Pierre Henry

I love this man. Genius of Musique Concrete and grumpy old guy. There is a great documentary out on him, Pierre Henry: The Art of Sounds, which is quite entertaining. I recommend it if you're intrigued by the post-war avant garde or just interested in how an innovator of mashups/sampling/electronica/noise continues to do his thing in his 80s.

A Petty Quibble

While reading arguments over who has experienced worse treatment at the hands of America's political partisans, George W. Bush or Barack Obama (a fairly childish argument in and of itself), I commonly see references to a "snuff film," a "liberal assassination fantasy" about President Bush, with the implication that American leftists were responsible for it. Not so.

That film, titled Death of a President (2006), was not, as is often believed, a product of the "professional left." It was not produced in the United States nor by an American citizen. It is a British film, with a British director, British writers, and British financing.

Like this post's title indicates, it's merely a petty quibble, and my wish here is to clarify.
Cheers

Puzzling

(It's been a while. . . .)


My (recovering) beloved and I caught an intriguing film the other day, a documentary titled Constantine's Sword, a study of Christianity and anti-Semitism, as well as Christianity and militarism (be it the US Air Force, Medieval Crusaders, or "Hitler's Cardinal"[aka "Hitler's Pope]). An interesting film--heavy on talking heads and filmed evidnce (but retrospectively harmed, perhaps, by its use of interviews with the now-discredited Ted Haggard--although the film came out last year, the interviews were recorded before the Haggard-meth-and gay sex scandal broke loose). Overall, it was a valid, and valuable, examination of the historical alignment of Western religion demonizing "the Other."

I wonder, though, why Blockbuster (from whence I rented the item) places a "Youth Restricted" sticker on this film. I mean, this is a sticker they usually place on unrated horror films . . . and Constantine's Sword could easily play--unedited--on The History Channel.

Maybe it's just my local Blockbuster that qualifies the film as "youth restricted," but I'm not so sure.

BTW: husband has completed radiation. We wait for a bit, and then he begins chemo. He's doing well. Thank you, deeply and sincerely, for your good wishes.

Penn's a Stooge

Well, according to the AP, anyway.

Sean Penn is set to play Larry in an update of The Three Stooges. I can see the fit, but Benicio Del Toro as Moe? I don't see it.

Aside: I just viewed Milk, and Penn surely deserved that Oscar. Brilliant.

Howl, Howl, Howl, Howl!

I know it can be hard for many to get all excited about a tragedy by William Shakespeare on hump day, but holy heck--PBS will broadcast The Royal Shakespeare Company's version of King Lear,directed by Trevor Nunn, with Sir Ian McKellen in the title role, tonight. Starting tomorrow, you can view the film in its entirety here.

If you've not seen Lear, one of the true, universal masterpieces of literature, get ready for corruption of the first order: greed, envy, adultery, murder, madness, and a spot of eye-gouging--it's all here, and its examination of human frailty is heartbreaking.

It's on at 9:00 pm local time, and should you choose to miss The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Nancy Grace, Access Hollywood, etc. etc., Lear is well worth your time.

Also--if you "enjoy" the play (it's hard to say if it's "enjoyable," but catharsis and all that, you know?), If you haven't seen the Royal National Company's version (from 1997), directed by Richard Eyre and featuring Ian Holm as Lear, grab it from Netflix, your local public library, or Amazon. Stark, horrific,mesmerizing, Outstanding.

Anyway, McKellen has received absolutely top reviews for his interpretation of Lear, and I am looking forward to it. Catharsis and all that, you know?

Update: Ah, catharsis. Nunn's Lear was every bit as compelling as I'd hoped. McKellen's Lear touches the heart; his descent into insanity--or, perhaps, senility--strikes a note of authenticity. I was a little dubious about Tom O' Bedlam, but only a little. Kent rocked his northern accent, and Gloucester--ah, what can you say? Goneril and Regan were appropriately demonic in their lust for power and a (pretty darn attractive) Edmund.

All in all, it's a magnificent production, and, if you missed the broadcast, you can watch it online at PBS's website.

The Richest Man in Town

Wendell Jamieson’s essay, “Wonderful? Sorry, George, It’s a Pitiful, Dreadful Life” reminds us that It’s a Wonderful Life (a film I truly love) is a masterpiece of dark cinema rather than a corny, cheerful holiday flick. Sure, there are corny bits, but it’s as much based in reality (albeit "heightened" reality") as it is fantasy. As Jamieson points out,

It’s a Wonderful Life” is a terrifying, asphyxiating story about growing up and relinquishing your dreams, of seeing your father driven to the grave before his time, of living among bitter, small-minded people. It is a story of being trapped, of compromising, of watching others move ahead and away, of becoming so filled with rage that you verbally abuse your children, their teacher and your oppressively perfect wife. It is also a nightmare account of an endless home renovation.

In nearly every respect, George Bailey is “everyman.” He is generous and kind to a fault, but he’s also frustrated by closing opportunities and repressive expectations based on “honor.” The moments when George’s self-control shatters, when his anger, shame, and fear break through that kind demeanor, are chilling—and recognizable. Shouting and shaking Mary before their kiss? The blow up at the kids? Smashing up the living room corner that represents his burst dreams (per the model and the architectural drawings)? The assault on Uncle Billy? This is a cheerful holiday film?

Although we sympathize with Mary, the children, and the poor old fool, Uncle Billy, we recognize George’s fears and frustrations. We might well recognize George’s suicidal tendencies.

Sure, no angels-second-class will come down to rescue us, and it’s probably a stretch to assume that our friends and neighbors would spontaneously donate $8,000 to rescue us from apparent financial malfeasance (in today’s climate, those people would likely string George up). But the film is a redemption story, and George’s redemption is that every one in town (sans old man Potter) acknowledges his lifelong sacrifices and confirming that he has made a difference in their lives. A presence rather than a non-entity. The film reminds us that, regardless of our wealth or education, our lives touch and enrich each others’. This is why the film has achieved such a vast, persistent audience—because we relate to George, and because the film affirms that we matter.

Avoiding Politics Tonight

A post that has absolutely nothing to do with politics or scandal.

Yesterevening I settled down to watch Dziga Vertov's Man With a Movie Camera, but my heart wasn't in it. I switched over to the cable and began watching Ratatouille instead. Okay, it's a bit of a contrast--from silent Soviet-era avant-garde to splashy Pixar animation--but let me tell you--Ratatouille was a treat. Absolutely delightful, charming, and fresh. I had my doubts--seriously, an hour or so gazing on animated rat hordes? (shudder). The film won me over completely--especially Peter O'Toole's voicing of the gothic and Vincent Price-y restaurant critic Atom Ego (I swear this is a reference to filmmaker Atom Egoyan).

Then another shift. I plugged in a dvd of what promised to be a cheesy Italian giallo titled My Dear Killer (I know--it sounds awful). To my pleased surprise, it was terrific enough to keep me awake past my bedtime. It avoided the giallo cliches, for the most part anyway, and focused on plot rather than death--blackmail, kidnapping, questionable affections for children, and a pretty decent Agatha Christie-type ending that I won't go into. And for once, George Hilton really impressed me.

So last night was a solid gold movie night.

On another note: The other night I tried watching Paul Naschy's turn in Rojo Sangre. Didn't finish it. What an awful film--the director tried to go all out in terms of style and flash, but the plot, although promising (formerly successful actor gets his vengeance out, a la Vincent Price), was terrible--it descended into sheer nastiness. Totally unappealing in every way.


One hundred (100) days until the election!

Dario Argento in the New York Times!

A non-election-related post. It had to happen sooner or later--evidence of a life outside of political blogs.

Terrence Rafferty at the New York Times offers a compelling discussion of giallo maestro Dario Argento’s work, including references to his newest film, the long-awaited conclusion to his “Three Mothers” trilogy, Mother of Tears. Rafferty argues that Argento's aestheticism elevates him as a filmmaker, regardless of the carnage on display in works such as Suspiria, Inferno, (the first two "installments" of the trilogy), Deep Red and The Bird With the Crystal Plumage. He also presents several good points on Argento as a director who sees the horror of urban lives.

Expelled: Ben Stein’s “Smart New Ideas” ?

In honor of the premier of Expelled, Ben Stein’s film about the exclusion of intelligent design/creationism from school curricula, I offer these snippets to support his argument that fresh ideas that conflict with evolutionary theory are excluded from the classroom:

“Sow evolution as taught by Darwin and [Herbert] Spencer and you reap Nietzche, [Heinrich von] Treitzchke, and [Friedrich von] Bernhardi, and then you reap the present way, with its cruelty, its lust, its murder, its rape, its agony, its death and almost universal dissolution and hell” (Torrey 10-11). [1]

On Evolutionary Theory:

After many years’ investigation of the philosophy of evolution, an investigation carried on in full sympathy with the widest application of that captivating theory, I have yet to see proof of a single fact showing, or tending to show, the operation of the so-called “law” or “principle” of evolution in the world of Nature. No instance has ever been found of a living thing of one species coming from ancestors of another species; and there is not the slightest ground for the belief that such a thing ever happened (Mauro 45). [2]

Aside: part of Mauro’s doubt about the theory of evolution stems from his belief that "[i]f the Bible does not give us a truthful account of the events of the six days recorded in its first chapter, it is not to be trusted in any of its statements " (27).

Some Middle Ground on the Six Days (perhaps):

Does science, then, really, contradict Genesis I.? [. . .]Here certainly is no detailed description of the process of the formation of the earth in terms anticipative of modern science—terms which would have been unintelligible to the original readers—but a sublime picture, true to the order of nature, as it is to the broad facts even of geological succession [. . . .] The “six days” may remain as a difficulty to some, but if this is not part of the symbolic setting of the picture—a great divine “week” of work—one may well ask, as was done by Augustine long before geology was thought of, what kind of “days” these were which rolled their course before the sun, with its twenty-four hours of diurnal measurement, was appointed to that end? There is no violence done to the narrative in substituting in thought “aeonic” days—vast cosmic periods—for “days” in our narrower, sun-measured scale. The the last trace of apparent "conflict" disappears (101). [3]

Although Stein’s premise in the film is that academia prevents the airing of “smart new ideas” on the complex origins of the universe, please note that all of the above, which echo throughout Expelled, were written prior to 1920. Items one and two, especially, remain the primary objections to the theory of evolution. Apparently, some doctrines simply don’t, well, evolve.

1) Reuben Torrey. “What the War Teaches, or, The Greatest Lesson of 1917.” LA: Bible Institute of LA, 1918.
2) Philip Mauro. “Life in the Word.” The Fundamentals. Vol. 5. LA: Bible Institute of LA, 1917.
3) James Orr, “Science and the Christian Faith.” The Fundamentals. Vol.4. LA: Bible Institute of LA, 1917.

Kenneth Anger's Rabbit's Moon

I got through my MA thesis by viewing Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs daily. Whenever I settled down for a spate of scholarship, I’d plug my VHS tape in and start typing along to Tim Roth's howls ("I'm fuckin' dyin' here"). It was awesome (if a little disturbing). Anyway, I’ve lacked a similar soundtrack for my current project. I think I’ve found it.
Rabbit’s Moon, a film by Kenneth Anger, is gorgeously shot in blues and silvers and with a skipped-frame technique (I’m sure there’s a proper name for this, but I’m unfamiliar with it). Anger shot the film in a warehouse in Paris during 1950. According to the Anger's commentary on the DVD, three students of Marcel Marceau’s school of mime perform in the film; they enact traditional figures from the Commedia dell’Arte (Pierrot, Harlequin, and Columbine).

Anger re-edited the film in 1972 and again in 1979. The version that I find most captivating is that of 1979, and part of the reason is its soundtrack: Rabbit’s Moon features a kinda glam, kinda Beatles-esque, but supercool song titled “It Came in the Night.” A gentleman named Andy Arthurs wrote the song, and his Brit band “A Raincoat” released it as a single in 1975 (aside: Mr Arthurs is now a Professor at the Queensland University of Technology).
Rather than "ruin" Rabbit’s Moon with a synopsis, I’ll show you towards YouTube to view the 1979 version. Caveat: the visual quality isn’t the best, but you get a taste for this hypnotic film’s evocative, plaintive, lyric beauty.

NB: Superfilmsleuth Michael Cohen details his seven year search to identify “It Came in the Night” and its writer at Flickhead. Cohen's page also features an mp3 of “It Came in the Night” for download.

Rabbit’s Moon at IMDB

More Giallo!

And after writing an entry on Giallo.....

I thought I'd scrubbed the excellent local Hollywood Video for horror/suspense titles (it really is a great local HV--they actually specialize in foreign and independent films). But ah! Today I found Crimes of the Black Cat (although I prefer its Italian title: Seven Shawls of Yellow Silk)
A description from xploitedcinema :

A blind pianist overhears a mysterious conversation in a bar. The next day his girlfriend is murdered. The only clue: a yellow silk scarf. This Giallo by the [director] Sergio Pastore is along the lines of Dario Argento and Mario Bava’s early work even if the movie’s most famous scene is ‘borrowed’ from Hitchcock’s legendary shower sequence… Features a haunting soundtrack by Manuel De Sica whose jagged melodies are reminiscent of the best Morricone. Stars Anthony Steffen, Sylva Koscina & Giacomo Rossi-Stuart.

Well, the film isn't all that, but it's intriguing enough for a bit of late-night, post-dissertating catharsis. And the scene "borrowed" from Hitchcock is pretty horrific, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you are a really-truly hardcore Giallo fan.

Giallo! Yes, Giallo!

I've been away working on the Big Project and dealing with existential issues that you certainly do not want to hear about. I've also embarked on a mission to lose some [expletive] weight (which might well be tied to said existential issues--but I've lost ten pounds so wahey!). Rather than go on and on and on about emotional fatness, I give you the Giallo title generator--complete with a director and plot outline!

If you're not acquainted with Giallo, it's an Italian film genre that, at its most basic, might be defined as a stylized, operatic, sometimes brutal murder mystery/thriller; you can usually spot a Giallo via its melodramatic title (e.g., The House With Laughing Windows, Seven Blood Stained Orchids, Short Night of Glass Dolls, Don't Torture a Duckling, etc). It's much more than that, though. I recommend Wikipedia's entry on Giallo if you're inclined to know more. And if you want to know more than that, check out this fab blog, Giallo Fever, which is run by a PhD student in Scotland.

If you've ever watched a Dario Argento film (Four Flies on Grey Velvet, Tenebrae, Profundo Rosso, or the classic Suspiria, among other titles) you'll have seen a Giallo film. Giallo elements spill into Argento's horror films as well. In fact, you could say that most of Italy's finest horror directors began with Giallo and never entirely left it. (With the exception of Lucio Fulci. He just got gross [The Gates of Hell? Zombi? Sorry. I have some standards, and they end at some woman puking up sheep intestines]).

You glimpse Giallo's influence in spaghetti westerns as well, such as those by Sergio Leone (aside: Ennio Morricone often scored Giallos, such as Argento's The Bird with the Crystal Plumage), and much, much contemporary horror (The original Friday the 13th? Say hello to Mario Bava's Twitch of the Death Nerve. Carpenter's* Halloween? Well, I think there's much of Profundo Rosso in there, but I think Carpenter cribbed from Italians across the board).

Enjoy the title generator. My favorite one so far:
A Big Green Aardvark in a Woman's Hands. Directed by Romano Pecorino

* I look forward to Rob Zombie's Halloween remake. I enjoy his old-school, USA grindhouse sensibility. Call me sick, but The Devil's Rejects was one of last year's best movies.

Celluloid Centenaries

Laurence Olivier 22/05/07

John Wayne 26/05/07

Americans to play the Bronte sisters?

Admittedly, this is a silly post, but I don’t get it this casting choice.

A new film about the Bronte sisters is in the works. Michelle Williams (Brokeback Mountain), Bryce Dallas Howard (Spiderman 3) and Evan Rachel Wood (13 [or is it Thirteen?]) will play, respectively, Charlotte, Emily, and Anne.

As The Daily Mail notes:
"The film will be the latest to feature Americans as English writers, following The Devil Wears Prada star Anne Hathaway as Jane Austen in this year's Becoming Jane and Renee Zellweger as Beatrix Potter in Miss Potter. "

"Bronte will be directed and written by British filmmaker Charles Sturridge, who recently directed the Lassie remake. "

There are so many wonderful British actresses out there, how is it that these roles go to Americans? Okay, Zellwegger produced the Beatrix Potter movie, but you get the point.

I’d love a Bronte movie, and the players named are solid actresses, but I wonder if the Yanks can carry off a convincing portrayal of the Yorkshire trio.

At the very least, let’s hope the producers turn the glam off.

"Brokeback" for 12 year olds?

Something is seriously wonky here.
A 12 year old’s grandparents filed a lawsuit against her school because a substitute teacher, a Ms. Buford, showed students--get this--Brokeback Mountain. In class.

Now, personally I think Brokeback is a pretty exceptional film. Ang Lee, Heath Ledger, and Jake Gyllenhall are to be commended for their work. That being said, it’s hardly an appropriate film for eighth graders. It’s rated R for a reason. At the very least, permission slips should have been distributed and collected.

What the article fails to mention is whether the teacher showed clips or an edited version, which could be both acceptable and appropriate (depending on her purpose in showing it), and I hope that this is the case. I find it hard to believe that someone would be so foolish, so unthinking, so, well, stupid to show an R-rated, controversial film in our current socio-cultural atmosphere. For crying out loud, teachers are losing their jobs for far-less significant matters.

Consider Tresa Waggoner. A music teacher in Bennett, Colorado who was placed on administrative leave because she showed clips from an old video about Gounod’s opera Faust to her class. The video was produced for children (featuring Joan Sutherland and sock puppets). Waggoner was called a devil-worshipper, a lesbian, and lord knows what else.

Or the Texas teacher--Sydney McGee--who was reprimanded and removed from teaching after taking her class to an art museum where, horrors! They saw sculptures of nudes. It was a school-approved field trip, and she’s asked the principal about it beforehand. The school district claimed that McGee’s performance was sub-par, and that the field trip only played a small role in their decision to remove her.

But while these stories exemplify the silliness of so many “protect the children” arguments, Ms. Buford’s actions--if she did, indeed, show the film in its entirety--reinforce those arguments; she’s given more ammo to the curriculum police, which only further “justifies” concerns about “devil-worshipping” music teachers, and “inappropriate” museum trips.