
10. Echo & The Bunnymen - Lips Like Sugar

Video - I think iTunes has sent a clear message there, huh?



And -



And for that matter - Radiohead at the most Echoish, no?

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

January Director of the Month - Nagisa Oshima

I am going to begin a new series - taking off from this one: A Favorite Directors Blogathon, started at Loren Rosson III's The Busybody, then picked up by others. I can't claim any direct connection, except that I've seen his posts (and some others, like Carson Lund's), and figure it is a good idea. I have been thinking about a way to write about directors - or maybe make some kind of ranking. I did that once, a long time ago - it's not a list that changes all that often, but it would be nice to revisit it...

And so - let us begin. I will start with Nagisa Oshima, partly to celebrate his career on the occasion of his death, though also because he makes a good starting point. To the extend that this is a countdown, he would make sense - he probably lands around 20 or so all time - though it isn't that much of a countdown. I prefer Andrew Sarris' method of lumping them - pantheon, far side of paradise, etc. (Though I've never quite managed to figure out how to make them fit his categories; but the general principal obtains.) Now - this series is obviously devoted to the pantheon - though even in the pantheon, there might be some striation. Up there at the top, there are the greater gods, the inner circle, the holy trinity - Ozu, with Capra and Godard and Mizoguchi right there at his side; then - oh - Hawks and Altman, Imamura, Rivette, Fritz Lang... and so on. I am not going to commit to anything like a list at this point - but I want to sketch in the parameters of what I want to write about....

That is enough preamble. Oshima: it took me a while to warm to him (if "warm" is a word you could ever use for him) - took a while to see enough of his films, and to see them in a proper format - and it was hard to know what to make of him when I did see them. I found him hard to place - it wasn't until I'd seen most of his films that he started to make sense to me. Some of this is because of his characteristic style and subject matter - which is to say - the lack of a characteristic style and subject matter. He changes constantly, in every dimension - content, style, form, tone - think just about the three films he made in 1960: Cruel Story of Youth - a youth behaving badly film; The Sun's Burial, an ensemble piece about a slum; Night and Fog in Japan, another ensemble piece, this time among political types; they are all fairly gorgeous widescreen color films, but the way they are made varies - look at how theatrical, formal, artificial, Night and Fog in Japan is, compared to the others... And move forward - he made black and white films, color films; widescreen and low tech; he adapted books (The Catch) and comics (Band of Ninja), worked with theatrical groups (Diary of a Shinjuku Thief - which remains the one major Oshima I haven't been able to see, to my intense annoyance), made films within films (The Man Who Left His Will On Film); made historical films and contemporary films, made pornographic films, horror films, surrealist comedies, samurai films, made films in English and French as well as Japanese...

It's odd: his eclecticism reminds me of Ichikawa, a comparison that might not go over very well - Oshima did not like Ichikawa, I believe. But they both have an ability to move among many styles, radically different styles, and maintain their identities. They carry their tone, almost everywhere - and it's a similar tone - dark, cool, comic - usually given fairly direct political implications by Oshima, more indirectly so by Ichikawa.... They are also alike in moving among all these styles while maintaining a similar technical mastery - neither one is capable of a bad shot... Oshima distinguishes himself, I think, steps above Ichikawa, in his critical capacity - as a filmmaker, you can never quite forget that he is a critic. He moves among a number of different filmmaking modes, always interested, I think, in how these modes work - he's always exploring film as a form, as a way of making meaning. This is something that links him to Godard, I think - Godard is like that too, an essayist in film. Many of the French New Wave directors had that quality - Rivette, Moullet - of using their films as ways to explore the art form... Oshima shares that. He does, I think, parallel the European filmmakers of the time - affinities appear, especially for Godard, Antonioni, and Pasolini. Though in fact, I think he is more varied and experimental than any of them, other than Godard. He did try damned near everything.

Finally - when I wrote about Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence last year, I noted that he was one of the great political filmmakers - he is. The complexity of the power relations in that film - the hierarchies, class divisions, national divisions (Japanese and Korean, English and South African, and Dutch and so on), personal divisions - is common to his films. They all explore power and its distribution, how it works in real society. His interest in the place of Koreans in Japanese society is a recurring example.... I don't think it would be too far off to say that he is the most interesting political filmmaker in the world.

Okay - enough of that... on to the films! I am not going to drag these out, just name and move on, unless something seems like it needs to be said.

1. The Ceremony - A big family saga stretching from the end of WWII to the 1970s, full of Manchurians, war criminals, right wing loons, a token communist, and series of ceremonies - with other activities (baseball, sex, meals) presented as rituals themselves. It reminded me of some of the big epic Oliveira pictures, Doomed Love or Francesca - that kind of absurdity, theatricality, with the gorgeous look of the rest of Oshima's films.

2. The Sun's Burial - plays like a nihilistic version of Pigs and Battleships - nasty criminals in the slums. A woman is buying blood from beggars and threading her way through a variety of obstacles - rival gangs, political; agitators, her junk lord father, various weak men who try to love her. She is a monumental villain, but she is also more or less indestructible. (She might as well be a vampire - immortal, living off the blood of others...) It is a great looking film, though we'll get to say that a lot in this post - understated lighting, all browns and golds, wonderful widescreen compositions, long fluid takes - not as showy as some contemporaries (SUzuki, say), or as detailed as Imamura, but still brilliant.

3. Boy - Story of a family of con men, who work by staging car accidents - seen through the eyes of a boy.... Again - extraordinary looking - no shots less than amazing, and many among the classics: the 2 kids sitting in the snow talking about their snowman/alien; a brawl at an inn in black and white that goes to color at the end. The family at the northernmost tip of Japan in a blizzard. Full of gorgeous off center compositions, oddly balanced, things coming in and out of the frame - some disruptive editing, plenty of sound and color tricks. Japanese flags everywhere...

4. Death by Hanging - R (a Korean) is condemned to be hanged - he is hanged, but doesn't die. This poses a problem - the cops and officials set out to prove to him first that he is R, then, that he is a killer, and third, that he is guilty and should die. They do this by acting out his story - first comically, but then almost seriously (as R starts to get involved) then moving out into the streets. Oshima gets in a number of modes in this one film - hilarious at times, horrifying, politically pointed, finally strange and haunting, and moving.

5. Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence - Well, I've said my piece on this before - it does not have the reputation some of his others have, but I think it probably should. It is hard to find anything approaching its political complexity in any other war films - especially as it applies its complex view of power to both sides. About seeing the other side from the other side, under pressure....

6. Ai No Corrida - Sada Abe story. She's a maid at an inn - she spies on the master and mistress making love, and soon enough he seduces her, and then it's off to the races. Famous for the sex, I guess, though it's a pretty convincing film - seeing the rest of his films reveals its place better. You can see how it builds on Ceremony or Boy. The satire is toned down, but it's still mordantly funny. And political - that famous scene, where he's passed by a column of soldiers, going the opposite way - they to their doom, he to his... though his seems a lot more admirable.

7. The Man Who Left His Will On Film - Begins with footage of a man with a camera who is immediately chased by someone else. The first man appears to kill himself while the chaser - Motoki - watches. From there it moves to a meeting by a group trying to make political films - then to scenes with Motoki and Yasuko (the dead man's lover? or Motoki's?) talking about film, these films, the other man - who may or may not exist - etc. You are down the rabbit hole in a hurry here. What emerges, though, is a film about Tokyo - documentary footage of riots, a film of landscapes they all argue about, the filmmakers going into the streets themselvesm to try to recreate the testament film - the most memorable, interesting element of the film is the view of the locations - the streets, the highways, the buildings, the neighborhoods. Which is an interesting twist...

8. Night and Fog in Japan - A wedding of a couple who met during the ANPO protests, a reporter and an activist; their friends gather, and old rivalries and such reemerge, mostly around a boy who disappeared during the protests. That, in turn,sets off flashbacks by the score - to 1950 when the groom's generation agitated against an earlier treaty andthe Korean war, as well as to the ANPO protests (which happened, one should note, in June 1960 - the film was released in October 1960 (though not for long...) Oshima uses every trick in the book - it looks like it's inpsired by La Chinoise at times, which is an impressive feat for 7 years earlier - black outs (and white outs), freeze frames, explicit theatrical lighting and other effects, automated camera movements (tracking around the room), hidden cuts, putting different times and places in the same shot, inserted texts (writing on the walls, like Ozu or Godard), books, inserted speeches, long arguments about politics, and very fractured narative. Though for all that, the story itself might not be so extreme - the wedding is a carvival site to bring all these people together - the airing of grievances follows. And while it is politically motivated, the basic story is mostly just a mystery story - how did the "spy" get away? who rang the buzzer? Still - it works - it makes the political factionalism vivid and interesting; individuates the characters to a remarkable extent - and generally retains the post-modern air of the whole thing.

9. Cruel Story of Youth - Story of student and a girl - he rescues her from a lecher, they hang around, he seduces her, they start shaking men down, using her for bait - these two disaffected youths are contrasted with her sister and the man she used to love - he was an idealist, but now he runs an abortion clinic.... In that, it anticipates the generational conflicts of Night and Fog in Japan, without the explicit politics. It skirts the political, though - released in June, 1960, it contains footage from some of the anti-ANPO demonstrations that spring.

10. Violence at Noon - Mostly about a rapist and murderer, with flashbacks to a love confusion at a kind of collective farm that was washed away by a flood. Marked by some very cool weird cuts. This one, like a couple of Oshima's films in the early 60s, feels at times like Imamura - oddly, Oshima tends to go for the shocks more....

There are plenty more worthwhile Oshimas - some of them, at least, on DVD in the states. They are worth seeing, though unless you want to see Charlotte Rampling having an affair with an chimp, you might want to steer around Max Mon Amour.

Friday, January 25, 2013

Torturer's Apprentices

Zero Dark Thirty (11/15) - There is a movie there, a pretty good one, too, a procedural in the vein of Zodiac (though not quite in Zodiac's league), with a more - conclusive - ending.... But the film as film has tended to be obscured by the talk about the torture in the film - and though it's tempting to sigh about that, that is also probably as it should be. It's unfortunate that the talk about torture has tended to make the film itself somewhat less visible than it might have been - you can see parts of the film world shying away from it - it seems to have cost Kathryn Bigelow a best director nomination, and to be making it more of a long shot for best picture than it might have been.... The first thing to note is that, whatever you think the film says about torture, the fact that it is willing to include it, to address it, directly (as directly as it does) is commendable. Torture is a shameful element of our history - and more shameful for our general inability to actually address it. We seem to want it both ways - we did it, we seem relieved not to do it anymore - but we don't quite want to face the consequences of having done it. That is very close to our official position on torture. The unofficial position might be even squishier - you can probably find enough people who would, if they were compelled to consider it, defend it - but these days, the culture seems to prefer forgetting about it. And that tendency leaves this film rather isolated - because it does address it, directly and seriously - whatever you think the film says about torture, it is certainly not eliding it. That, by itself, is something worth praising.

Still, that's just the start - what does the film actually say about torture? It is notable that in fact, there are claims on both sides - there are those who say it defends torture - some who say it condemns torture; some who say it shows torture working - others who say it shows torture not working.... with multiple positions between, and differing notions of how it positions the viewer and - more..... Well - to me, it seems that this multiplicity of interpretation is a feature, not a bug - it is a deliberate result of the film's design. I think Zero Dark Thirty is made in a way that allows you to see what you want to see. If you want to see the Americans as making themselves morally indistinguishable from the terrorists they are torturing - you probably can. If you want to see that torture works and without it Bin Laden would be alive - you probably can; if you want to see that torture is a terrible thing, and made us all a little worse, but ya know, in the end, without it, Bin Laden would be alive - well - you can probably find that, too. Whether you find it or put it there - there's plenty of room for all of these ideas. This openness is a function of the style - the distance, the neutrality, the coolness of the style - and the main character. Chastain does not emote, does not reveal much beyond her professional behavior - Bigelow does likewise, leaving Maya as a blank cipher, someone whose non-CIA life is invisible, whether it exists or not. Bigelow doesn't show it - and when other characters try to find it, Maya deflects it as well. You won't get any humanization here. You get emotion - but it's professional emotion - pride or impatience or disappointment... I think the effect of this strategy is to avoid judgment on the things we see. The film seldom guides us. It trusts us to understand what we see - it challenges us to think about what we see, and interpret it. Though I don't think it's unfair to say it's careful ambiguity is there precisely to avoid responsibility for what it shows - to avoid taking sides, on things where not making moral judgments might just be a moral judgment itself. At least - an unwillingness to commit, in public.

But on balance, I would say its neutrality is more a good thing than a bad one. And - despite it's unwillingness to really commit to a final word on torture, I think the film does make at least one fairly clear judgment about torture. It is, I have said, a procedural, a film about competence, about a task to be completed and the means of completing it, the methods for completing it... and in that context - torture is shown as a shortcut - it's cheating. And what's more, it's a waste of time. Taking it as a procedural - what you see is 7 years of torture that yields nothing, ends, more or less, in failure and frustration - only to start over again, with someone who has gone to the trouble of going through the files - a rather less exciting, or horrifying, piece of work than stuffing a guy into a box - but which works. And maybe all that torture gave them a clue or two, someone to look for - but none of it mattered without the real work of going through the files, tracking down phone numbers, getting wiretaps, putting agents on the ground, looking for him, staking out miles of road, to find out where he lived. There is a pragmatic argument against torture there - that it is time wasted. Anything you got with torture you could have gotten somewhere else, and probably faster.

The thing is - you can get what you want with torture, if what you want is to hurt people and make them beg for mercy. Maybe to intimidate other people - to control them.... Ask the Stasi! It's interesting that Christian Petzold's quite remarkable Barbara (12/15) has a somewhat similar beginning to ZDT. The character types in the opening parts of ZDT are very similar to those in Barbara - the new girl, a hotshot from the city; the charismatic old hand at this sort of thing, who initiates her and guides her... In ZDT he makes her a torturer; in Barbara he's a spy, and operates in a kind of moral half world between her and the Stasi. Barbara's story is this - a doctor comes to a remote part of Germany, from Berlin. She's some kind of political problem - the local secret police and the head doctor at the hospital where she works are keeping an eye on her. She does her job, she tries to help people - she also makes plans to escape. And - the police keep tabs on her - searching her, harassing her, every time she goes out of sight... There are subplots - a girl who keeps running away from a work farm; a boy who tried to kill himself - the doctors treat them, though sometimes the treatment needed isn't medical... Things build, to medical crises and political crises, sacrifices are made, large and small acts of heroism. All of it is shown with consummate care and style, without quite showing off. A great little film.

And one that, if we're thinking about torture, ought to tell us something - it is not ambiguous. It is not sentimental about torture. Torture, the police state, is aimed at intimidation - you can make anyone say anything you want them to. Which the CIA men in ZDT don't seem to realize is not what their job is - they want their prisoners to tell them things they don't know - but torture is designed to make people tell you what you want to hear. The one won't get you to the other. The East Germans didn't seem to have those illusions - they use torture to intimidate - and not just the person being tortured. They are made examples of - they are used to terrify other people into submission. Which works - until it doesn't... all that paranoia builds, and it reaches a point where the intimidation doesn't work anymore - people will do anything, risk death, to leave.

One more film: Central Park Five (11/15) - a documentary about five black and hispanic teenagers accused of a horrific rape in Central Park in 1989. Accused and convicted - but then freed, when the real attacker confessed in 2002. And this film provides what might be an even clearer statement of that half-hidden thesis of Zero Dark Thirty - that torture only gets people to say what you want them to say; that in police work, it is almost always a shortcut, used to avoid the real work of actually catching the perpetrators. The story here is an explicit version of what I said about ZDT - a crime committed - the cops rounded up suspects - went to work on them, using rather harsh and dubious means to get confessions - and as soon as the kids admitted something, the cops shut down everything else. They had reasons to be looking for Matias Reyes, the real attacker, from the start; they ignored evidence from the time that would have led them away from the people they arrested. There was no forensic evidence - how can you have a brutal rape and no trace of the rapist? or - have traces of the rapist, but no traces of the 5 people you arrested for the rape? there was no logic in it - but they got what they wanted, by keeping a bunch of teenagers up all night, berating them - maybe this didn't count as torture, though it's pretty damned close - especially used against 14 year olds.

Friday in January

Where did this week go? All right - I have a couple posts in the pipeline, so I might make up for the lack of posting with a surfeit of material in the coming week. (Surfeit, in my case, meaning, probably, 2 posts - oy...) Meanwhile, a completely random ten with no special significance whatsoever...

1. Brian Jonestown Massacre - Cold to the Touch
2. Spiral Stairs - Cold Change
3. Stephen Malkmus - Cold Son
4. Janelle Monae - Cold War
5. Klaus Nomi - The Cold Song
6. Husker Du - Ice Cold Ice
7. Public Enemy - Cold Lampin' with Flavor
8. Rocket from the Tombs - So Cold
9. White Heaven - My Cold Dimention
10. The White Stripes - In the Cold Night

Video? Well, who knows cold better than a Minnesotan? Mr. Mould?



Speaking of Minnesota - new Prince song out...



and I guess I'll post this too - audio only, but the world can always use a bit of White Heaven.... they sound cold!

Friday, January 18, 2013

Musical Friday

And - without much ceremony, here is today's Friday Random Ten:

1. Red Crayola - War Sucks
2. Jimmy Reed - Honest I do
3. Elvis Costello - Wednesday Week
4. AC/DC - Beating Around the Bush
5. Lone Justice - Pass It On
6. Elastica - Never Here
7. Melvins - At the Stake
8. Badfinger - Maybe Tomorrow
9. Velvet Underground - Sister Ray (Live)
10. Grateful Dead - China Cat Sunflower

Very good... and video? Let's go topical, with John Cale: when you've begun to think like a gun, the days of the year have suddenly gone...



hey don't you do that, you're gonna stain the carpet... though this is an all Jersey version, Feelies and Yo La Tengo...



Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Nagisa Oshima

Nagisa Oshima has died... The period in which he emerged, the Japanese new wave, if you can call it that, is one of the high points, the absolute high points, of film history. I am, fairly obviously, more of an Imamura man - but I guess that's like saying I'm more of an Ozu man than a Mizoguchi man - there's not that big a gap. And Oshima is the director who defines the period for me - his experimentation, overt political engagement, intellectual ambition, and rather all-encompanssing interests - epitomize the era - inventive, challenging, and always beautiful filmmaking. His contemporaries do seem to have found their niches, worked a more particular ground - maybe only Yoshida can approach the variety of film work Oshima did... He was, then, one of the great ones - and I salute him.