Chrisnu’s Screening Log

Inland Empire

Directed by: David Lynch
Year: 2006

I (finally) watched Inland Empire again late last night. Probably a good time to watch it. I don’t like the inclusion of the rabbits. While I understand what they may represent, the fact that they exist doesn’t mean it was executed well, and I just don’t think that content is substantive enough to warrant inclusion. Some more examples of self-consciousness include the talk show, Harry Dean Stanton’s character, and “Bucky” (who is very obviously Lynch’s voice). It’s like that kind of deadpan humor and Hollywood critique is expected in a Lynch film. Tiresome.

I actually enjoyed the cadence of the first half of the film very much. It felt very much like a dream in that elements feel connected, but you’re not exactly sure how they are connected. That’s how the randomness of the Locomotion scene fits so well. Dern is absolutely outstanding as our emotional compass. I think that her journey in the film plumbs a great deal of the rigors involved with becoming lost in a character, the idea that we’re always performing for other people, the willingness for Kingsley to let Nikki go where she needs to go may not be our of respect, but out of usury.

I can’t pinpoint where the lack of organization becomes a detriment rather than a benefit, but eventually, we’re walking down halls and experiencing visual motifs that while they may be recurring, connecting the dots to earlier parts of the film, it’s not exactly clear what connecting the dots really accomplishes. Some kind of closure is achieved in the end, but I’m not exactly sure how it was achieved, or what that closure means. The story just kind of ends. At this time, I think that Inland Empire is initially engrossing, ultimately unsatisfying, and the first Lynch film that seems to be aware of its own existence, of what the audience expects in a Lynch film. I actually find that to be somewhat condescending.

The Wild One

Directed by: László Benedek
Year: 1953

The Wild One was awful, just awful. Plotless, depthless, horrid acting, and for a motorcycle movie, we’re stuck in a podunk town for an ungodly amount of time. Nothing happens for huge stretches of time. The sequence I remember most is Brando driving around some girl on a motorcycle, and then driving back in the opposite direction. Brando isn’t allowed to create a character, just a series of mannerisms, with some lackadaisical expository dialogue. What I found particularly emblematic of 50s Hollywood is that it purports itself, in a bold disclaimer, that this is meant to be a cautionary tale, and yet we’re meant to fall in love with Johnny, and both he and the audience don’t learn anything. A complete waste of time.

I’m very glad I went to this. Best movie-going experience this year. Both pictures had pristine film prints; The Straight Story looked like it was filmed yesterday. I cherish that movie. I also think I have a newfound appreciation for the moral ambiguity in The Elephant Man, where I largely initially responded with cynicism.

What struck me this time about Dr. Treves’ relationship with John Merrick is that in some ways, it is akin to a large corporation donating money to benefit cancer patients, or something similar. No matter what the motives behind such generosity are, although I believe Treves’ motives are good, what really matters is that someone’s life is being changed. Even though the Elephant Man is nearly paraded around as a poster boy, he has been provided an existence and fulfillment that he could never dream of. The danger behind getting caught up in your own image, however, is that you become no longer yourself, but what people expect of you, or rather, what you expect they expect.

Other than some fluttering on the first reel, The Straight Story‘s film print was absolutely flawless. I think that even above how the film chronicles coming to terms and making peace with your previous self, acknowledging mistakes, and not letting them control your current actions, it makes you appreciate the effort of people simply being there when you need them to be. It can take a lot of effort, swallowing a lot of pride, letting the chaff fall away, as Alvin put it. I think this movie shows Alvin learning that by doing it, right now, rather than simply doting sage advice which you hope to follow yourself someday.

I also sat next to someone who, after I mentioned the Altman retrospective held last year, that he’s a good friend of Altman’s son, also named Robert. He mentioned that while Altman was filming Cookie’s Fortune in Mississippi, he was working on My Dog Skip, also being filmed in Mississippi, and he was able to visit Altman’s set a few times. He mentioned that Altman liked to show the cast some of his older films. I mentioned that Images was a part of the retrospective, and he said that at the time, not only did Altman not know where the negative for Images was, he only had a single, 16mm print of the film. He mentioned he was trying to find the film for years, and hoped it would be on DVD. I did mention that the DVD is now available on Netflix. I also mentioned that, coincidentally, Cookie’s Fortune isn’t available on DVD any more. Any way, neat guy to sit next to.

Tsotsi

Directed by: Gavin Hood
Year: 2006

Tsotsi feels like foreign film for dilettantes. It’s too polished, too safe, too simple, and thinks that it’s exotic, or daring, or gritty reality, when it’s entirely not. Telegraphed, connect-the-dots psychology. I can see this being someone’s favorite foreign film if they’ve never watched a film with subtitles before. It would’ve received absolutely no attention if it were in English, and transplanted to any American urban area. The story wouldn’t have lost anything, actually. There’s pretty much zero social context. It’s further proof that Oscar voters look for more of the same in their foreign film selections.

Knocked Up (Apatow, 2007) – 8
Tsotsi (Hood, 2006) -3.5
Ratatouille (Bird, 2007) – 8
The Elephant Man (Lynch, 1980) – 9
The Straight Story (Lynch, 1999) – 10
The Wild One (Benedek, 1953) – 1

The Libertine (Dunmore, 2006) – 6
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End (Verbinski, 2007) – 4

I Walked With a Zombie (Tourneur, 1943) – 4
The Lookout (Frank, 2007) – 7
Grindhouse (Rodriguez / Tarantino, 2007) – 7
(Planet Terror: 6, Death Proof: 8.5)
Three Kings (Russell, 1999) – 8
Get Shorty (Sonnenfeld, 1995) – 6.5
Bringing out the Dead (Scorsese, 1999) – 6.5
Hot Fuzz (Wright, 2007) – 8.5
Unfaithfully Yours (Sturges, 1948) – 9

The Body Snatcher

Directed by: Robert Wise
Year: 1945

 The Body Snatcher is a tale of a doctor who is ruthless in the pursuit of knowledge, but that same ruthlessness keeps him hiding in fear. Dr. Wolfe MacFarlane (Henry Daniell) is teaching students medicine, but hesitates to use his knowledge for the direct benefit of patients. He needs cadavers for study, and has a clandestine arrangement with John Gray (Boris Karloff) regarding the retrieval of such cadavers, through means of which are unscrupulous at best. MacFarlane employs student Donald Fettes (Russell Wade) as his assistant, and begins to entangle him in the same moral quandary.

The film uses the power of suggestion, and expressionistic lighting and photography by Robert De Grasse to create a murky, foreboding mood, and a particularly astonishing moment of violence. Karloff is the film’s greatest asset. His ragged appearance and impeccable line delivery contribute a great deal of emotional credence to a very simple moral dichotomy, the machinations of which evaporate under any kind of scrutiny.

While Karloff is delightful as the necessary evil from which “Toddy” Macfarlane cannot escape, the film actually spends too much time with Karloff, in scant screentime which could have been utilized to flesh out the back story of the real main character, Macfarlane, and the cycle of guilt and fear behind his relationship with Gray. Reducing the main conflict of the film to a couple of conversations only exposes the circumstantial house of cards upon which the film sits to a greater extent. Shot quickly and cheaply, The Body Snatcher shows potential as a psychological horror film, and has an atmospheric polish which defies its B-movie status, but desperately needs a change of focus and further incisiveness to fulfill that potential.

Come and See

Directed by: Elem Klimov
Year: 1985

Come and See is a fever dream of war and hell in pillaged Byelorussia during World War II. Florya (Aleksei Kravchenko), a young, fresh-faced boy filled with idealism and visions of glory, feels inspired to go to combat. However, as his mother realizes, the repercussions of such a decision can’t be fathomed by uncorrupted innocence. What follows are seemingly endless horrors so macabre that the only capable reactions are disorientation, mania, and numbness. Florya’s crumbling visage is our only compass in a brutal, barbarous world without respite.

Director Elem Klimov immediately disorients the viewer with an opening scene of children acting in ways diametrically opposite of expectations; the apostasy resulting from combat is immediately made apparent. The camerawork and sound design are absolutely relentless in their barrage of the senses. Large portions of the film exist in drifting, almost hallucinatory episodes, as if it’s the only way that Florya can respond to the carnage, to having every safe haven, be it a partisan camp, an authority figure, or the company of a young girl, Glasha, who at first appears to have become more accustomed to this state of limbo. This milieu is executed so effectively that it becomes easy to stop questioning why events are occurring, if characters are drawn in a manner that’s effective, or if they’ve simply become another victim in a long line of suffering.

The film’s final act, in its unflinching brutality and seeming hopelessness, that questions regarding the film’s character and agenda arise. Florya has been dredged through such excruciating psychological torture that it almost becomes instinct to cease emotional investment without some kind of human empathy. The film becomes nearly misanthropic in both Florya’s ardor and the unmitigated hatred in its people. While the film has few rivals in displaying the visceral cruelty of war, however one-sided, there needs to be if not catharsis, than a kernel of hope. And in this the film fails entirely. Perhaps it is inevitable that such a moment will fall short of the power the film previously established, but what is received is not only completely incredulous given our main character, but almost pat in its sentiment and brevity. Come and See is virtuoso filmmaking, and adept at creeping into the crevices of wartime depravity, but is nearly devoid of expiation.

Zodiac (Fincher, 2007) – 8.5
Black Snake Moan (Brewer, 2007) – 8
300 (Snyder, 2007) – 3
Come and See (Klimov, 1985) – 8
The Lady Eve (Sturges, 1941) – 8.5
El Topo (Jodorowsky, 1971) – 5
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (Anderson, 2004) – 8
The Namesake (Nair, 2007) – 7
The Body Snatcher (Wise, 1945) – 6