Just watched: La Haine (1995) written & directed by Matthieu Kassovitz. A memorably stylized, scalding French portrait of three young fictional residents of the Parisian projects. A perfect film. In conversation with Do The Right Thing (1989). A borderline must-see for the sake of humanity. Borderline and not a shoe-in probably because I’m classist and racist. 🍿
Just watched: A Fish Called Wanda (1988), written and directed by Charles Crichton and John Cleese. It took some time for me to warm up to the humor (or maybe it was the humor itself that took some time to warm up). But once warm, the (admittedly rather broad) comedy came in buckets. All three leads whose lines were written for laughs do it excellently: Cleese does sympathetic pathetic very believably. Kline played a “live-action Daffy Duck”: Annoying at first, then annoying and hilarious. And he won an Oscar for it. Palin manages to play a severe stutterer without, as it seemed to me anyway, playing the stutter itself for laughs. (The stutter does serve as a small plot device sometimes, and it does enable at least one very funny scene in which it is a miracle Cleese and Palin don’t bust out laughing. But mostly it serves to develop sympathy for the character. If the stutter is ever the butt of a joke, it’s a mean joke told by another character and makes you like Palin’s character more.) Curtis does very well, too; I’m just not sure how to describe her character.
An interesting comedy/tragedy pairing with The Killing, which just so happened to be the previous movie we watched.🍿
Just watched: The Killing (1956) adapted for screen and directed by Stanley Kubrick. A perfectly shot and richly instructive fable. (And I mean that fable part: My internal landscape has these character-constructs in it.) Tense the entirety of its short runtime. With dialogue whose clever audacity made me laugh out loud several times. Film noir bettered only by Touch of Evil and The Night of the Hunter. Its unconventional narrative structure is often praised for its ingenuity, but I think its primarily serves to (successfully) help the viewer understand the plot. (Plots are often hard to follow in film noir. See the otherwise excellent Out of the Past.) I can’t tell you my favorite part without spoiling it. 🍿
Hypothesis: A big reason we love books, movies, and recorded music is that they offer to our lower brains a passable simulacrum of company. Inspiring, beautiful, mind-expanding they can be. But they are, at their root, an inferior substitute for basic emotional and relational goods that come from real, live, human company…
…writes the man whose wife of twenty years hasn’t been home in a week and is currently incommunicado on a sailboat in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Just watched: The Last Stop In Yuma County (2023) written and directed by Francis Gallupi. Two and a half time shorter than Greed (1924) and three times as fun, with nods to the Coen brothers and Tarantino, in that order. Lots of craftsmanship to admire. Worthwhile, but only as a brain break.
The pitch clock has worked: Baseball has become enjoyable to watch! ⚾️
A remarkable exchange between characters in Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning:
Ethan Hunt: I swear your life will always matter more to me than my own.
Grace: You don’t even know me.
Ethan Hunt: What difference does that make?
Just watched: La Grande Illusion (1937) directed and co-written by Jean Renoir.
What is the great illusion? Is it national borders? Is it the idea that this war would be the one to end them all? That war can be gentlemanly? That war is worth it?
Anyway, this movie stands alongside The Best Years of Our Lives, Dr. Strangelove, and The Bridge on the River Kwai as one of the best antiwar films I’ve seen. (I haven’t watched Apocalypse Now yet.) But less like Strangelove and more like Best Years of Our Lives in that all the characters are very human. These are people fighting, dammit. Makes me want to rewatch The Rules of the Game because Renoir is so good. Perfect, transparent acting. Bonding people across class and nationality, yet sometimes having to stick to those, too. In the end, So very human. A perfect film. Definitely worth watching. If this was Jean Renoir’s outlook on people, we could all stand to learn. Finally, a French film and a French director Carla and I enjoy with no reservations! Full of bits of philosophy that are never heavy-handed.
It is curious that we never see the life of a foot soldier in this movie. But I suppose you write about what you know. But we do see a black man. And refreshingly, he is not a buffoon or a mammy or any other black stereotype.
A New Yorker writer: “Sophistication at the service of innocence, not cynicism or chic: That’s the glory of “Grand Illusion” as a narrative, a showcase for transcendent acting, a piece of philosophy in action, and a leap into pure cinema.”
Some tired thoughts on this Swing Time (1936), which is the first film Carla and I have repeat-watched from the greatest lists. Is Swing Time worth watching? Yes. Like we did with Top Hat, we shared some of the dance numbers with the kids. We weren’t sure what to do with the Bojangles number at the time; Wikipedia now tells us that the Bojangles is a real person to whom (with one other guy) Astaire was paying tribute, not aping. Carla and I agree it’s the better of the Astaire-Rogers films we watched, although I’m more tickled with the dancing in Top Hat. It’s the faces, though, in this one, like Ginger’s when she comes to plant a kiss on Fred in his dressing room, fails, and then they kiss behind a closed door. Close-ups of Fred toward the end when he finds out Ginger is going to marry the Metaxa character. Fred Astaire looks more like JImmy Stewart in this one. We shared the dance numbers with the kids. Interesting how central a role cheating plays in this one. More believeable, this one. Again, those dresses. Must’ve been quite the pick-me-up during the Depression. Worth watching.
I hypothesize that the reason folks like me are OK with watching movie violence and less OK with watching movie sex is that the latter arouses feelings and potentially even action, while the former does not.
The scary part wiggled your head a little.
— Sullivan, after having watched portions of How to Train Your Dragon at a family friend’s house 🍿