Posts tagged Blow Up

Above, Under, Near, Inside, Outside and Lost in the Surroundings

“We know that behind every image revealed there is another image more faithful to reality, and in the back of that image there is another, and yet another behind the last one, and so on, up to the true image of that absolute, mysterious reality that no one will ever see.” — Michelangelo Antonioni

“Nothing like a little disaster for sorting things out.”
Blow-Up
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

The most important films of Michelangelo Antonioni’s career came in the early 1960’s when he placed his muse, Monica Vitti, at the core of plots involving alienation within the spacial landscapes that furthered her character’s emotional turmoil. She was the perfect actor for these roles which required an odd intermixing of passion, panic, eroticism and almost overwhelming passive boredom. Writing this description it is hard to understand how she was able to do it.

There are very few film actresses that look anything like she did. In Antonioni’s films she seems like she might fall over at any moment and yet oppositional in that she also seems capable of knocking anyone down who might get in her way. In these films, Monica Vitti is both passive and aggressively demanding. She presented a sort of quiet introspection that threatens as much as it begs. Like Antonioni’s camera she is lost within the framework of her surroundings. As his films progressed her characters seemed to be simultaneously formed, informed and destroyed by every “thing” around her.

“A new adventure in filmmaking…”
Monica Vitti contemplates.
L’Avventura
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960
Cinematography | Aldo Scavarda

1960’s L’Aventura is entirely dependent upon Monica Vitti’s presence. Vitti has such a strongly unique erotic charisma, being and mystifying beauty and everything that happens in the film requires her to make it believable. It is impossible for the viewer to take their eyes off of her. Within only a few minutes of Claudia entering the camera’s frame, the audience is placed in a surprisingly uncomfortable position.

Is this young woman someone we can trust? Do her actions seem disconnected from her motivation?

It says a great deal that we contemplate these ideas so early on. As the film moves forward the viewer must decide if Claudia is actually concerned or simply curious. There seems to be a deception playing out within the geographical and interior spaces.

L’Avventura Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960

Antonioni finds ways to casually push a suspicious and possibly tragic disappearance further way from his film’s plot. What at first seems like an essential motivation for Claudia and that of her vanished friend’s lover eventually becomes nothing more than a back story. By the time the film drifts to its midpoint, the audience becomes accomplices in Claudia‘s warped journey. Like her, we no longer care longer about this missing friend, daughter and fiancee. Our primary concern becomes the possibility of love between Claudia and the “worried” fiancee. There is an ever unsettling feeling that the two leading characters hope the respective friend and lover is never found. The real kick-spin is that both have different reasons for wishing this woman to stay vanished. It is an alarming shift of gears that doesn’t really hit you until the “Fine” title card emerges on the screen.

Gabriele Ferzetti and Monica Vitti
L’Avventura
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960
Cinematography | Aldo Scavarda

Is she thinking of her friend or obsessing about herself?
Monica Vitti
L’Avventura
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960
Cinematography | Aldo Scavarda

1961’s La Notte is less interested in telling a story than pulling the audience into a different world. The world in which we find ourselves alternates between cold and intimidating to abandoned and decaying. It seems to be in a state of change that threatens to push our characters even further into isolation. The film is an effective, textured and sensual exploration of a specific place during a specific moment in time. The time is 1961 and the place is Milan.

“I no longer have inspirations, only recollections.” La Notte Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961

La Notte
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

The modern architecture is carefully photographed and it seems to reflect, deflect and motivate the film’s characters. The schism between the ultra-modern designs and the remainders of pre-WWII Italy the audience is allowed to see seems to play roles in the way characters relate or fail to relate to one another. The old and dilapidated appear to be falling away and replaced with sleek and modern youth. The same appears to be happening to a married couple. As we follow the two halves of a near middle-age couple roam through their day and evening ideas fill both the screen and the mind.

Jeanne Moreau’s character is reduced in self-worth and hope as she wanders the streets of Milan.
La Notte
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

The ideas do not form a unified thought or purpose. Nor does the roaming lead to anywhere specific. This is the point.

Jeanne Moreau roams the mansion while Monica Vitti basks in her boredom…
La Notte
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

As the old falls away so do the walls that have protected generations from exposure are now given way to a certain transparency that forces the characters to see the truth of not only strangers but of each other. A brilliantly effective, evocative and sensual mood piece of European cinema. An ideal film for a viewer who likes to think and experience an art form.

Jeanne Moreau and Marcello Mastroianni fail to connect. Monica Vitti listens in…
La Notte
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

It is unlikely that it will appeal to those who seek out movies for story and escapism, but it is hard to imagine a more human experience. Hearts are damaged and there seems to be no comfort found in a marriage that has failed to flourish alongside the urban civilization that is only beginning to sprawl. The ideas associated with architecture mirroring its inhabitants is again pursued by Antonioni’s next film, L’Eclisse.

L’Eclisse Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962

Michelangelo Antonioni’s vision is perhaps most strongly applied with L’Eclisse. This movie has become better every time I see it. It is framed as a love story, but the actual focus takes on a deeper perspective regarding the mixed and differing feelings between two would-be-lovers. The architecture of La Notte often fights to be a leading character. L’eclipse embraces both Monica Vitti and Alain Delon as the primary characters, but the architecture seems to emerge as a third.

Alain Delon and Monica Vitti are actually fitting into their environment, but are their emotions?
L’Eclisse
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

Post WWII Rome’s architectural conflict is very much present, however it often feels like the two human characters are informing it rather than the other way around. Gianni Di Venxnzo’s cinematography fully utilizes the Rome land/inner-scapes, but our two characters are essential elements in their mutual and respective worlds. Minimal in the way of speech, Antonioni still expertly captures two young people and a city in the midst of adapting to post-war changes.

There is a great more between these two lovers than a structural support column.
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

Nearly every emotion or concern felt is reflected back to them from the buildings, walls and all surroundings within which they are attempting to live, grow and love. It as if this “love” is wanting to return to the old world comforts. The problem facing both characters is how can they use love in a modern world that refuses to go back? If there were to be a means of escape, would they lose more if they left? An essential and magical film.

A poster seems to be offering an escape, but it could be a trap of another sort.
L’Eclisse
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962
Cinematography | Gianni Di Venanzo

In 1964 Antonioni hired Carlo Di Palma as his cinematographer. He shot Red Desert / Il deserto rosso in color. This film is deceptively beautiful because society’s landscape and territory are no longer simply imposing and reflecting emotions. In Red Desert the man-made structural landscapes and architecture is actually attacking the film’s leading character. Monica Vitti’s Giuliana is not merely trapped within the identity and isolation imposed by her environment — she is suffering as her environment is literally attacking her. The world in which Giuliana moves is toxic.

il-deserto-rosa-the-red-desert-optimized_54ed072b0822f

In dying color… Red Desert Michelangelo Antonioni, 1964 Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

Unforgettable and operatic in her performance as a mentally unstable wife/mother, Monica Vitti becomes a walking analogy for the environment in which she must live. Surrounded by the bleakness of destructive industrial plants and the cold interiors which have been created in the surrounding suburbs. Red Desert marks a major turn in Antonioni’s vision regarding the human condition and surrounding environments.

Monica Vitti takes a walk in a post-industrial nightmare.
Red Desert
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1964
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

“I dreamed I was in bed and the bed was moving. I looked down and it was on quicksand. It was sinking deeper and deeper.”
Monica Vitti
Red Desert
Michelangelo
Antonioni, 1964
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

The captured images are surprisingly lovely, but the meanings conveyed through them come close to post-industrial horror. In many ways this film is the most experimental the director had ever made. He is clearly in love with Vitti and renders her unique beauty in the most sensual of ways. And while this movie is obviously aimed to be societal commentary, it also features a fascinating performance. As Monica Vitti forms her character she lends the film a possibility of other meanings.

“She loved that spot. The colors of nature were so beautiful, and there was no noise. She’d leave only when the sun did too.”
Red Desert
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1964
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

This is realism and one is never quite sure if perhaps her challenges might be more connected to mental illness than environmental. It is easy to imagine Todd Haynes taking notes. It is hard to imagine that Red Desert did not inform his brilliant 1990’s Safe. While Red Desert is most certainly a turn in a different direction for Antonioni, his next film really swerved off his expected cinematic path.

“What do you they call you in bed?” Blow-Up Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966

Blow-Up finds Antonioni in a different country and films the entire film in English. This infamous 1966 film offered more than just a language and location change. Gone is the angst-ridden female protagonist. Monica Vitti is no where in sight. The new protagonist is a young man enjoying, manipulating, exploiting and indulging in the expanding excesses of Swinging London. David Hemmings plays a sly, bored and seemingly hollow fashion photographer who pursues sex and human connection with the same amount of passive interest as a random purchase at an antique store.

For our protagonist, models are not people. They are objects that he arranges.
Blow-Up
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

Not without talent, Thomas is an emerging hot talent in the world of Fashion photography. He is clearly well paid, but not yet where he wants to be. Women are no longer people to this man, they are pretty little things he photographs and seduces. Actually, he doesn’t bother with seduction. The hot young women are as hungry for fame as he is for money. People do not seem to hold much value for Thomas. Surrounded by the excitement of his city and the era in which he moves, Antonioni establishes that his protagonist is not enjoying much of anything.

It’s all in a day’s work…
Blow-Up
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

It is isn’t until he makes the mistake of photographing a private moment between two lovers in a park that he is forced to actually re-evaluate his measure as a human being. Antonioni crafts a magical film. Make no mistake, he captures the ambiance of 1960’s Swinging London with the same carefully articulated method he applied to the re-emerging post-WWII Italy.

Is it just a pretty picture?
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

The film is slowly paced as it begins to pull the audience into the photographer’s depressingly vacuous world. But then, just as the audience thinks Blow-Up is taking in a certain direction the gears shift. Antonioni offers something that he has never given the audience before: A Hitchcockian plot twist that would have served any other filmmaker in a dramatically different way.

Not your typical Swinging London Party Girl, Vanessa Redgrave assess the photographer, the situation and her options.
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

Vanessa Redgrave’s Jane rushes into the film like a breeze of erotic curiosity and panic. Her visit to the photographer’s home and studio should lead the film in a what seems the logical place — instead this scene serves as a catalyst for introspection. As Thomas rushes through his study to blow-up the negatives of Jane‘s seemingly romantic entanglement in the park, he shows an unexpected aspect of himself. Thomas is actually interested in understanding why Jane was so desperate to secure the film he had taken of she and a lover in the park.

For the first time in the film, David Hemmings shows some passion in his pursuit of understanding.
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

David Hemmings’ Thomas has no connection to Monica Vitti’s Antonioni’s characters. He is not alienated. He is neither riddled with insecurity, ennui or angst of any sort. He sees something he wants, he puts forward only the required energy or money to get it. But as an artist, Thomas is curious. Of course Blow-Up wants the viewer to think it is a thriller. Once the twist is revealed, Antonioni shifts cinematic gears once more. If one must call this movie a thriller, then that person most likely needs to Anti to the term. This is one thrill that turns against the protagonist inward toward self-introspection. In some ways the cost of the plot’s thrill is far more horrifying than the stalking of a killer. Thomas soon finds himself not so much in pursuit of the answer to a mystery — he is left to contemplate the empty shell of a person he has allowed himself to become.

“What did you see in that park?”
Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966
Cinematography | Carlo Di Palma

Less a mystery of human cruelty as it is a study humanity lost in decadence. In the end Thomas has more in common with the female protagonists of Michelangelo Antonioni’s Italian films. The only real difference is that he is male and has been allowed more access to freedom. That societally entitled power takes him no closer to fulfillment.

Matty Stanfield, 5.16.2016

Is That London Burning? Or Exploring The British New Wave from The Other Side of the Underneath…

Uh, oh. Trouble is coming from all sides as Ken Russell takes British Film into the 1970’s. Despite on-going demand, Time Warner still refuses to allow us to take a full-on second look back. Britain’s most infamous film actually belongs to a United States based corporation. The Devils Ken Russell, 1971 Cinematography | David Watkin

When one thinks of 1960’s Film Art, the mind does not immediately jump to thoughts of British cinema. Most of us think of France’s La Nouvelle Vague, Germany’s Neuer Deutsche Film, Italy’s NeoRealism film movement, The Japanese New Wave or The Polish New Wave from which Britain did snatch Roman Polanski. Certainly there were groundbreaking British films that caught the spirit of London’s Swinging 60’s Era, but many of these films have aged rather poorly. Just think of Petulia, Morgan!, Darling, Billy Liar or Georgy Girl. If honest, what really still works about these films is related to a time capsule interest. Many of these British films are quite valid (think A Taste of Honey, This Sporting Life, Room At The Top, A Hard Day’s Night, Seance on a Wet Afternoon, Performance ) but the majority have not held up as well as one might hope.

This is not true across the board. Stanley Kubrick’s British work has only gotten better with time and Michelangelo Antonioni’s visit into Swinging London culture of the time, Blow Up, remains a vital work. However, are these truly British films? It would seem that both of these filmmakers were in a sort of transitionary position. Antonioni was visiting England. Kubrick was still fairly new to British culture.

The great Julie Christie is The Ideal Woman of 1965’s British satire of Swinging London, but the film barely registers beyond nostalgia now. Darling John Schlesinger, 1965 Cinematography | Kenneth Higgins

Most of the iconic British films of the 1960’s are simply limited to nostalgia. Guy Hamilton, Andy Milligan, Lindsay Anderson, Karel Reisz and Lindsay Shonteff are exceptions but much of what they were trying to convey would soon better estimated by the likes of Alan Parker and most especially Mike Leigh. Ken Loach would not truly find his voice until he entered his 50’s in the 1990’s. There was also a good share of attention to The Angry Young Man of the day. Tony Richardson had moments of brilliance but looking back he seemed to have been challenged by what style of film best suited his voice. Richard Lester certainly left a mark, but here again we are slipping into time capsule pop culture moments.

The British New Wave is also largely obscured by the mega-epics of David Lean’s heavily praised, Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago are considered to be a cinematic masterpieces. I’ve never been particularly impressed. To be honest, I’ve never made it through Lawrence of Arabia without falling asleep. Carol Reed’s adaptation of the stage musical, Oliver! was another huge British hit of the 1960’s that pushed pass the more reflexive films of the day.

There were two particularly strong and solitary British Film Artists who were finding new methods of cinematic language. Nicolas Roeg would soon move from the cinematographer chair to that of director and change the face of film editing as it was known. Ken Russell’s work for the BBC and his adaptation of Larry Kramer’s adaptation of DH Lawrence’s Women In Love all stand alone and unique in offering new ways of using film to express ideas and to tell stories. And he really stole the anticipated reigns of the film biography when The Music Lovers slammed onto movie screens across the world in 1970.

Ken Russell welcomes us to the 1970’s via way of 16h Century France as “the wife” of a Priest makes her way past the destruction of the Roman-Catholic Church… Gemma Jones The Devils Ken Russell, 1971 Cinematography | David Watkin

As British Film headed into the 1970’s some firm and potent voices formed. Certainly Stanley Kubrick’s A Clock Work Orange is a British Film. All American cultural ideas have fallen off his cinematic map. John Schlesinger pretty much left England for America. Ken Russell defied all expectations with his searing and important 1971 film, The Devils. As it turns out Ken Russell, Nicolas Roeg and Stanley Kubrick were not alone. The thing is some of the new British voices got somehow lost in the mix. Barney Platts-Mills’ may have only made one film in the 1960’s, but it is a powerful entry into British Film History. Three other filmmakers also created work not only ahead of the cultural curve — they challenged it and ran their work close to the edge of the rails.

As we stumble forward toward the third decade of the 21st Century, The British Film Institute has gone deep within the corners of their storage closets to re-release a couple of seldom seen motion pictures that capture 1960’s London in whole new ways. Most of these titles were dusted off, restored, re-released within the UK and issued to DVD/Blu-Ray between 2009 and 2011.

The British Film Festival pulled several legendary but almost forgotten films and re-issued them to DVD/Blu-Ray in 2010 and 2011. These “lost” films of Jack Bond, Jane Arden, Joseph Despins and William Dumaresq teach us that Ken Russell and Stanley Kubrick were not alone in finding new ways to capture stories and ideas for the British Screen.

Two of these four filmmakers were actually Canadian born. Even still, these two ex-pats of Canada artists show no signs of unfamiliarity with the setting of their two crucial films that BFI re-issued several years back for the first time in over 40 years. The other two filmmakers are most certainly British and have cinematic voices which come close to that of Ken Russell and Nicolas Roeg. Like Russell / Roeg, these two British Film Artists were well-versed but often Anti-Intellectual in the way they approached their work. They were far more focused on the visual and the use of film editing. Rebels all, but each were reeling out their rebellion from different core identities. Unlike Ken Russell and Nicolas Roegs’ work of the 1960’s, all four of the other Film Artists will not appeal to a number of people, but it is hard to imagine anyone disputing their importance.

I’m currently exploring the work of a number of British filmmakers who are new to me. I plan on writing more on the art and collaborations of Jane Arden and Jack Bond. The work these two created almost defies terminology, but I’m going to give it my best shot!

But for this post, I want to touch on two films. The first of these two was born out of the mixed theatre and social service ideals of the great Joan Littlewood. “The Mother of Modern Theatre” devoted the second half of her life working with the young people of East London who were lost, without purpose or supervision. These young people were in constant threat of falling prey to all manner of trouble. Her idea was to create a space where these teenagers could be allowed to hang out and “act” out their issues, challenges and ideas. Firmly grounded in the arts but against what she viewed as Elitism of The National Theatre. Her Theatre Royal Stratford East was free of pretension and open to everyone. It was here that Barney Platts-Mills was inspired to scrap together a bit of money to make an amazing little film called Bronco Bullfrog.

Non-actors, Anne Gooding & Del Walker, “play” fictionalized versions of themselves and contemplate their futures.
Bronco Bullfrog
Barney Platts-Mills, 1969
Cinematography | Adam Barker-Mill

Bronco Bullfrog stars non-actors who had been working with each other under the loose guidance of Joan Littlewood. While the plot is deceptively simple, a great deal of information about the grimness of urban decay, lack of parenting and dystopian boredom come through loud and clear. Glam and style-free, this is a study of teenagers floating along without purpose, direction or hope. Interestingly, it is not all gloom and doom. The characters of Bronco Bullfrog start to find their way as the film heads to conclusion. This is a gem of a film that has never received the praise or attention it deserved. As good as this movie is, it can hardly stand-up when positioned next to Joseph Despins and William Dumaresqs’ ultra-strange and unforgettable twisted little movie, Duffer.

A good 6 years before anyone had seen the dark surrealism and humor of David Lynch, this low-budget experimental film serves as welcome warning that the art of filmmaking is about to take an innovative, creative and altogether new turn. Kit Gleave as Duffer Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971 Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

Joseph Despins and William Dumaresq crafted this weird and entertaining movie on a budget so low it is probably best not to state it. The camera work is surprisingly solid. Actually the cinematography is far more than solid, it is artistically sound. Cinematographer, Jorge Guerra, may not have had the best equipment but he most certainly knew how to use it. The shots are often brilliant.

There is no sound. The narration and voices were recorded by a different cast. It only takes a few minutes before it is clear that the lack of sound was not going to be a deficit. In fact, the creative dubbing actually adds to this film in more ways than one. Comical and often horrifying, the dubbed dialogue serves exceptionally as an aide to the film’s surrealism, dark comedy, menace and horror.

“WoManAmal!!!” Duffer’s junkie gay keeper heaps on the abuse and chronicles it all for underground porn.
William Dumaresq as “Louis-Jack”
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

The dubbing actually heightens the discomfort as we watch a young man attempt to reconcile the emotional, physical and sexual abuse of his older junkie boyfriend by engaging in an affair with a female prostitute. Enduring the sort of sadistic torment one seldom sees addressed in film, Despins and Dumaresq were extremely clever in presenting it in very dark comical ways that disturb but never so much that one needs to run for cover. The kind but obviously more than a bit twisted herself, prossie called Your Gracie gives the lost teen some solace while fully utilizing him as a tool.

Erna May as “Your Gracie” is using Kit Gleave’s “Duffer,” but he hopes she is saving his masculinity… Duffer Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971 Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

As the KINK/BDSM with his male keeper becomes more severe and his trysts with his female lover decrease — Duffer is pulled into his male lover’s Horse addiction and begins to suffer one of the most bizarre psychosomatic delusions I’ve ever seen. The poor kid’s delusions continue to morph into what appears to be a psychotic break. This twisted, funny, unsettling and fascinating experimental film deals with almost every aspect of human cruelty and horror imaginable. And just to amp up Duffer’s already potent cinematic stew, we gradually begin to suspect that our protagonist may not be the most reliable narrator.

Just a bi-sexual boy walking through 1970 Notting Hill either on his way from or toward abuse at the hands of older suitors.
Kit Gleave in his only film role…
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

As the film unspools more perversities and jaw-drop moments at break-neck speed, we are constantly given an exceptional examination of 1970’s Notting Hill. You may think you’ve seen urban decay and dystopian-like settings, but Duffer presents an England few of us have seen. Filmed on location and on the very cheap, this is perplexing and truly extraordinary view of the state of things circa 1969-1970. I realize that some of you will be annoyed that I’m grouping this film into the 1960’s British New Wave, but Duffer is clearly set in the 1960’s. This is not the 1970’s.

The film begins with Duffer sitting alone by the water. A pretty young woman pauses as she crosses a bridge far above the handsome boy. As the film whirls to conclusion we find him once again in the same place. It is impossible to not ponder where the film’s reality begins or ends. In fact, there is a distinct possibility that none of it is real. However there are just as many clues that all of what see presented has happened in reality. I’m not dropping a spoiler here, the viewer begins to distrust poor Duffer almost immediately. This is a narrator we are unable to trust. But the most jarring aspect of this film is that it presents itself solidly within the Surrealist Context.

All alone in his thoughts…
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

It is important to note that as much as I praise Duffer, it is not for all tastes. While never truly graphic, it is most definitely profane and very perverse. The humor is so dark that many will feel guilty laughing. This is one demented movie. It also features a deeply strange musical score from the composer who gave the world the 1960’s Broadway smash, Hair. Galt McDermot’s score plays like something you would hear in an alternate universe Tin Pan Alley. Just when you think you will only be hearing a piano — a quickly use of electronics starts to grind forward.

“Mind how you go…” No where in Notting Hill is safe!
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

Duffer screams out for repeated viewings to understand, to ensure that what you think you’ve just seen was actually shown and for the simple fact that this movie is endlessly entertaining. And trust me, this movie gets under your skin. Once it slips under, it stays there. In addition, something about Duffer seems to be signaling the audience to watch out for David Lynch. Were it not so very British, it could easily be mistaken for something a young David Lynch might have created. Unique, innovative, disturbing, haunting, funny and altogether original, Duffer is a must see lost British Cinematic Treasure.

Well there is nothing quite like watching your lover’s home movies abusing you…
Kit Gleave watches what we can only guess hurt a great deal.
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

I honestly found no flaw in Duffer.

Just pulled back into darkness after being “fixed” for activities best kept there…
Duffer
Joseph Despins & William Dumaresq, 1971
Cinematography | Jorge Guerra

I loved this film, but the work of both Jane Arden and Jack Bond really blew me away. Blown out the window and lying on the pavement outside our San Francisco home, the collaborations of Arden and Bond require more than a little thought and meditation. I’m still letting their three films digest, but I’ll be writing about them soon.

Pushing Feminist Agenda, Drug Experimentation, Examination and Destruction of an identity born of societal and cultural domination, Jane Arden & Jack Bond pull us into the dangerous threat of absolute madness…
The Other Side of the Underneath
Jane Arden, 1972
Cinematography | Jack Bond & Aubrey Dewar

Matty Stanfield, 12.23.2015

Cinematic Candy or Entering The Criterion Closet or Approaching My Pitiable Criterion Bookshelves

The Criterion Collection has been kicking around for over 31 years. What began as LaserDisc format-grounded film restoration and distribution company has emerged as the pre-imminent Art Film Label. The simple icon carries more meaning and value than any major film studio. It has become the symbol for true Art Film validation. While this can be a bit problematic, it is still a sound statement. After the LaserDisc format died, Criterion remained solid thanks to a strong relationship and shared goal with Janus Films. An American film company established in the mid 1950’s, Janus Films has always been focused on bringing the finest in International Cinema to the US. Criterion took over home distribution for Janus long ago. It has been a dream-collaboration for both companies.

This logo has become the benchmark for Film Art — specifically the label of Cinematic Target Audience?
True Film Aficionados

As we move toward Criterion’s 32nd year of operation, they still offer the best and most diverse collection of Art House Cinema. With the advent of Blu-Ray, they are really the only trustworthy source from which we know only the best restoration and transfer will be provided. Sometimes Criterion’s commitment to the Filmmaker Vision requires an adjustment in expectation. Most recently, Criterion’s aspect ratio for Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby caused a slight ripple in the waters of FilmLuv. But it was a fleeting moment. Criterion had correctly re-adjusted Roman Polanski’s pitch-perfect film of horror, paranoia and the supernatural back to the ratio within which Polanski had intended. Once everyone knew this, grumbling about this ratio fell silent and the waters were calmed.

“Mother, they’re still not sure it is a baby! “
American Filmmaker, David Lynch, holds the first printed copy of Criterion’s re-stored “Eraserhead” blu-ray.
David Lynch, 2014

The very first film to receive The Criterion Collection treatment was Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane. I’ve never seen the LaserDisc but have frequently heard it still surpasses the rather limited “job” Warner Brothers has issued to Blu-Ray. Sadly, this is usually always true. Criterion lost the licensing rights to Citizen Kane, but there hard work remains somewhere safe in that vault.

This film holds the distinction of being the first movie to ever receive “The Criterion Treatment” It was released in the short-lived Laser Disc format in 1984.
Citizen Kane
Orson Welles, 1941

It is at “the ready” whenever WB grows tired of “re-packaging” the same transfer over and over again. Restoration technology has zoomed forward since 1984. I’d love to see what they could do with Citizen Kane now. Many other important titles found their way to Criterion LaserDisc — Woody Allen’s Annie Hall, RKO’s King Kong, Federico Fellini’s La Strada, Michelangelo Antonioni’s classic Blow Up, Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and Ken Russell’s Tommy (now forever lost to the hands

The Criterion Collection’s highly prized LaserDisc of Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner.

of Sony. I’ve seen the LaserDisc version. It is a whole other world from the Sony Blu-Ray. And sorry kids, The Devils never made it to Criterion. And it is not for lack of trying. WB is the sole reason this controversial and acclaimed Ken Russell remains a murky mess on bootlegs or Korean “edited” version DVD’s. The original Theatrical Cut has never been released. Never. Blame Warner Brothers. Numerous petitions and even the sad loss of Ken Russell has not moved Warner Brothers to let the film out. No reason has ever been given.

“The Devils is not a film for everyone . . .”
Vanessa Redgrave as Sister Jeanne
The Devils
Ken Russell, 1971
Cinematography | David Watkin

Maybe they are too embarrassed to admit that they lost or destroyed. But you see it doesn’t matter. Ken Russell’s family retains the original cut of The Devils in safe keeping and pristine. Warner Brothers still refuses.

Criterion also restored most of Stanley Kubrick’s films for LaserDisc that continue to rival anything Warners has released to Blu-Ray. Rob Reiner’s The Princess Bride, Danny Boyle’s Trainspotting as well Mel Brook’s The Producers, Hal Ashby’s Shampoo, Barbra Streisand’s A Star Is Born and Prince of Tides, Jonathan Demme’s Silence of the Lambs, The Marx Bros’ A Night at the Opera, Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver, The Wizard of Oz (now owned by Warner Brothers), Gene Kelly’s Singing in the Rain and David Cronenberg’s Dead Ringers all exist in exceptional LaserDisc transfers owned by Criterion.

“On every street in every city, there’s a nobody who dreams of being a somebody.”
Robert De Niro
Taxi Driver
Martin Scorsese, 1976

The titles were snatched back by the likes of WB and Sony. The one thing they will never be able to snatch back are the incredible transfers and often obscure special features Criterion secured. A close examination reveals Warner Brothers and Sony to be the most difficult studios with whom Criterion has had to deal. However, the oddest challenges come up when trying to secure the required licensing. Don’t even get me started on Shampoo. Please note the very poor Sony DVD transfer below. Wait. I’m pushing my luck.

“You wanna fuck?”
Well, yes, Mr. [insert name here] is “totally OK” to take Carrie Fisher up on her offer.
Shampoo
Hal Ashby, 1975
Cinematography | László Kovács

The sad fact that while you can secure most of these films on Blu-Ray, the quality is nearly always sub-par. Even a recent reissue of Taxi Driver proves minimal in impact. As for Woody Allen’s Annie Hall — in fact all of his early cinematic brilliance has yet to receive an appropriate restoration. The Annie Hall Blu-Ray is essential the cheap DVD transfer moved into the newer format. All the more tragic when one remembers that nearly all of the key Woody Allen films were shot by the late Gordon Willis.

Does anyone really believe that this is the best Warner Brothers can do?
That would be Rutger Hauer hidden in unintended shadow
Blade Runner
Ridley Scott, 1982

And seriously, Blade Runner. Warner Bros, what the fuck? I’d gladly give up my unicorn snow globe for a better transfer. And poor Wizard of Oz. Warner Brothers has issued/re-issued and re-packaged it so many times without ever increasing the quality of transfer. At least I can’t see or hear any improvements.

Recent years have seen Criterion step up its marketing. Last year saw the arrival of beautiful hard-backed book, Criterion Designs, filled with Criterion’s much admired approach to packaging. This book also offers a detailed listing of all the great films Criterion restored for LaserDisc during the early years. It is a stunningly beautiful book of art inspired by some of the greatest films of all time.

Anna Karina interviewed by Criterion.
Criterion, 2002

The folks at Criterion have really stepped up the innovation of packaging and design. It inspires all Film Aficionados. “Fake” Criterion art designs are to be found in all corners of the Cyber World. Some are truly brilliant. The point of these “fake” covers is that those designers who make them hope to stir Criterion to pursue certain films for “The Criterion Collection Treatment.”

Peter Falk and Gena Rowlands interviewed by Criterion.
Criterion, 2004

Sadly, it takes a whole lot more than some clever artwork, petitions and suggestion for Criterion to take on a new film. Rest assured, Criterion is working on securing a number of films to join the collection. And they do their very best to secure time and interviews with key players. Great surprises are revealed as iconic artists such Anna Karina, Peter Falk, Gena Rowlands and Isabelle Huppert lend insight into their roles and experiences.

Isabelle Huppert discusses Jean-Luc Godard with Criterion.
Criterion, 2014

In the last 5 years Criterion’s web site has been elevated to match the quality of the films they produce. A great On-Line Forum and access to film essays and clips are only a couple of the major adds to the site. For me, the most fun are the 3 Reasons vid-clips that quickly explain why a film has been chosen. Even more fun is when Film Artists are given “access” to The Criterion Closet.

Nicolas Winding Refn grabs Alex Cox’s “Repo Man” during his visit to The Criterion Closet.
Criterion, 2013

It is fun to watch and listen to filmmakers as each reacts to what is essentially a room filled with approximately 5-10 copies of all DVD/Blu-Rays Criterion has produced. It is kind of like entering a cinematic candy store. It reminds me a bit of that “rush” my 5 year-old heart experienced overtime I went into Sam Goody’s with my mom. I was not usually allowed to get anything, but I loved roaming through the record racks on the tip of my toes. Too short to ever really see the full album, it was still awesome. The Criterion Closet is like that. There are so many film artists I’d love see look through the closet. Would it not be cool to see The Great Carrie Fisher, Sissy Spacek, Kentucker Audley, Joe Swanberg, Lynn Shelton and Catherine Keener let loose in there?!?!? Send them into the tiny room in couples. Carrie Fisher and Catherine Keener would be fun duo to watch!

Korean Filmmaker, Joon-ho Bong visits The Criterion Closet.
Criterion, 2014

The website is full of these vid-clips.

British Filmmaker, Richard Ayoade visits The Criterion Closet.
Criterion, 2014

If you’ve never been given the opportunity to walk into the surprisingly little room and are curious, you can find the clips at the link below.

https://www.criterion.com

My only “complaint” is that there seems to be some odd sort of “Boy’s Club” mentality going down. Why have we not seen any female filmmakers explore The Criterion Closet?

Canadian actor, Michael Cera visits The Criterion Closet.
Criterion, 2015

The reason is not as “political” as you might think. There is no high-tech innovation when entering the closet. The lighting isn’t great. The absence of female actors is more linked to “publicist worry” than anything else. Sometimes the “official” trips are carefully planned, but most of the time these happen more or less “off the cuff.” Still, some effort needs to be made. Personally, I’d love to see Claire Denis raid The Criterion Closet. And, if she is in NYC — she would be more than “game” for it. And has anyone even asked Lena Dunham or Greta Gerwig? Neither of these very important female artists are worried about being ready for their “close-up.” Criterion? Can you hear me? Not everyone is Barbra Streisand or Goldie Hawn!

The late American Cinematographer, Harris Savides visits The Criterion Closet.
Criterion, 2012

Since the advent of The Criterion Collection Blu-Ray, I’ve slowly begun the process of forming my own version of The Criterion Collection. It is not very big, but I’m on a budget. And, truth be known, more than a few were given to me! Covert operating has it’s privileges! I call this ever-growing collection My Pitiable Criterion Bookshelves! I suppose my most valued “player” in my collection is Kar-wai Wong’s Chungking Express which is tragically out of print. And it it is not likely to return anytime soon. The most devastating loss? I used to own the coveted Criterion transfer of Nicolas Roeg’s The Man Who Fell To Earth. It is long lost. Don’t ask. By the way, if you do not already own it, you are well advised to purchase Jim Jarmusch’s Mystery Train fast while you still can. Just a suggestion.

Welcome to my Criterion Bookcase…

I was recently give the task of selecting six discs from my sad little Criterion Collection and offer a brief discussion of each. The methodology was simple. I sat in front of my bookcase in Lotus Position. Strained my Chakra System and sent my Film Loving aura’s energy upward and reached forward 6 times to pull a movie. Ok. I’m lying. I’ve no interest in Yoga or anything applied toward The New Age without irony.

Essentially, I just squatted in front of the case while my dodgy cat and nutty dog raced around me and blindly pulled 6 titles. I should add that this created quite a mess as over 16 titles fell over and out. These are in no particular order and I do not particularly love one of these films than the other. I selected these Blu-Rays accidentally. This seemed the best way to go. In the end I decided to make an executive decision and only offer my insights into 4 of my initial 6. I did this by closing my eyes and picking up 4. So here are my comments regarding 3 of my Pitiable Collection. Let the fun begin!

Paris, Texas
Wim Wenders, 1984
Cinematography | Robby Müller

I actually have a kind of interesting connection to Wim Wender’s Paris, Texas. I was just entering the deep end of the pool of drugs at the age of 14. I loved movies, but my knowledge was largely limited to the movies that played in my home town of Beaumont, Texas. Around this time I became enamored of Nastassja Kinski. Her images adorned my bedroom walls. I was lying on the floor of my bedroom when my crazy-ass father entered and whispered, “Would you like to meet Nastassja Kinski?”

Only partially annoyed I answered, “No. I would hate to meet Nastassja Kinski. I only have her all over my walls because she is of no interest to me.”

“Well, that’s too bad because of friend of mine has invited us over to a club where she is shooting a movie.”

I jolted up out of my weed-infused stupor, “Really? Are you kidding? Yes! Can I bring — ”

“No. And you have to promise me you don’t mention this to your mother. Never. Got it?”

“Ok.” My parents had re-entered their ill-advised marriage again. He told me to call in sick the following day. The Donut Shop where have to deal. I was gonna meet Nastassja Kinski! The next morning I joined my dad in his huge car and we were on our way. I should mention that my hometown of Beaumont, Texas is not an ideal place. When my insane father told me he was friends with both the owner, manager and some of the “girls” of a place called The Keyhole Klub located in Port Arthur. Yes, aside from the film crew — the first thing I noticed is that this was “club” with a “K.”

I don’t mean to cause offense, but if Beaumont is the “armpit” of Texas then Port Arthur would have to be the “perineum” of Texas. Port Arthur could be rough in a major way. At the time, this was the sort of town which you really needed to avoid. And The Keyhole Klub was more or less just off the battered old highway.

All that appears to remain of The Keyhole Klub. Apparently it was shut down some time ago. This sign is gone. The building still stands, but it is all boarded up.
Keyhole Klub,
Port Arthur, Texas, USA

I don’t think I was yet fully aware of “things” at this point in my life. I knew what a prostitute was and I understood most of the fundamentals of sex thanks to my father’s porn collection and observations hanging out with friends. But I’m not sure if I really understood that this “klub” was a “legalized” illegal operation. Of course this being my father — it all makes sense. He knew the owner because he had cut him a good deal on a shipment of guns. He had also trained several of “the girls” to shoot guns. These “girls” looked more like kind of overly made-up creepy old ladies to me. In reality they were probably barely 30. This is remembered from the eyes of a 14 year old stoner.

The movie crew looked both professional and confused. My father introduced me to the owner of the “klub” – think Willem Dafoe as “Bobby” from David Lynch’s Wild At Heart. This dude was seriously creepy. But to be honest “creepy” was not a new reality to me back then.

The owner told me that she hadn’t yet arrived. Or if she had he hadn’t noticed.

“Strange girl, that one. Puurty. But fuckin’ strange. You don’t look much like your Daddy.”

He and my father began to talk about some gun delivery he was still waiting “on.”

I asked, “So where is Nastassja Kinski and why would she be here?” Just then one of “the girls” walked up to the owner.

The owner told “the girl” to walk me around and keep me out of trouble. The film crew had full control of the “klub” for the day and into the early part of the night. “The girl” introduced me to Harry Dean Stanton. We shook hands. He asked what a kid like me was doing there. I think I just shrugged. Then she introduced me to the film’s director. He seemed hot and frustrated, but extended his hand and said hello in a friendly, thick accent of some sort. A sweaty guy with an even thicker accent walked up to talk to the director. She introduced me to him as well. This time I asked, “Lasso?” “No. Lazlow.” I had no clue of who they were. It did dawn on me that I had seen Stanton might have been in Coal Miner’s Daughter and The Rose, but I wasn’t sure. Nor was “the girl.”

She asked me if I wanted to go inside where there was air-conditioning and she’d get me a Coke. Would I possibly see Miss. Kinski? I entered the suspect looking building. I wish I could remember the name of “the girl” but I can’t. She took me through into this dark hallway. It was seemed dirty and smelled odd. A hall of one-way mirrors with tiny desks and phones placed in front of the mirrors. “The girl” told me that men liked to pay money to talk to them. I asked how and she let me inside one of the rooms. Suddenly I heard her voice and she told me she could see and hear me, but I couldn’t see her.

“He thought if she never got jealous of him that she didn’t really care about him. Jealousy was a sign of her love for him…”
Nastassja Kinski
Paris, Texas
Wim Wenders, 1984
Cinematography | Robby Müller

The room was in a state of half-construction. There was a stool, chairs, toys, sex toys and perfumes. She told me that every room was the same.

We returned to the cruel heat, humidity and sunlight. I found my father talking with a group of rednecks. One asked me if I liked to go “shootin‘” like my dad. I answered “no.”

This led to a spit and a new question, “You mean you don’t know how to shoot a gun, boy?”

My rebellion was in full-tilt, “Oh yeah. I can shoot a gun. And I shoot a gun well.”

My father offered his standard joke while his hand was firmly clutched around the back of my neck, “You have to excuse my son. If Jesus walked up he’d tell him to get a haircut!” …this was met with laughter and more Skoal spitting.

I sulked all the way back to Beaumont. It would be several years before I realized I had met The Harry Dean Stanton, The Laszlo Kovacs and The Great Wim Wenders. All of whom were very nice to me. I was an annoyed teenager hellbent on meeting a “real” star. It is ironic. Year later I would have the opportunity of meeting Mr. Wenders again. He was charming, easy-going and very open. I did not let him know we had met years before. The really interesting thing about my “connection” to the movie is that when I finally saw the film itself, one of if not the most important moments in Paris, Texas takes place within the walls of a gross Port Arthur sex club.

Nastassja Kinski / Harry Dean Stanton
Paris, Texas
Wim Wenders, 1984
Cinematography | Robby Müller

Somehow Kovacs and Wenders transformed that little room and one-way mirror into something interestingly beautiful. The true magic of filmmaking. Obviously, Ms. Kinski eventually showed up. And she is exceptional in the film. Every time I see this movie I wonder if they took out the sex toys before or after she entered the room. I think this might be Wim Winders’ greatest film. For me, it is most definitely a cinematic masterpiece. Harry Dean Stanton barely speaks at all, but he conveys all and more than you need to know or understand. He is practically mute until he enters the sex club. He sees his far-too young wife, but she can’t see him. Stanton reveals his character’s truth in one of the most beautifully sad cinematic moments.

Robby Müller’s cinematography has never been so fully utilized. (And that is saying a great deal) This is a cinematic poetry of “the ordinary.” Magically, Wenders’ gives this visual poem flight into “the extraordinary.” Bittersweet beauty. Brilliant.

While we are still in the 1980’s, let’s move to 1986 and Jim Jarmusch’s Down by Law.

“It’s not where you start – It’s where you start again.”
Down by Law
Jim Jarmusch, 1986
Cinematography | Robby Müller

Jim Jarmusch’s great movie has taken on a new level of importance in the past decade. Not that it wasn’t important upon it’s initial release. It was. I skipped a day of school and drove my beat-up old Buick to Houston to see an afternoon screening. It felt so vital and new. This was my first Jamusch movie. And what a movie it was! There is a great difference in seeing this movie through the eyes of an 17 year old and the eyes of a thirty-something. There is an even greater difference viewing it through the eyes of a fourty-something. Each viewing is rewarding, but age and the passing of time bring this simple, low-budget movie a far deeper level of meaning. Add in the aftermath of Katrina, this is an important portrait of a New Orleans long gone.

Jarmusch and his actors capture the cool and the conflict. Robby Müller’s brilliant cinematography captures glimpses of this city that have been forever changed. John Lurie, Tom Waits and Roberto Benigni (before I found him annoying) are perfectly cast as fictional versions of themselves. Ellen Barkin shows up as well. This is a young Barkin who is already far more talented than her age would suggest. I remember thinking it funny as she tossed our poor Zack’s possessions out the window of their grubby and yet impossibly cool apartment. In my thirties I was in pain for Tom Wait’s character. He only has a few things and what she tosses out that window are priceless.

” You don’t take care of me. You don’t want me…”
Ellen Barkin / Tom Waits
Down by Law
Jim Jarmusch, 1986
Cinematography | Robby Müller

I knew Tom Waits to be a cool singer/songwriter who was creating experimental twists on the blues and jazz. He had dumped Rickie Lee Jones and inspired her to create an entire iconic album. I didn’t know who John Lurie was, but he seemed cool. Benigni was a harmless clown. As these three “true” characters find themselves stuck in a jail cell the naturalistic charm and humor comes to full bloom. We follow them on a simple escape. Now fugitives, we see them argue, bond and joined together as outsiders. The film rambles it’s way to an ending that is as satisfying as it is kind of sad and unsure. Jim Jarmusch is an essential filmmaker. Over the years his eccentricities sometimes veer far deeply into his “hipster cool” — this, for me, remains his best cinematic moment. Somewhere in my mind, these three men are still sulking, joking and sliding through their lives. Lives that are far more meaningful that surface view allows.

“Life is like the surf, so give yourself away like the sea.”
Y Tu Mamá También
Alfonso Cuarón, 2001
Cinematography | Emmanuel Lubezki

Expectations were not that high as we took our seats to see this film. Alfonso Cuarón’s movie is framed as if a “documentary” which features a distant and dis-engaged narrator. It is an effective device. As we “meet” the 3 leading characters of the story, we are allowed to make “judgements” about each one. I stress the word “judgement” because that is what we do. It is as if Cuaron gives his audience permission to allow us to wedge each three “characters” into our own sense of stereotyping and passive viewpoints. As the movie progresses, the idea of documentary gives sway to leaving the audience as “flies on the walls.” Our pre-conceived ideas of each character proves incorrect. These characters do not fit into cultures’ restrictively simple “labels.”

Thanks to the skills of Maribel Verdú, Diego Luna and most especially Gael García Bernal — these characters very quickly become “people” filled with challenges and very real worries and concerns. The “older” woman is not really that much older than her male friends. She is barely a decade older. But as a woman and as an adult who has had a bit more experience, she is more forgiving of her friend’s limitations. It doesn’t mean she understands them. Julio and Tenoch have been raised in very different ways and within very contrasting social classes. It has not prevented a deep friendship, but as they grow older each is painfully aware of their own “judgements” and “prejudices.”

Maribel Verdú, Diego Luna and Gael Garcia Bernal
Y Tu Mamá También
Alfonso Cuarón, 2001
Cinematography | Emmanuel Lubezki

What seems like a simple road trip and coming of age story is far more complex. At the time the film was released, Cuaron’s use of explicit sex went far beyond the range of the American R-rating. It was hit with the often damaging and unfair “NC-17” label. For younger people this film became an infamously erotic, bold and graphic look at sexuality. It would be unfair to not allow the film its eroticism. It is erotic. It is also a very intelligent examination of sexuality from both the limited perspectives of two only recently “legally” recognized young adult males as well as an adult female perspective. Sexuality is at the core of this beautiful film.

The road trip is not simple. It is filled with glimpses into The Mexican culture which is simultaneously beautiful, confused and horrifically economically corrupt tension. In addition, this “little” road trip reveals itself to be a realistic and troubling exploration of male bonding. When that bonding dips it’s toes into the deep waters of sexuality — this friendship can never return to it’s innocent fun and love. It is severed. It is damaged beyond repair. And our leading female character is dealing with life’s most challenging and horrifying realities. Beyond lonely, Luisa is trying desperately to find solace in a world that has refused it. These two kind young men represent a youth she has almost forgotten. And while she tries to help guide these two boys into a smarter sexual understanding she also pushes them too fast and too far.

Gael García Bernal and his friend are about to go deeper than their friendship can survive.
Gael García Bernal
Y Tu Mamá También
Alfonso Cuarón, 2001
Cinematography | Emmanuel Lubezki

She is unable to notice this because of an internal horror that she keep hidden. Not because she is afraid to share it — but because she is too afraid to allow herself to view it. Y Tu Mama También presents itself as a sexy coming of age movie that is actually a profound and tragically sad reality that comes with adulthood. Underneath that already complex achievement lies a societal-political of a Mexico that is about to explode onto other cultures and countries that I don’t I was even aware of at the the time. More than just an “important” work, this is stunning adult film that no one will want to miss.

“Fact, fantasy or memory?”
My Winnipeg
Guy Maddin, 2007
Cinematography | Jody Shapiro

If I were pushed, I’d have to admit that this is probably my favorite of the 4 movie from my Criterion Collection. Guy Maddin’s work is “tripy” and constantly shifts from “Horror” to “Dark Comedy.” But every film also offers an enticing beauty. The Saddest Music in the World would prove to be his most “accessible” movie. He emerged from the fringes of his earlier shorts and experimental films. Interestingly, as good as that film is — it is far from being one of his best. Following the Art House success of Saddest Music and the success of 2006’s Brand Upon The Brain, he created his most personal film.

I had the pleasure of seeing My Winnipeg before it was released to the film festival circuit and it’s all too-limited US release. While Brand Upon the Brain was a fascinating experimental re-visit to silent film, My Winnipeg takes the “form” of a documentary. This “formation” features re-enactments of Maddin’s “personal memory” and of Winnipeg’s eccentric “history.” Utilizing his standard devices of long ago abandoned cinematic tricks. This is not a documentary that can be accepted as “truth.” This is an artist’s re-invented collection of memories that he has bent, twisted and often self-created or imagined.

The late Roger Ebert wrote an incredible review of My Winnipeg that captured my own viewpoints far better than I could ever articulate. I still remember a very key comment Ebert gave in his review. I did’t remember it well enough to quote, but it was easy to find on-line.

Roger Ebert wrote, that Winnipeg’s “city fathers commissioned it [the film] as a documentary, to be made by “the mad poet of Manitoba,” as a Canadian magazine termed him. Maddin has never left his hometown, although judging by this film, it has left him.” This is an almost perfect summation of the movie. I highly encourage you seek Ebert’s review of this odd but effective film prior to seeing it. And if you have not seen it — you must check it out. Ebert’s one sentence frames Maddin’s incredible film perfectly.

We never doubt that Maddin loves and is proud of “his” Winnipeg, but we can’t really be sure that we can trust what he shows and tells us. He rejects the idea of creating the “documentary” for which he was commissioned. Instead he pursues an experimental and surreal glimpse back into what might be a collective feeling of a city long gone. He examines an idea of himself via what are very likely false childhood “memories.” I call these memories “false” because they are too absurd to be considered true.

Mother does not always stand for comfort..
Ann Savage casually chats her son out of suicide.
My Winnipeg
Guy Maddin, 2007
Cinematography | Jody Shapiro

His “mom” is more a symbol of Winnipeg than a maternal relation. In fact his entire “family” emerges more as metaphors or symbols of a city’s history long abandoned. It is partly from his own familial “experience” and the city’s “history” in sport and retail that Maddin once again returns to his familiar examination of sexuality. Maddin’s work has always found ways to root themselves into the ream of sex. He has never shied away from a conflicted view of sexuality. This includes a constant re-emerging study of repressed homosexuality. I do not mean to imply anything regarding Maddin’s real sexuality or identity, but his work continually pulls his audience to the attention of a vague interest related to “latent homosexuality.” It appears to be a source of conflict and humor. This is not a politically offensive “conflict” or “humor.” It is expressed as both a sort of longing, sadness and curiosity.

The role of women in Maddin’s work is also takes form in a mystical riddle. The female characters share maternal instincts as much as they offer sexual pleasure and danger. Once again, this is not misogyny. The idea of women is a source of conflict within Maddlin’s cinematic world. A conflict that is interestingly free of rage or objectification. Women seem to allude him. They are mysterious and powerful — and they enchant him. One senses that Maddin is truly encaged in what becomes a true magical mystery.

Marcel Dzama’s effective design for The Criterion Collection’s packaging.
My Winnipeg
Guy Maddin, 2007

My Winnipeg offers the perfect formation of Guy Maddin’s eccentric, dark, disturbing and often funny ideas and style. This is a fully formed world in which we are placed. It is logical that this formation takes place as Maddin is paying homage and also applying a sense of sadness toward the mysteries of childhood perspective and a time long ago. Winnipeg culture is tied to the filmmaker’s identity. This film is a rewarding experience. After the movie ends, I feel as if I need to re-adjust my vision. And the lonesome laments of Maddin’s brilliant film lingers. A poster for the film’s original release hangs in my dining room. Moments from this magical movie are forever in my own memory. My Winnipeg is a true Cinematic Masterpiece. It also that defies “genre.” Having the opportunity to speak with Maddin, and one does speak “with” him. He is a good a listener as speaker. You are able to connect this very grounded man to his films. Bizarre as they are, each is somehow grounded in a reality that is uniquely intellectual, beautiful and uniquely his own. Every shot, every character is different and sometimes even “evil” — but this filmmaker has love for each one.

Criterion has done an outstanding job at transferring this film. Fingers-crossed that they are soon able to do the same with Brand Upon The Brain! via blu-ray and a re-freshed VOD version. Criterion released BUTB to DVD which offers alternate audio narrations of the silent film. Isabella Rossellini provides the “official” narration to great effect, but it is interesting to hear other actors serve as narrators. Each narration delivery seems to change the film’s intentions and meanings. Technology has advanced a great deal since this film joined The Criterion Collection as a Blu-Ray. Let’s hope they will be able to re-master and re-issue to Blu-Ray and VOD soon!

” All things will happen again. And again.”
Brand Upon the Brain! A Remembrance in 12 Chapters
Guy Maddin, 2006
Cinematography | Benjamin Kasulke

Meanwhile, we can dream… I particularly love the dreams of Designer and Design Firm, Variant. Variant is a boutique design agency specializing in key art for independent film. Beautiful work to be discovered there. I love their design for Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.

www.variantcreative.com

Fake Criterion Cover for Stanley Kubrick’s
The Shining
Designed by and courtesy
of © Variant
http://www.variantcreative.com

Another great site devoted to the art of design for “dream” Criterion Covers is far more subversive. However, I do think a case could be made for Adam Bernstein’s cinematic adaptation of Julia Sweeney’s iconic SNL parody of androgyny. It’s Pat was a bad film, but over time it has developed an odd sort of entertainment value. There is goofy but legitimate amount of fun in this strange little cinematic error. “I played with the Ween!” You can find and follow both via Tumblr and Twitter:

http://fakecriterions.tumblr.com

Fake Criterion Cover for
It’s Pat
Julia Sweeney
Adam Bernstein, 1994
Courtesy of
© FakeCriterions
http://fakecriterions.tumblr.com

In all honesty, FakeCriterion’s design for Shane Carruth’s brilliant Upstream Color erbp is far better than erbp Films’ official packaging design.

The power of Film Art is unlimited and subjective. This is a concept that is well understood by The Criterion Collection.

Matty Stanfield

7.30.2015

Posts tagged Blow Up

Choose another tag?

Above, Under, Near, Inside, Outside and Lost in the Surroundings

Is That London Burning? Or Exploring The British New Wave from The Other Side of the Underneath…

Cinematic Candy or Entering The Criterion Closet or Approaching My Pitiable Criterion Bookshelves