léo ferré - avec le temps

My Travels And A Little Bit of This And That: Overview of some recent films I've seen in the las...

My Travels And A Little Bit of This And That: Overview of some recent films I've seen in the las...: This is not going to be a comprehensive critique of all the films I've seen merely a gentle overview which may stimulate some of you to...

Overview of some recent films I've seen in the last few weeks before end of 2013

This is not going to be a comprehensive critique of all the films I've seen merely a gentle overview which may stimulate some of you to go see the films reviewed or not. It's been a good year for films, in general, the roster has been quite rich and that's a good thing.  With the gradual disappearance of DVD's courtesy of Netflix and ITunes I worry that watching films the old conventional way, in a movie theater, will also become extinct in the not so distant future.  Perhaps this fear is unjustified, perhaps not.  Was talking to someone who has lived here for the last twenty years.  He distinctly remembers lines snaking around the block to catch a film in our little theater which still boasts five screening rooms.  I have never seen a lineup that big even for so-called marquee names like the Hunger Game franchise or any of the other blockbusters of the year which have all been screened here lasting only a few weeks at best.  True the community itself is not big, twelve thousand maybe double that in the summer although there are many communities of similar size or bigger not far away and no theater within a forty km. radius, that's a relatively big pool to draw from.  Technology is changing everything too fast and not always for the better.  I will revisit this topic in a few years to assess the state of theater going options meanwhile here are a few reviews of my latest forays.

Marius and Fanny:  Directed by Daniel Auteuil

A double bill French, no subtitles which would be a shame in any case since it's set in Southern France, Marseille specifically where the accent is so picturesque and half the fun of the movie.  This story of young, wronged love has been told many times but it still felt fresh in the hands of director and actor Daniel Auteuil and the young lovely actors he entrusted the main roles too.  Marcel Pagnol a native son of Marseille and its most famous auteur wrote the story which has been filmed more than once.  Fanny is in love with Marius but Marius has been bitten by the bug of the unknown he wants to escape the narrow confines of the bar where he works with his dad César who is also its owner.  Fanny accepts to let him go when an occasion presents itself for him to crew on a sailboat.  In her heart she knows he will never be happy until he experiences a life of adventure.  Shortly thereafter Fanny discovers she's pregnant and accepts to marry Panisse a much older man who well aware of the situation is willing to consider the child as his own and give him his name.  Panisse is a very honorable man, César approves of this choice even though he knows Fanny will never love someone other than Marius.  Marius reappears but Fanny, her heart breaking, decides to stay with Panisse, end of story.  It's simple, it's eloquent, it's heartfelt.  The one problem I had has more to do with the filming itself which was filmed more as a play than as a movie.  The camera was rather static, the sets were few and some of the action felt "staged" as a result.  Perhaps for financial reasons Auteuil did not make use of the beautiful Midi scenery.  There were a few overhead shots of Marseille and Notre-Dame de la Garde I wanted to see more of those since I was born right below the great cathedral true beacon of Marseille.  There were also a few excursions into the glorious Mediterranean "calanques" with the pines, the cicadas, the bouillabaise (fish stew) and the aquamarine water.  Would have loved more of those although the film was never meant as a travelogue of the region I'm letting maudlin sentimentality take over.  It's doubtful anybody reading this will have a chance to see these two films but if you're at all intrigued try seeking them out online if you have to.

Ain't Them Bodies Saints:  Directed by David Lowery

David Lowery is a young director I wasn't aware of prior to watching this film and he shows some serious promise. Again this is a story of young interrupted love,difficult to quibble with such eternal themes. Bob and Ruth love each other passionately.  One day a robbery goes horribly wrong, a shooting ensues, a gun is fired and a policeman is shot.  Ruth fired the shot but Bob having just discovered that Ruth is pregnant takes the fall. While in prison Bob has only one obsession, escaping and reuniting with Ruth and his child.  Comparisons have been made between this film and Terrence Malick's Badlands which featured a similar theme of star crossed young love and was also set in Texas.  Like Malick Lowery makes abundant use of the scenery and lets it speak for its characters, there is a lot of silence in between the words although that silence can speak volumes.  He makes great use of natural light although he's partial to sunset rather than sundown like Malick.
These are facile comparisons there will be ample opportunity for Lowery to prove whether he can go the distance as a director.  Malick has been notoriously spotty having completed only six films in a career spanning four decades, not a tremendous output, Lowery with three films to his credit is already halfway there in terms of sheer production. Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara have genuine chemistry and Ben Foster as the wounded cop turned protector is also very good.

The Wolf of Wall Street:  Directed by Martin Scorsese

I had great hopes for this one, I've been a fan of Scorsese's work since earlier on in his career.  Raging Bull is still one of the greatest films of all times, a genuine hit you in the heart and guts masterpiece.  The term masterpiece is bandied around far too often but in the case of Raging Bull it's a deserving crown.  Of course there have been hits and misses in his career since those early days. The remake of the Chinese Infernal Affairs renamed The Departed and for which Scorsese won an Oscar was never as good as tight or as enthralling as the original and,in my opinion, not deserving of the Oscar.  Scorsese should have won for either Taxi Driver or better yet Raging Bull the Academy is often very shortsighted. Regardless I intended to discuss The Wolf of Wall Street and lay this one to rest.  I read somewhere that both Scorsese and Di Caprio couldn't wait to option the book on which the film is based.  I suppose it has a lot of the lurid elements Scorsese appears to prefer,drugs,sex, wantonness, lack of morality,violence not of a gun variety but of a predatory nature nonetheless and as a bonus not one single great female character.  This is something I have come to notice over the course of Scorsese's oeuvre.  He's a guy guy's director he simply cannot portray a female character without turning her into some kind of caricature either saint, sinner or both, bimbo or temptress, they never feel real, maybe Scorsese has a lot of unresolved mommy issues.
The film chronicles the rise and "fall" of  Jordan Belfort at first a small time trader who is content to swindle mom and pop's hard earned cash with the promise of untold returns on penny stocks.  Not satisfied with this scheme he soon graduates to bigger and more profitable targets, i.e. people who can afford to lose a lot of money and are just as greedy as Jordan Belfort and his crew of disreputable, amoral traders whose single soul destroying mantra is:  MONEY, MONEY, MONEY and its inevitable corollary: MORE,MORE, MORE.
The film is directed with brio and assurance, it's Goodfellas on an extra dose of steroids, without the guns and the murders reveling instead in the excesses of Wall Street gangsters in all their grotesqueness. The term reveling is well chosen Scorsese is having a lot of fun and so are Di Caprio and Jonas Hill, Belfort's second in command.  It's hard to fault the performance of Di Caprio he is in every frame, delivers long lines of dialogue to harangue his troops on a daily basis, loses control of his motor movements, forced to crawl to his car upon having taken one too many Quaalude and generally embraces these excesses with a kind of wanton abandon rarely captured on film.  It's definitely a one of a kind performance all the more since it didn't require any use of prosthetics, weight gain, weight loss the usual accoutrements of what constitutes a great performance.
Belfort is seductive in the same way that a poisonous snake can be both seductive and repulsive. For me the repulsion was stronger than the seduction and after three hours of unrelenting ugliness I found myself wanting
Belfort and cohorts to be arrested and put away for a very long time.  I suppose Scorsese wanted the excesses to speak for themselves, representative of that era when the sky seemed the limit for these young Turks of Wall Street and screwing people was the name of the day, the way the game was played.  Sadly it wasn't enough, I wanted a more potent statement, a more potent condemnation especially in light of the fact that nothing has really happened to most of the major players who brought about the crash in 2008 and
 that still stings, it stings a lot.  It's unfair to demand a political treatise from Scorsese who has never shown an inclination to do that in any of his films. He is content with observing, witnessing and letting the film speak for itself and I suppose, in the end, that will have to do.

American Hustle:  Directed by David O. Russell

American Hustle is a sparkling concoction like very good champagne it goes down rather easily although it's not quite the "Grand Cru" I was expecting given the considerable talent attached to the project.  The year is 1978 Jimmy Carter is President and everything still seems possible before the big crash of the 80's will put a stop to the party before resuming in earnest in the 90's.  Irving Rosenthal and his mistress Sydney Prosser aka Lady Edith Greensley, a fictitious British aristocrat with ties to the banking world, are successful small time grifters content to fleece unsuspecting clients eager to be fleeced in the if it's too good to be true it undeniably means it is.  This all comes to an end when their scam is uncovered by a zealous yet very unstable FBI agent with the name of Richie DiMaso.  The actors, Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence as Irving's deliciously crackpot blond bombshell of a wife Rosalyn are all uniformly great.  I would especially like to single out Amy Adams who is absolutely riveting as the conniving half of the duo with breasts semi-exposed for most of the film via waist plunging necklines she is sexy and fearsome with a hint of vulnerability. Of course everybody's hiding something in this film and the narrative thread of what and who is real runs throughout as a taught undercurrent. The period is lovingly recreated from the clothes, to the hair, to the makeup to the furniture everything is spot on.  I do have a few quibbles with the plot which at times veers on the incoherent, frankly it's a bit of a muddle if you're not paying close attention. Is it the best film I've seen in 2013 no....not for me, that honor still goes to the harrowing 12 Years a Slave which I already reviewed in my blog.

World War Z -  Directed by Marc Foster

I resisted renting this one for a while after watching too many zombies on The Walking Dead. I was feeling a bit of zombie overload although some people can never get enough of the soulless eaters. In a sense it's fitting that so many apocalypses feature zombies.  They are relentless, ravenous and their hunger for human flesh is never satisfied, sounds like the bankers, corporate cronies, CEO's and traders from Wall Street and beyond.  They too are never satisfied, their greed is unparalleled except it's a much more destructive yet more difficult to detect force, it works by increment after small increment till everything is consumed.  At least with zombies it's clean and efficient plus they leave nature alone, they're not into exploitation or their exploitation is not venal it's of a more carnal variety.
Marc Foster seemed to be an unusual choice for directing this latest apocalypse but upon reflection he does have a rather varied "oeuvre" to his credit.  To name a few:  Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, Stranger Than Fiction, The Kite Runner and Quantum Solace, not a bad résumé.  He does a very good job on this one too.  Some scenes are downright startling and terrifying, the one with the zombies climbing on top of each other to scale a wall is a winner, it does stay in your head and kudos to the poster too which is wonderful.  Brad Pitt does a credible job as the lone man against the hordes, he's brave, he's smart, he's a loving husband and father, in short he's everything you might want in your hero if the apocalypse ever came your way.  I won't spoil the ending although I'm sure many of you will be able to guess how it ends, in that way it's very predictable.  It's not irredeemably black like The Road which is post apocalyptic when everything has gone to hell already.  If you like zombies this one's for you.

My Travels And A Little Bit of This And That: Thoughts on Catching Fire

My Travels And A Little Bit of This And That: Thoughts on Catching Fire: First a little disclaimer went to see Catching Fire a couple of days after having been to see 12 Years a Slave, you can't help but compa...

Thoughts on Catching Fire

First a little disclaimer went to see Catching Fire a couple of days after having been to see 12 Years a Slave, you can't help but compare even though the two are entirely different genres.  Nevertheless after the powerful moving film which is 12 Years it's difficult not to make comparisons, even unfair ones.

I went to see the first Hunger Games film without having read the books, knowing only the broad outlines gleaned here and there.  The film was dynamic, the story was well laid out, its simplicity was appealing and suited the unfolding events.In the second film  Jennifer Lawrence is still incendiary as the main character Katniss Everdeen the oh so reluctant "revolutionary".  The plot takes off from the film with Katniss back in her district living in better digs as befits her role of champion.  Ditto for her fake game boyfriend Peeta.  Throughout the film she will continue to oscillate, feelings wise, between him and her District boyfriend Gale. She tries reassuring Gale by telling him "it was all a game" she did what she had to do to survive.  Here's the irony by allowing Peeta and herself to survive she has become the powerful if unknowing leader of a potential rebellion a title which she fervently doesn't want and doesn't really understand.

The first part of the film is very slow with repeated televised appearances of the most famous couple the Games has ever produced. There are also visits to the various districts to honor the fallen tribunes.  This ostensibly to please the masses and make them forget about their miserable lives under an intrusive ever present totalitarian dictatorship headed by the oily and ubiquitous President Snow played with some relish (of the pay check variety ) by Donald Sutherland.

President Snow is perturbed at the idea that Katniss especially is inspiring the masses in ways he had not anticipated, he wants to be the ultimate manipulator of the games and its aftermath.  I had a problem with this basic premise.  The author Suzanne Collins probably does a much better job of delineating how suffocating the lives of most people under this dictatorship must be and what a breath of fresh air Katniss certainly must have been.  It's difficult to see that playing out in the film.  There are a few gestures of futile acts of rebellion such as the three finger salute to the mouth and the hand holding by tributes past winners who will now be pitted against each other in a novel twist on the old game.  Current leitmotif, the games never end, either in one's head or in reality. They are always there for the one percent's enjoyment.  The three finger salute is too reminiscent of the Nazi salute to be totally effective even though in this case the salute is an act of defiance rather than obedience.  Nevertheless the salute coupled with the heavily borrowed decor straight out of Nazi propaganda films was enough to turn me off thus not achieving its intended purpose at least not for me.

One hour into the film the action does get under way with the games although I never felt that Katniss was in mortal danger knowing another two film episode (a la Twilight) will soon be coming to a Cineplex near you. The idea that the masses are unwilling to rise up because they lack cohesive leadership is lightly  touched upon in the film with the mockingbird being the ultimate symbol of the rebellion were it to emerge under the leadership of an extremely reluctant Katniss.  In so far as spectacle is concerned the film delivers on a minor scale with special effects that don't overwhelm the story.  I loved the wedding dress segment, truly beautiful and the makeup and costumes are still fabulous.  Most of the same players are back with the addition of Philip Seymour Hoffman, always delightful, although frankly he could probably play this role in his sleep since it doesn't demand too much of him.  This is mostly Lawrence's film and there's no doubt she will set the box office on fire with this second installment.  For my part a lukewarm endorsement I would give it a 6.

Thoughts on film 12 Years A Slave

At this point I'm mostly writing these reviews for myself.  I have tried to enter the very busy milieu of blogger.com which is especially crowded with film reviews from people, I suppose like myself, who are trying to pass themselves off as film critics.  Unfortunately film criticism, not so long ago considered an art form, has fallen into disrepute due to overuse by zealous yet unqualified people.  The worst offenders are not the bloggers but actual  film websites which still appear to attract scores of curious readers and feature more or less prominently on IMDB the go to search engine for films. It's a bit puzzling since a lot of the writing is shoddy at best, at worst it's downright awful.  I suppose it's the cult of the dumb and dumber. Culturally we're all slowly succumbing to it whether we want to or not whether we partake in it or not, it's out there like a malevolent bacteria and it will only keep growing.

Since I'm mostly writing for myself I won't excuse my overindulgence in the previous paragraph, a little ranting goes a long way.

Some films one can immediately form an opinion about, good, bad, horrible yet enjoyable or downright awful and to be avoided at all cost.  Other films require a separate category of their own I believe 12 Years A Slave to be that kind of movie.  It's uncompromising yet not exploitative and beyond its obvious artistry it is trying to capture a terrifyingly malevolent period in American history a period which can never be condoned, rationalized or brushed aside for there can never be an excuse for slavery. That such an important part of American history has been the subject of so few deeply serious films is in a sense understandable for who wishes to confront what can only be viewed as the absolute worst in people, white people, supremacists mostly ignorant and abject creatures who because of their whiteness and because slavery was legitimately sanctioned by the state experienced absolutely no remorse at the enslavement of another.  Quite the opposite in fact they were almost gleeful in the intoxicating power they derived from it. The film is very clear on this, as a spectator I felt shame and revulsion not because the film was raw in its violence but because it was true.
From the opening frames when we first see Solomon Northup we know that something horrible has happened to him and to the others with him.  The flashbacks to his former life only confirm that, making his present situation all the more horrendous and brutal.  Previously Solomon was a young violinist player living a peaceful semi-bourgeois life in upstate New York with his young wife and two children, a son and a daughter.  We see him going about the town enjoying the respect of the townsfolk, he's at ease in his surroundings, well accepted one might even say well liked.  He has all the prerogatives of a free man even though he is black. All this comes to an abrupt end when he is tricked into accepting to play music for a traveling circus. Lulled into a sense of ease and familiarity Northup has no reason to suspect that the two men have something else in mind. Drugged he wakes up to find himself in chains in a holding pen where slave traders beat him into submission before shipping him off along with other slaves to be sold like chattel to the highest bidder.
 Chiwetel Ejiofor gives the performance of a lifetime in the role of Northup. It's unbearable to watch him trying to hold on to his former educated self in the midst of unceasing pain, brutality and generally dehumanizing treatment. Traded, beaten, hung and forced to an unspeakable act himself he still manages to maintain an innate dignity never losing sight of the fact that he was once free and will be free again.

The director Steve McQueen well known for uncompromising works such as Hunger and Shame resists all attempts at sentimentality.  Still using his "muse" Michael Fassbender in the role of  Epp the most brutal of Northup's masters McQueen is able to draw a powerful fearless performance from Fassbender.  He was so terrifying that I literally held my breath every time he came on screen.  The other actors also acquit themselves well although Benedict Cumberbatch only has a minor role as a master who recognizes and approves of Northup's intelligence although, in the end, he does nothing to stop Northup's inevitable decline into ever more increasing brutality by selling him to Epp.  Brad Pitt who also produced has a brief but pivotal cameo towards the end of the film  He's too well known by now to play anything other than himself, that's the price an actor pays when one becomes such a global commodity and phenomenon.

The end couldn't come soon enough for me.  Not the end of the film but the end to Northop's calvary.  I was moved to tears at Northop's reunion with an aged wife, son and daughter as well as a brand new grandson, 12 years of hell it's been a long time coming.  See it, highly recommended.

Review of Le Démentèlement by Québec filmmaker Sébastien Pilote

Le Démentèlement which literally means the breaking apart does not leave any room for doubt as to what the final outcome will be.  Gabriel Arcand, Québec's national acting treasure and winner of countless awards, plays Gaby Gagnon a man of few words with very limited social interaction who is seemingly content with a bucolic existence which consists of tending for his flock of sheep from dawn to dusk.  The film wants to be a slow meditation on one man's relationship with his land and family which consists mostly of the episodic visit from two  wayward fundamentally selfish daughters now living in Montreal.  The film is set in Lac St. Jean and it does look beautiful indeed but the filmmaker's refusal to romanticize any aspect of the ties which bind Gaby to the land,his sheep or and his daughters make it a difficult somber viewing.  We learn very little of Gaby or why he's so attached to his daughters in a long suffering quasi "Père Goriot" sort of way.  He explains it once by stating that it's always been the roles of fathers to protect and care for their daughters at the expense of their own well being.  This deterministic fatalistic approach to life ushers in what should have been gut wrenching, the breaking up of his farm to secure a $200.000 "loan" for Marie his eldest daughter,but ends up instead a mere whisper a slight ripple on the pond of his life.
The film starts out slow and basically stays that way for its entire running length. It's not exactly boring, Arcand is a wonderful performer who can express a great deal with his beautifully mobile lined face nevertheless one longs for a little more human interaction.  The monotony of Gaby's life is intermittently broken by visits from his friend/accountant who urges him to live a little bringing him a refurbished computer which Gaby nonetheless proceeds to swiftly unplug.  He has no interest in the outside world.  When his oldest Marie comes for a quick visit announcing that she is separating from her husband and needs $200.000 to keep the house Gaby barely blinks even though after having worked forty years and netting only a meager $10.000 a year it's obvious he doesn't have any money to spare.  Why he agrees regardless of the consequences to his own well being is maddening I wanted to shake him out of his torpor out of his ready acquiescence to something so fundamental it was certain to damage his soul and the very root of his being.
In one near unbearable scene Gaby ,having found that the little one room apartment he's rented does not accept dogs, takes his dog to the pound and pays $25.00 to have his perfectly healthy dog euthanized.  It's heartbreaking and the poignancy of the scene is not any less affecting when Gaby abruptly returns to fetch the dog.  He ends up tying him up near a neighbor's farm even though she's already stated she can't take care of it.
The youngest daughter Frédérique comes to visit after a phone call from Gaby's friend, the accountant, she stays a week and helps with the démentèlement.  She doesn't make much effort to dissuade him, on the other hand she can see that his mind is made up.  Brothers who never wanted the farm in the first place arrive to stake their claim but Gaby kicks them out. The farm is his to do as he pleases.
When Frédérique comes to tell him that the flock has been sold Gaby allows himself a brief hiccup of sorrow, it's gut wrenching to watch because one is aware of the life which now awaits him.
The last shot is of him sitting in a chair in his tiny cell of an apartment looking out the window.  The film will prove to be too melancholy for most people.  It reminded me of early 70's experimental films by Antonioni and Visconti with echoes of Ingmar Bergman. Films by these respected auteurs would have trouble finding an audience amongst today's film goers only dedicated cinéphiles might be moved by the rigor of these films' composition and by the rigorous formalism of this one.
On a broader theme beyond the scope of this specific film I started wondering about the end of small time agriculture in general.  Young people no longer want to farm.  All the people featured in the film during the breaking apart of Gaby's farm were old farmers themselves, not a young face in the bunch.  It's sad really.  Who is going to grow the food of the future, will it consist mostly of food grown in big agro-chemical complexes trucked and shipped over thousands of kilometers it's not an idle question.  Nobody cared about Gaby's farm furthermore it's harder and harder to make a decent living on smaller parcels of land ultimately  that scenario does not bode well for the future.