Week in Film: 7/18/16-7/24/16

Week in Film: 7/18/16-7/24/16

Film of the Week: The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie
   Year: 1972
   Director: Luis Bunuel

       A group of bourgeoisie hosts and houseguests try and eat a meal, on many occasions, and find themselves constantly being interrupted, set back, or dreaming. This could almost be called an influence on Inception, on account of now many dreams within dreams within dreams there are. It's primarily a takedown of the bourgeoisie class, but I think there's something else lying below the skin, something more sinister, something probably just slightly too out of reach to be able to grasp, or comprehend fully. It's like Mulholland Drive, not just in its surrealism, but in its ability to suggest the dark.

       Surrealism is one of my favorite modes of expression in the arts, and this is a fine example of it. As the reasons for their inability to eat dinner become more and more absurd, one of the primary functions of surrealism starts to come into focus: it's ability to expose truths reality simply cannot at times. We are shown on many occasions glimpses inside the heads of the characters via dream sequence. One dreams of being murdered by robbers, another of committing murder himself. The most telling of these is the sequence where the guests are invited to attend dinner at the colonels house, and find themselves on stage. They don't know the lines. They don't know what their supposed to be doing. The audience boos and walks out on the "production", after the guests themselves begin leaving the stage. Many eyes are waiting for them to make a move, and they cannot, so everyone, the players and the audience, just leave in embarrassment and frustration.

       Bunuel goes beyond a criticism of the upper class, however. There are other, more troubling dream sequences and memories retold. Like of the dead mother who tells her son to murder his false father. Or the dream about wandering the streets of the dead, running into long lost acquaintances. These are told by more of the same class, but there is a feeling they go beyond simple mocking or critique. They're darker pieces of the puzzle, ones who's places are just as unseen as their counterpart. Like I said before, there seems to be something lurking in the shadows, just out of sight. Something we, as the audience, may not want to see after all.

       Some films slip away after a viewing, and some stick with you. This is the rare movie that does neither of these things, but actually seems to grow in memory. The more I write about it, the more I find I want to see it again. One of the things I admire most in film is the ability to capture the imagination in such a way that the movie lives in the mind and its shadows darken the more thought is given to it, almost like its feeding off the thoughts. Not many movies have this quality, I can only think of a handful: Hitchcock's Vertigo, Lynch's Mulholland Drive, Coppola's Apocalypse Now. This is the kind of thing I'll have to revisit, explore it's dark crevices more.

   Rating: A

The Rest:

Here Comes Mr. Jordan

   Year: 1941

   Director: Alexander Hall

       Sometimes all you need is some nice entertaining fluff, and this fulfills that need nicely. It's by no means among the best of it's genre or era, but it's so pleasant and just fun that it doesn't matter. And it shouldn't matter. Sometimes it's best to throw off the critic hat and just enjoy something.

   Rating: B

The Palm Beach Story

   Year: 1942

   Director: Preston Sturges

       Where the last film I saw, Here Comes Mr. Jordan, was, as I said, "nice entertaining fluff" but "by no means the best of it's genre or era", this film in contrast is likely among the best of those things. I kind of loved this. Everything is perfect about it, and everything perfectly enjoyable and fun. There are no complaints. The only reason it doesn't get that elusive A is because of the prestige applied to that grade, and my wanting to be as sparing as possible with it. 

   Rating: A-

Vidas Secas

   Year: 1963

   Director: Nelson Pereira dos Santos

       The film is visually assaultive in it's intensity of light, to the point where you begin to feel woozy as if you've been out in the sun too long. Or maybe that has something to do with the camera work as well. I haven't seen anything quite like the way the camera is handled in this film. A lot of the shots the frames seem to bend and create weird moments of altering perspective, almost like an inverse form of 3D. Fabiano and his family and poor nomads, wandering a wasteland desert in hopes of finding work and a means of living, and one day becoming "real people", as opposed to the worthless wretches they see themselves as. It is a disquieting, powerful film about poverty, with certain moments that stand out as having incredible weight and impact on the viewer. Such among these are the death of the family dog, and the bleak yet hopeful ending shot of the family walking into the desert. 

   Rating: B+

Metropolis

   Year: 1927

   Director: Fritz Lang

       Failed to meet my expectations, which isn't really the movies fault. Features some of the most iconic and influential imagery in all of cinema, and that imagery certainly doesn't disappoint, but the rest was kind of just fine to me. I guess I was just expecting more. What else I was expecting, I'm not sure. A case of an over-bloated reputation affecting the enjoyment of a film. Expectations.

   Rating: B

Paisan

   Year: 1946

   Director: Roberto Rossellini

       Uninteresting and lacking in anything that can keep the viewer in its grasp. Six different vignettes told during WWII in Italy, all of which mostly lack any real power. Not as good as Rome, Open City, a film I wasn't even that big on either. Comes off as insignificant and poorly constructed.

   Rating: C

Taxi

   Year: 2015

   Director: Jafar Panahi

       An obvious, but good, companion piece to Abbas Kiarostami's Ten (both use the same conceit of being shot almost entirely with dashboard cams inside a car), yet not quite as good as that masterpiece. More drama unfolds in this movie, but to less emotional and intellectually provocative effect, which is not to say this film is lacking really. It just does to less affect what has been done before.

   Rating: B-

The Thin Man
   Year: 1934
   Director: W.S. Van Dyke

       Perpetually tipsy couple Nick and Nora carry this movie, but the rest is standard fare. Gets the grade it does only on the strength of it's two stars. Other than that, it's fine, but mostly forgettable.

   Rating: B-

Stroszek
   Year: 1977
   Director: Werner Herzog

       Another interpretation of the American dream, and how it's all messed up and bogus. This would have become dull by now if A: the topic weren't always so ripe for reinvention, and B: if it weren't in the hands of Werner Herzog. It's mostly a movie about misunderstandings however. The plot seems to mostly move forward based upon various failures to communicate among its players. Oddly barren and without meaning, as far as the lives of its characters go. The film of course is chock full of interpretations to be made, but the people involved slowly discover that for them, there is none, and unfortunately they don't matter much in the grand scheme of things.

   Rating: B+

Au Hasard Balthazar
   Year: 1966
   Director: Robert Bresson

       Au Hasard Balthazar is a great movie. You can tell that from watching it, and Ebert can explain why in his "great movies" review. Many consider it Bresson's masterpiece, and I suppose I can see that. But for most of the running time, I simply wasn't there. In fact, I didn't even realize I liked it till the very end. Part of that has to do with extenuating circumstances, and my ability to pay attention throughout the film, but part of it has to do with the fact that it just didn't grab me, didn't stir anything in me. It was kind of boring, to be honest, and far from, in my opinion, Bresson's best work (that I've seen anyway). Someday I'll revisit it in a better frame of mind. You kind of have to be prepared for a movie like this.

   Rating: B

A Propos de Nice
   Year: 1930
   Director: Jean Vigo

       An interesting, albeit mostly meaningless and pointless look at a sea side city, in the avant garde format. Some cool shots, but that's about it.

   Rating: C-

Jean Taris, Swimming Champion
   Year: 1931
   Director: Jean Vigo

       Even less substantial than A Propos de Nice, this one has more interesting technique, but again, nothing else of worth.

   Rating: C-

Zero de Conduite
   Year: 1933
   Director: Jean Vigo

       This was the Jean Vigo I was hoping for. You can really see the influence on so many films, from If.... to The 400 Blows. Full of whimsy and fun. The film doesn't condemn the children's actions, instead taking part and embracing the freewheeling reckless spirit of childhood.

   Rating: B

The Decameron
   Year: 1971
   Director: Pier Paolo Pasolini

       The eternal conflict between "morality" and Earthly desires, projected onto the screen by that famed debaucherer Pier Paolo Pasolini. It's an often funny series of scenes centered around religion and sex, and a blending of the two that would be called unholy, but whether it is wrong is in question. Morality is a grey zone here, and as the man in the final episode discovers, sometimes what you thought was prohibited isn't so bad after all.

   Rating: B

Bay of Angels
   Year: 1963
   Director: Jacques Demy

       A young man becomes a gambler, meets a woman, becomes infatuated, and starts living life by chance. It's never a good idea gamble with money, let alone life. It's a story about getting poisoned, and about two different lives trying to live together in a way that can only cause harm. The man misunderstands the relationship, and it is his job to misunderstand because the woman is in control, and she makes the rules. It's a sad film with a happy ending that feels false.

   Rating: B

The Merchant of Four Seasons
   Year: 1971
   Director: Rainer Werner Fassbinder

       I'm finding every Fassbinder I watch is stuck underneath the shadow of the colossally good The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant. Every one of them seems to be lacking just by comparison, which isn't fair on the movies, and is a habit I'll have to try and actively avoid in the future.

   Rating: B