Casino, 1995

I had difficulty selecting a single film for some directors; therefore I selected more than one. These are all directors who have consecutively put out great films; I'm not going to list any directors who have only made a single good film (there are lots of those unfortunately).

Anyway, here are my favorite directors and their best film(s) (in my opinion):

Steven Spielberg:

Best film(s) – Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Martin Scorsese:

Best film(s) – Taxi Driver

Nicolas Roeg:

Best film(s) – Walkabout

Ridley Scott:

Best film(s) – Alien/Blade Runner

Gus Van Sant:

Best film – Drugstore Cowboy

Stanley Kubrick:

Best film(s) – A Clockwork Orange

Werner Herzog:

Best film(s) – Stroszek/Aguirre, the Wrath of God

George A. Romero:

Best film(s) – Martin

David Cronenberg:

Best film(s) – The Dead Zone/Videodrome

Krzysztof Kieslowski:

Best film(s) – Dekalog (TV series)

Tim Burton:

Best film(s) – Ed Wood/Edward Scissorhands

Quentin Tarantino:

Best film(s) – Reservoir Dogs

Jean-Pierre Melville:

Best film(s) – Le samouraï

Frank Darabont:

Best film(s) – The Shawshank Redemption

Hayao Miyazaki:

Best film(s) – Spirited Away

George Lucas:

Best film(s) – Star Wars (episodes IV, V and VI)

Roman Polanski:

Best film(s) – The Tenant

(*NOTE* This blog-post was extracted from this thread of mine on the HikiCulture forums.)

Posted via email from HikiCulture – A Forum For Reclusive People (and Hikikomori) {HikiCulture.Com Site Blog}

If we want everything to stay the same, everything must change…

Above: To watch Visconti’s battle scenes is to see the hand of a Renaissance master in motion. I highly recommend this epic classic.

Last night, as Tracie B and I watched the first 90 minutes of Visconti’s 1963 technicolor classic Il gattopardo (The Leopard), I couldn’t help but think of the passages we read from Count Camillo Cavour’s epistolary in my “Italian Wine and Civilization” seminar last week at the Austin Wine Merchant. In the opening sequences of the movie, the Prince of Salina reads aloud from a letter sent to him by courier from his brother-in-law: “My dear Fabrizio, I am writing to you in a state of utter collapse. Such dreadful news in the paper. The Piedmontese have landed. We are all lost.” The backdrop for the movie is Garibalidi’s Expedition of the Thousand: in 1860, General Giuseppe Garibaldi landed in Sicily with an army of “a thousand” and defeated the forces of the Kingdom of Two Sicilies. In doing so, he implemented the final (and historically symbolic) stage of the Unification of Italy, orchestrated, in large part, by Count Cavour in Piedmont.

Above: The banquet and ball sequences of Visconti’s film are among the most celebrated in international cinema history. Scorsese is a fan…

A very short 15 years before, and three years before the first Italian War of Independence in 1848, Count Cavour — the architect of Italian unity — was planning another crusade of sorts, an “enological crusade”:

To Giacomo Giovanetti, Novara

I openly confess that the excellent wine of Sizzano has almost convinced me that luxury wines can be produced in Piedmont. To a great degree, this wine possesses that which bestow prestige on the wines of France and which our wines generally lack, bouquet. The bouquet of the Sizzano does not resemble that of Bordeaux but rather the bouquet of Burgundy where wines like Clos Vougeot and Romanet [Romanée] enjoy supremacy over all the wines of France for their delicate qualities.

Therefore, it has been proven that the hills of Novara can compete with the hills of Burgundy. In order to triumph in this struggle, [estate] owners must diligently oversee the production of their wines so that the wines will be rich, elegant, and indulgent. I hope to take part in this enological crusade [italics mine] and I will do what I can in the circles within which I move. In order to act expeditiously, it is crucial that you inform as to whether or not these wines of this caliber are available for sale and what is their price. If Count Solaro ever gives up his post — something I doubt he’d ever be willing to do — I will send the wines of Sizzano as a gift to all the diplomats. In the meantime, I will drink them with my friends and toast to your health.

Turin, July, 1845. (Translation mine.)*

As the letter reveals (in my unpublished translation), it was a wine from the township of Sizzano (in the province of Novara, Piedmont, not far from Gattinara) that first inspired Cavour’s “enological crusade,” to make wine in Piedmont that could rival the wines of Burgundy.

With this in mind, I couldn’t help but find uncanny Franco’s post today, announcing a wonderful tasting of Langa Nebbiolo and Burgundies this weekend in the town of La Morra (in the heart of Langa). The tasting, entitled Their Majesties (aka, Nebbiolo and Pinot Noir), is intended to create dialog and discussion of the affinities and differences between these two noble grapes and terroirs.

Today, as Italy’s tenuous unity teeters more precariously than ever on the divide between north and south, it might seem to some that Cavour’s enolgoical crusade has been the more successful. “If we want everything to stay the same,” says the Prince of Salina, “everything must change.” (That’s the cover of the editio princeps of the English translation of Lampedusa’s 1958 novel Il gattopardo, published in 1960, and given to us by Tracie B’s dear friend Lena.)

Above: Tracie B’s ragù was so good last night with a bottle of the 2007 Dolcetto by Marchesi di Gresy. We love that wine…

I wish I could spend the whole day reflecting and writing about Cavour and Nebbiolo, Lampedusa and Visconti, Nebbiolo and Pinot Noir… but, alas, it’s already 9 a.m. and time to get to work and hit the market and “move some boxes,” as they say in the business. I’m headed to San Antonio… Stay tuned… We’ll be watching the second half of the movie tomorrow night…

In other Nebbiolo news…

I love it when McDuff writes about one of his favorite producers of Nebbiolo, Vajra, as he did today… Check it out…

* Translation copyright Jeremy Parzen 2007.

I went back to the 90’s and made up a list of the 30 best movies from 1990-1999. Enjoy. I will not take any shit for placing The Godfather part III so high up on the list. It is an excellent motion picture and it makes me cry every time I see it.

1. Schindler’s List (1993) Director: Steven Spielberg
2. Goodfellas (1990) Director: Martin Scorsese
3. The Godfather part III (1990) Director: Francis Ford Coppola
4. In the Name of the Father (1993) Director: Jim Sheridan
5. Silence of the Lambs (1991) Director: Jonathan Demme
6. JFK (1991) Director: Oliver Stone
7. Casino (1995) Director: Martin Scorsese
8. Pulp Fiction (1994) Director: Quentin Tarantino
9. Eyes Wide Shut (1999) Director: Stanley Kubrick
10. The Big Lebowski (1998) Director: Joel Coen
11. Scent of a Woman (1992) Director: Martin Brest
12. Groundhog Day (1993) Director: Harold Ramis
13. As Good As It Gets (1997) Director: James L. Brooks
14. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) Director: James Cameron
15. Shine (1996) Director: Scott Hicks
16. Shawshank Redemption (1994) Director: Frank Darabont
17. Leaving Las Vegas (1995) Director: Mike Figgis
18. A Few Good Men (1992) Director: Rob Reiner
19. The Remains of the Day (1993) Director: James Ivory
20. Dances with Wolves (1990) Director: Kevin Costner
21. The English Patient (1996) Director: Anthony Minghella
22. Heat (1995) Director: Michael Mann
23. The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) Director: Henry Selick
24. American Beauty (1999) Director: Sam Mendes
25. The Fugitive (1993) Director: Andrew Davis
26. Magnolia (1999) Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
27. Donnie Brasco (1997) Director: Mike Newell
28. Misery (1990) Director: Rob Reiner
29. Se7en (1995) Director: David Fincher
30. The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) Director: Anthony Minghella

THE TRAILERS FOR THE TOP 3 BEST MOVIES OF 1990-1999

This film has been going through my mind for the past few days, and I love it. There are just so many memorable moments in it that exemplify the magnitude of image and sound—I can hear The Rolling Stones’ “Jumpin Jack Flash” and drunken evil laughter every time I think about the scene where that crazy Johnny Boy walks through the fiery red lit bar in slow motion as the camera follows in front of him. “I talk about penance and you send this through the door. Well, we play by your rules don’t we? Well, don’t we?” questioned Charlie’s catholic conscience right before the Rock n’ Roll music blasted. Is this hell? No, this is Scorsese’s Mean Streets (1973).

After the directing the Roger Corman produced film Boxcar Bertha (1972), Scorsese was advised by John Cassevetes to make a more personal film. In contrast to The Godfather (Coppola 1972), Mean Streets portrays the dirtier and grittier side of the New York City gangster life, which was something that Scorsese was constantly surrounded with while growing up in Little Italy. The film’s main protagonist is Charlie (Harvey Keitel) an Italian-American small time gangster trying to rise in the ranks of the mafia by working for his old school Mafiosi uncle, Giovanni. He is a seemingly devout catholic that quotes the bible, but often doubts his faith in his mind. Johnny Boy (Robert De Niro) is Charlie’s erratic and crazy childhood best friend, who owes money to everybody on the block and most importantly, the loan shark, Michael. Charlie is in a secret relationship with Teresa (Johnny Boy’s cousin) and feels the need to help Johnny Boy out with his debts, both of whom his uncle has advised him to stay away from. Charlie thinks he can’t be saved by the church, but in the streets he can, and in the end, he will experience the meaning of sacrificing himself for others.

It’s no surprise to anybody who has seen Goodfellas (1990) or Casino (1995) that one of Scorsese’s famous tropes is the use pop music as the film’s soundtrack either diegetically or non-diegetically. Its influence on younger directors is easily recognizable in films like Resevoir Dogs (Tarantino 1992) and Boogie Nights (Anderson 1997). There are other films that may have had a pop track for a scene before Scorsese, but Mean Streets is the first film to use pop music extensively and as an indicator of the set time period. At a party later in the film, one of the characters requests that they play “one of the old ones,” on the jukebox, which is indicative of the strong connection the characters themselves have with the film’s music.

Look familiar?

Look again.

The voiceover in the film is used quite uniquely opposed to its conventional use as a story commentator. Just like in Shoot the Piano Player (Truffaut 1960), a different actor did the protagonist’s voiceover, which creates a disassociation, or distanciation, between the external and internal character. (Coincidentally, the protagonists from both films are named Charlie.) In Mean Streets case, Scorsese actually recorded his own voice as Charlie’s self-doubting catholic conscience. In the introduction scene while the screen is black we hear, “You don’t make up for your sins in church. You do it in the streets. You do it at home. The rest is bullshit and you know it,” and then it immediately cuts to Charlie abruptly waking up in his bed as though he had a nightmare. We are led to presume that those are his thoughts and inner conflict, which later in the film becomes much more evident. At one point, his thoughts become so over bearing that he unintentionally says them out loud in front of Johnny Boy and Teresa, but still in Scorsese’s own voice.

As seen from the images above and below, the color red seems to reoccur plenty of times in the film and hold great significance symbolically. The first taste of red we get is in the first bar scene where it looks like it is completely drenched with bloody red by lights as we listen to Charlie’s voiceover talk about the two sides of “the pain of hell.” Incidentally, the place does look like what hell is thought to be—hot like “The burn from a lighted match increased a million times.” Thus the color red is associated with evil, danger, and to a certain extent Charlie’s catholic religion for the rest of the film. Inside the blue car that Charlie drives with Johnny Boy and Teresa to escape from Michael, hangs an ominous red sign of the horns amulet from the rear view mirror. It looks just like the Hook ‘Em Horns sign, except that in “Sicily the red corno or horn is the most popular amulet against the evil eye.”* It later proves to have no effect in fending off Michael or preventing Johnny Boy and Charlie from getting shot on the neck and hand, respectively. I’m not religious myself, but I think Charlie’s newly made hole in his hand and the blood that squirted everywhere from Johnny Boy’s neck is somehow representative of Jesus’ sacrifice and the “blood” Catholics drink during communion. Also, there’s a funny line said before they get attacked by Michael; Charlie runs a red light and Teresa tells him to slow down to which he responds with: “What does red mean?”

I definitely believe Mean Streets was the first film that qualified Scorsese as an emerging American auteur during the Hollywood Renaissance. Like Truffaut’s The 400 Blows (1958) before him, Scorsese’s breakthrough film was a very personal one, almost autobiographical. I think we are lead to believe that both Charlie and Johnny Boy each represent one side of Scorsese—the unselfish side and the self-destructive side. Also, as any good Hollywood Renaissance film would, Mean Streets delivers plenty of violence, nudity, and profanity to go around for everybody.  This film is so great that it offers so much to discuss about that I didn’t even tap into.

* “Gangster Priest: the Italian American cinema of Martin Scorsese” by Robert Casillo, page 209

After watching Mean Streets(Scorsese 1973), I had to take a few minutes to digest the meaning of the film.  In Mean Streets Charlie who is trying to become part of the mob, tries unsuccessfully to take care of his friend ‘Jonny Boy’. This is largely do to the fact that Jonny boy is likely has some sort of mental problems and cannot pay his debts.  The film delves into Charlie’s character; we get to see the full spectrum of his problems, from his girlfriend with epilepsy that his uncle disapproves of to his problem of Jonny.  The film explores Charlie’s religion, as we see reoccurring throughout the film Charlie reaching into open flames.  Another reoccurrence that I noticed is multiple times in the film characters would lie to each other and after being called out on their lie would lie and say that they forgot or were confused about the question. Race came up a few times in the movie, but the theme didn’t play a major role.

The plot of the movie seems simple but was hard for me to follow.  Throughout the film it was near impossible to predict where the film was going next or why certain events had any relevance.  Some examples of this were exceedingly long fight scenes.

Looking at the style of the film it is defiantly apparent that it is a new renaissance film. Most of the characteristics that we discussed in lecture were present in Mean Streets. The film was full of narrative fragmentation.  The beginning of the film for example jumps around quite a bit.  It opens with a monologue from Charlie.  We are in his apartment as he wakes up and looks into the mirror, but we do not immediately find out who he is or what he meant, instead the film goes into a title sequence. In my opinion the opening scene of Mean Streets is brilliant.  We are introduced to all of the main characters, as separate entities from one each other doing things that we come to associate their characters with.  We get a clear look at each of the characters, but at the same time this is jarring and kind of confusing.

In the opening scenes and some of the scenes the voice over’s also serve to jar the viewer.  In parts I got confused as to if the voiceovers were supposed to be diegetic or non-diegetic.  In allot of parts of the film the background noise that was intended to be diegetic was out of proportion.  Also the in a few parts the music that I originally perceived to be non-diegetic turned out to be coming from a jute box or was another source of diegetic sound. The music in the film alternates between popular music and Italian music, which contrast each other.

There are only a few zooms in the film and when they happen lots of attention is on the fact that the camera is zooming.  Tracking shots are prevalent in Mean Streets.  Another stylistic technique that Scorsese uses the color red.

In the film the characters go to the movies a few times.  Charlie is a fan of John Wayne.  Scorsese went to film school as was well educated in the history of film.  Being a “movie brat’ I think that Scorsese was making a reference to the genre of the Western and how the films that he himself make can be considered the “new western” that the Western as a genre transformed in order to satisfy a different generation.

Another characteristic of the Renaissance Hollywood film Charlie is definitely a ‘troubled introspective protagonist.”  In the film we are showed exactly what Charlie is going through and how is constantly being conflicted.  Charlie is an out of place character throughout the film.  He doesn’t really get along with his friends, especially towards the end, he comes to dislike and not get along with Jonny, and it is not acceptable for his to have a relationship with Teresa because of her epilepsy.  He is most out of place in the scenes with his uncle and the other higher ups.

The ending of the movie left me feeling ambiguous about the message of the film.  Most of all I just ended up feeling really sorry for Charlie.

Mean Streets (Scorsese 1971) is considered one of the key films of the period in Hollywood known as New American Cinema. While the films of this era cover a broad range of topics, there are two elements which they all manage to incorporate into their narratives; the first is violence, and the other is sexuality. Mean Streets employs both of these throughout the film. These are common themes in films of the early 70’s due to Hollywood attempting to compete with television, and thus they exploited images that couldn’t be shown on television. With the nude scenes of Teresa, and the gruesome climax, it makes sense that this film would be a staple of New American Cinema.

The movie opens with the protagonist, Charlie, delivering  a monologue discussing his inner conflict between his religious beliefs and his desire to rise in the mafia world. This internal conflict allows the audience to understand why Charlie puts up with his irresponsible friend, Johnny Boy. Charlie tries to achieve redemption by helping Johnny Boy with his troubles. Ultimately, the friendship ends tragically. What this means in context of Charlie’s moral troubles is hard to say. Personally, I took it to mean that it’s everyone needs to sleep with their demons, and they can destroy you if you let them.

As this was one of Scorsese’s first big films, and his first important contribution to the gangster genre, I was prepared to see a few moments of in which Scorsese’s style would shine through. However, I admit I was surprised that his style was so clearly defined at this early a time in his career. Pop music of the era was used throughout the film to set the mood, something he would continue with his other films. Also, long tracking shots were used throughout the movie. None of them were as long as the famous club scene in Goodfellas (1990 Scorsese), but still, the similarities were there. The subjective camerawork is key Scorsese’s style. Of course, when talking about Scorsese one must bring up his striking use of the color red within his films, and this movie was no exception.

Personally I found myself somewhat disappointed with this movie. I did not find myself invested in the characters, and once the movie finally got going in my opinion (when they went on the run), it ended. Everything before that was the characters collecting money and talking about Johnny Boy. I enjoyed the performances and dialogue, but the story simply did not do it for me. I suppose the central question of the film was, “Will Charlie save Johnny?” However most of the film was him worrying about Johnny, but he never had any schemes or attempts to get money for Charlie. Perhaps it was meant to be a more introspective journey, but I felt that the film spent the whole time setting up the conflict, but never really allowed the protagonist to attempt to achieve his goal.

Just a list for the nerds in the audience…

Heeeere's Johnny! Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

DRAMA: Green Zone (Directed by Paul Greengrass/ starring Mat Damon/ out in April); Inception (Directed by Christopher Nolan/ starring Leo diCaprio/ released in July); Shutter Island (Directed by Martin Scorsese/ starring Leo diCaprio, Michelle Williams/ released February)

ACTION: Salt (Directed by Philip Noyce/ starring Angelina Jolie/ released July); Thundercats (Directed by Gerry O Flaherty/ starring & relesase date TBC); The Wolfman (Directed by Joe Johnston/ starring Anthony Hopkins, Benicio del Toro/ released in February); The A-Team (Directed by Joe Carnahan/ starring Laim Neeson, Jessican Biel); The Expendables (Directed by Sylvester Stallone/ starring Stallone, Jet Li/ Released August); Prince of Persia (Directed by Mike Newell/ starring Jake Gyllenhaal/ released May)

Con 37,8 de fiebre se puede tocar un concierto y pasárselo bien. Sirva esta pequeña ventana al mundo para darle las gracias a María por el esfuerzo del otro día en el Club Dos de Petrer, donde a pesar de su alta fiebre, lo dio todo arriba del escenario y nos contagió su buen rollo.

Otro día de estos le daremos las gracias infinitas a Jose, pero eso será en otro capítulo de Iba Andando.

Por cierto, el próximo sábado 21 de noviembre lo tenéis tocando con Scorsese en la sala Wah-Wah. Es el debut oficial de su proyecto musical, al que deseamos la mejor de las suertes.

This week I decided to watch Mean Streets (Scorsese, 1973) as a supplemental screening. Considering how much I like Goodfellas (Scorsese, 1990) and The Departed (Scorsese, 2006), I decided that it would be a good idea to look into Scorsese’s earlier work. Widely considered to be the breakthrough film for both Scorsese and De Niro, I was not sure what to expect at first, but I still held high expectations for such a revered film. After watching this movie, I was amazed at how early in his career his definitive style was imposed so clearly on his films.

Within the first couple of minutes of the film, I could tell that Scorsese’s imprint was going to be obvious. The jump cut he uses as Charlie, played by Harvey Keitel, lays his head down on the pillow starts one of the many sequences that go perfectly with the music. The perfect use of popular music is one of the things that stood out to me, including “Be My Baby” by The Ronettes and “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” by The Rolling Stones.* I don’t think the use of popular music was something revolutionary – films like The Graduate (Nichols, 1967) had done this before- but the choice to do it, and do it well was an excellent one by Scorsese. I think that the music helped to set the environment and nostalgia in the movie, and helped to set the tempo of the editing, like in the first scene. I read an overview article about the film, and it mentioned the fact that one of the producers was “a former road manager for Bob Dylan and The Band (both of whom would become the subject of future Scorsese documentaries).” ** I found this interesting, and I think that the fact that Scorsese had people around him who had knowledge of the music industry definitely influenced his choice of music.

One of the other things the article mentioned was the fact that Scorsese meant for this film to be almost an autobiographical film about his life growing up in Little Italy, a neighborhood in New York. This was evident to me after reading the article, because I found the film to be centered around the interactions among these characters, and the unique environment that they lived in, much more than focused on a “central question,” typical of a Hollywood film using the classical style.

Another one of Scorsese’s marks on this film is the inundation of the screen with the color red. Dr. Thomas Schatz has mentioned in lecture for RTF 317 that Scorsese has an obsession with the color red, which is very evident in Goodfellas and Casino (1995), along with this film. The color is almost omnipresent, whether it is the crimson red atmospheric light of the bar, the blood red walls of the fancy restaurant, or in the attire of Johnny Boy (De Niro) and Charlie; the bright red in Charlie’s tie comes to mind.

The color red is constantly present in the film.

The use of a dynamic camera was very eye-catching in the film. One of my favorite shots is when Charlie enters the bar, and the camera is tracking him as he grooves on to the stage and ends up dancing with the girls. Another shot, and an example of subjective camera work is when they are partying, but there is just a permanent close-up shot on Charlie’s face as he dances, takes shots, and ends up crashing down to sleep at the end of the sequence.

With an almost abrupt ending, the film thrives on what the viewers probably feared that would eventually happen to them. The character I found to be the most sympathetic is Amy Robinson’s: Teresa. As hard as she tried to be strong and independent, she was too attached to Charlie, and I felt bad for her throughout the movie; most notably when she had an epileptic seizure, and was left alone on a dirty hallway floor. Robert De Niro’s character, Johnny Boy was hard to like, which speaks volumes about his performance. I just wanted to slap him upside the head like Charlie would, and make him think clearly about what he was doing.

De Niro, Scorsese, and Keitel

Mean Streets was definitely a good choice for me, and I am glad I can add it to my arsenal of film knowledge. Although there were some obvious production quality flaws, like bad dubbing at times, it is easier to forgive because of such solid performances and directing. The movie was shot in twenty-seven days, which just boggles my mind, and makes it a bigger accomplishment in my eyes.** I would definitely recommend it, and I hope that my thoughts on it encourage people who read them to rent it.

*http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070379/soundtrack

** http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=83170&category=Articles

They got it now, Robbie…
Oj, vad man önskar att den där jämrans tidsmaskinen nånsin blev färdigbyggd så man kunde ta ett skutt ganska exakt 33 år bakåt, till Winterland i San Francisco i november 1976. The Band’s avskedskonsert The Last Waltz där dagens födelsedagspojke (64 år) Neil Percival Young bara var en i raden av fantastiska gästartister. Lägg också märke till förra veckans födelsedagsbarn Joni Mitchell som sjunger i bakgrunden.

Det här är också den mest kostsamma scenen i hela Scorsese’s underbara film. Vi kan väl sammanfatta det med världens dyraste snorkråka…

En annan ganska ovanlig fågel är Gamnacken. Dessa Gamnackar arrangerar PopGiss 2010 som börjar om exakt 100 dagar…

La última pelicula de Scorsese es Island Shutter, en ella nos encontramos de nuevo con Leonardo DiCaprio como protagonista.

Shutter Island es una novela escrita en el año 2003 por el prodigioso Dennis Lehna. Este film se basa en esta novela y narra como Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) y su compañero Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) en una aventura de Marines Estaunidenses son enviados a Boston donse llegan a la institucion mental para criminales peligrosos considerados como violentos y irracionales en búsqueda de una psicopata llamada Rachel Solando.

La investigacion lelva a preguntarse como una mujer se escapa de una carcel de maxima seguridad, desde un 3er piso y descalza. Entre toda esta trama un huracán inpide su salida de la isla y la situación dentro de la propia isla se vuelve un caos, pues muchas cosas estan ocultas y la verdad está alla adentro.

Este es un drama psicologico pues los personajes en encuentra interrogantes descabelladas y pnen al limite sus sentidos cuando se dan cuenta, o creen, que no pueden confiar el uno en el otro. Miles de escenas irracionales aparecen frente a ellos que solo buscarán escapar de aquella isla

Qui a Latveria, come pure di la a dISPENSER, ci piace interessarci non solo di quelli che sono dei fighi senza se e senza ma, come Galactus o che ne so, Nick Fury. Non siamo così limitati e prevedibili! Cosa credi? Infatti, in barba a quello che credevi tu, ci piace anche porgere la nostra attenzione verso quei personaggi considerati da qualcuno marginali, che però a noi ragazzi ci hanno trasmesso tante gioie, dolori, emoziòni… Che alla fine le emoziòni sono importanti. Mica solo il pim! pum! pam! Per cui per questa volta abbiamo chiesto al nostro lector d’eccezione, Costantino della Gherardesca, di dare vita con la sua profonda voce al fragile animo di…

KAREN PAGE

Cliccare per ascoltare in streaming…

Avete presente il luogo comune dell’uomo che si porta a letto la sua segretaria? Ecco, la storia d’amore tra Matt Murdock e Karen Page inizia proprio così. Lui è un avvocato non vedente. Lei invece una ragazza bella, bionda e fresca di laurea. I due, inevitabilmente, si innamorano. Le cose vanno talmente bene che Murdock decide addirittura di fare uno strappo alle regola numero uno del mondo dei fumetti e rivela alla bellissima ragazza la sua seconda identità. Di notte, si mette una tutina rossa aderente e – grazie ai suoi sensi superpotenziati – si impegna nella lotta contro il crimine. È infatti Devil: L’uomo Senza Paura. La loro storia d’amore andrà avanti anni, fino a quando Karen non lascierà New York alla volta di Holywood per tantare di diventare una stella del Cinema. Ce la farà, ma nei film di Scorsese o Spielberg, ma in squallide vhs pornografiche. Già che c’è, la ragazza decide di darsi anche all’eroina. Devastata da anni di abusi, Karen Page durante una violenta crisi d’astinenza “vende”, in cambio di una dose, la vera identità di Devil a uno spacciatore. Il suo gesto ha delle terribili conseguenze: Matt Murdock viene radiato dall’albo degli avvocati, perde la casa e vede morire molti dei suoi amici. Presa dal rimorso, Karen torna a New York per tentare di salvare Matt, che ovviamente la perdona. I due tornano insieme: lei si disinitossica, organizza campagne per i diritti delle donne e comincia a fare la speaker per un programma radiofonico. La sua carriera decolla e, ancora una volta, lascia Matt per insguire il successo. Ma anche se adesso è una brillante donna in tailleur, gli anni di vizi si pagano: Karen scoper di avere l’AIDS. Poco importa però: poco dopo, per evitare che il suo amore di una vita venga colpito da un micidiale colpo sferrato del cattivone Bullseye, morirà facendogli scudo.

Ah, pare che dopo questa performance Costantino sia stato chiamato a leggere degli audio libri di un certo spessore.
BONUS! Per non farci mancare nulla – soprattutto le foto delle donne nude – in omaggio per Voi una foto simpatica di Ellen Pompeo, ovvero colei che avrebbe dovuto portare su grande schermo Karen Page nel terribile Daredevil. Il film fortunatamente ha poi subito dei tagli e – PUF – Ellen Pompeo nel film non si vede. Un bene? Un male? Chissenefrega?

I grew up in New York City. My mother went to the high school of
performing arts; my Dad was a scientist/engineer who had a great
appreciation for Jazz and Art. I grew up surrounded by my parent’s
musician and artist friends. My grandmother brought me to museums
often when I was very young and I loved it- Calder, Giacometti,
Matisse, Picasso-pretty heady stuff for a six year old. Art of all forms
has been a huge part of my life so it was natural for me to get
involved. I’ve made films and videos. Went to NYU Film School when
Scorsese was in the grad school. We were all jealous!
In the 70s and 80s I lead a progressive “rock” band called People
Falling and wrote music. The music scene in New York City was
intimately involved with painters and poets at the time and we all hung out together. I think that the late 70s to the early 80s was the last successful, truly grass-roots, art scene. There was Punk, New Wave, the remnants of Pop Art, Minimalist Art, Conceptual Art, Figurative Art and Performance Art all coexisting and feeding off each other. I see glimmers of that kind of cross-pollination now in the art/music scene inhabited by the 20 to early 30-somethings around the edges of the city. The children of the Baby Boomers –Watch out!

George Pelecanos considers him the leader of Noir’s new school, Bret Easton Ellis is already adapting his Follower into a HBO serie…
Meet Jason Starr, a novelist from Flatbush who sometimes gets like Psycho killa : Norman Bates !

I’ve been living in Flatbush -right in the middle of Brooklyn- until I was 18-19 y.o, then I left to go to college… I’m in Manahttan right now, Upper East Side.

I’ve heard you’ve had a lot of shitty jobs before you blew up.
A lot. I’ve been a dish-washer, a telemarketer, I’ve parked cars, I’ve written for a couple of financial magazines… I even had a job where I was operating pizza vending machines… you know, like they do for drinks, but with pizzas (laughs), that was stupid…

Whats does the expression « New York Minute » mean to you ?
The intensity of the life in Manhattan. Guys laying in the subway, yellow cabs… Wall Street.

Only Manhattan ?
Yeah… Like most people, I identify New york to Manhattan. Nobody don’t really think of all 5 boroughs when you speak about New York.

We do. People say anything can happen in a New York Minute, for better or worse… Do you have a Brooklyn example ?
(Long pause, he tries to remember one) Back In the 1980’s… I’m walking home from school one day, it’s a normal day and then, I see a guy attack this teenager and start slashing his face with a knife. It was brutal, bloody, horrific.

Do you know why he did it, or if the guy has been arrested ?
No, I never heard anything about it. This was in 1984, the height of the crack problem in New York, when violence was rampant. I have no doubt the attacker was high on crack.

Did the kid survive ?
Yes, it was just his face that was slashed and he was running, screaming for help.

You were 18 at the time, and you started writing later… Do you think seeing such a violent act “triggered” something about your imagination ?
I’m not sure, it might have… It was the first time I’d seen brutal violence. This happened right in front of my house, on Bedford Avenue, near the Long Island Railroad train tracks.

You never read crime fiction before going to college, what brought you to it ?
I’ve never been deep into books. When I started writing (in college), my style was already precise, the sentences were shorts, so I started looking for writers who worked like that. I began with Albert Camus, but then I found out he was influenced with James M. Cain, that The Stranger was inspired by The Postman always rings twice… I had started writing « literrature » novels and I realized my style was naturally feeling like Noir, so I got into reading Elmore Leonard’s books, then Jim Thompson’s, then others… and this whole thing became my world.
(end)

Now that you’ve get to know the guy, peep his Top 5 lists for eternity

1st things 1st : The Books.

Crime and Punishment (Fedor Dostoïevsky, 1866)

The Killer Inside Me (Jim Thompson, 1952)

Edith’s Diary (Patricia Highsmith, 1977)

The Rules of Attraction (Bret Easton Ellis, 1987)

Get Shorty (Elmore Leonard, 1990)

Then, the Movies :

The Killers (Robert Siodmak, 1946)

Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese, 1976)

Inglorious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)

The Comfort of Strangers (Paul Schrader, 1990)

Double Indemnity (Billy Wilder, 1944)

Line O’ the Day:

“There are gonna be fifty some odd men on that other sideline on Sunday who wanna take something from you. And three weeks ago, they did just that. DON’T FUCKING LET THEM DO IT AGAIN. DON’T LET THEM COME INTO THIS FUCKING CITY AND TAKE YOUR FUCKING GLORY. That shit is YOURS. It sure as fuck isn’t Tony Sparano’s. That fat fuck. YOU WILL FUCKING GO OUT THERE, AND YOU WILL KICK THOSE FUCKERS RIGHT IN THE BALLS. AND THEN YOU WILL EAT SLOPPY JOE’S OFF OF THEIR WIVES’ TITS!  EVERYONE GIVE ME A FUCK YEAH!” Coach Ryan Likes Hot Dogs [Big Daddy Drew via KSK]

Best of the Best:

• Foul-Mouthed Ticket Scalper Expounds on Life, Love and, the Sex-for-Phillies Tickets Scandal [Gawker]
• Excerpts from the Book the NBA Doesn’t Want You to Read [Deadspin]
• Federal Reserve Policy Audit Legislation “Gutted”, Paul Says [Bloomberg]
• Martin Scorsese Picks 11 Scariest Horror Movies of All Time [First Showing]
• Libelous Leftist Lynch Mobs [LRC]

News in November:

• Halloweenaroo [Big Daddy Drew via Deadspin]
• Congress Gets Involved in Concussion Debate, Fails to Solve Everything [Deadspin]
• Harvard to Offer Class on “The Wire” [Warming Glow]
• Not Everyone’s a Critic [Warming Glow]
• Best Night of the Week to Get Piss Drunk [Big Daddy Drew via Deadspin]
• Horror Movie Encyclopedia of Awful Ways to Die [Gawker]
• Soros to Vanquish Whatever Market Fundamentalists He Can Still Find [Reason]
• It’s Japan We Should be Worrying About, Not America [The Telegraph]
• Still Going After Them (Illegal Immigration) [The Economist]
• Hot Gaming [English Russia]
• This 11-Year Old Schoolgirl had a Baby on Her Wedding Day [News of the World]
• California to Withhold a Bigger Chunk of Paychecks [LA Times]
• Cole Hamels Reminds You that Grenades are for Pussies [Kotaku]
• A Conversation with Gore Vidal [The Atlantic]
• FOX Sports Sends a Message: “We Are Shameless Corporate Whores” [Deadspin]
• Starbury and Knicks, Together in Fail for Eternity [Deadspin]
• Peter King and the Throbbing Groin [Big Daddy Drew via KSK]

Du 13 au 18 octobre avait lieu dans l’agglomération lyonnaise le premier Festival Lumière, qui organisé par l’Institut du même nom, redonnait une seconde jeunesse à des œuvres dites de patrimoine, sous le regard bienveillant d’un Clint Eastwood invité d’honneur de la manifestation, et qui recevra au passage le tout premier Prix Lumière, sorte de Nobel du cinéma. Au programme des festivités : des rétrospectives très peu risquées mais imposantes sur Sergio Leone et Don Siegel, les deux mentors de Clint auxquels ce dernier rendait hommage lors du générique de fin d’Impitoyable, à travers un « To Sergio and Don » resté dans les annales. Revoir les fabuleux westerns de Leone sur très grand écran n’a pas de prix, et visionner quelques inédits de la filmographie de Siegel, maître inégalable de la série B américaine, également.

Du travail de défrichage orchestré par Thierry Frémaux et son équipe, on retiendra la découverte du premier long-métrage de Siegel, The Verdict (1946), une intrigue « à la Sherlock Holmes » où Sydney Greenstreet et Peter Lorre tentent d’élucider un meurtre dans l’un des premiers films policiers dits de « chambre close ». Adapté d’un roman d’Israel Zangwill, le Charles Dickens juif, The Verdict captive l’attention du spectateur dès les premiers plans jusqu’à un final étonnant qui en surprendra plus d’un. Méconnu également, L’Enfer est pour les héros (1962) est un film de guerre d’une rare violence pour l’époque, et visuellement sublime. Steve McQueen y interprète un soldat américain isolé avec une maigre compagnie dans les tranchées françaises, et sous les canons de plusieurs régiments allemands. Sans concession et affublé de principes qu’il n’abandonnera jamais (à l’image de la plupart des héros des films de Siegel), le personnage de McQueen résume à lui seul la pensée et la morale d’un film anti-militariste chaudement recommandable. Et pour ceux, encore convaincus que Siegel est un cinéaste réactionnaire, on ne saura leur conseiller de voir Les Révoltés de la cellule 11, film de prison humaniste et progressiste qui milite, déjà en 1954, pour des conditions de détention plus humaines des prisonniers, tout en abordant la question toujours chaude aujourd’hui des détenus psychiatriques et du manque de traitements appropriés à leur égard.

Entres autres nombreuses découvertes comme un mini-panorama de l’œuvre du cinéaste coréen Shin Sang-ok, d’ailleurs perçu comme inégal par les festivaliers, et quelques ressorties en copie neuve pour réviser ses classiques (dont la fable poético-burlesque de Pierre Etaix, Yoyo, sommet d’humour et d’émotion), le Festival Lumière était surtout l’occasion de découvrir sept films noirs américains totalement inédits, et issus des collections des studios hollywoodiens. Présentée par Eddie Muller (fondateur et président de la Film Noir Foundation de Los Angeles) et Philippe Garnier (journaliste et écrivain français exilé en Californie), cette série sobrement intitulée The Art of Noir, réunissait donc des films méconnus des années 40 et 50. Deux métrages ont particulièrement retenu notre attention. Le premier, Dans l’ombre de San Francisco (Woman on the run en v.o.), signé Norman Foster en 1950, raconte les mésaventures d’un homme témoin d’un règlement de comptes mafieux, et qui plutôt que d’aider la police, préfère prendre la fuite. Sa femme et un journaliste partent à sa recherche avant qu’il ne lui arrive malheur. Sur un scénario typiquement hitchcockien qui place un quidam au centre de l’intrigue, Norman Foster (qui co-réalisa avec Orson Welles Voyage au bout de la peur en 1943) accouche d’un polar au suspens haletant, et aux rebondissements aussi imprévisibles que pertinents. Supporté par d’excellents seconds rôles (l’épouse malaimée qui tente de regagner le cœur de son mari pour sauver son mariage, et l’inspecteur qui possède toujours un temps de retard), Dans l’ombre de San Francisco réussit sans mal à convaincre son audience, préfigurant même le final dans le parc d’attractions de L’Inconnu du Nord-Express.

L’autre sommet de la série The Art of Noir est signé Michael Gordon, avec Le Traquenard (1949), dans lequel Edmond O’Brien (acteur culte des séries B de l’époque, présent également dans 711 Ocean Drive de Joseph M. Newman, autre belle découverte du Festival) interprète un avocat qu’engage un riche industriel soucieux de préserver ses arrières alors que son ancien associé sort de prison, bien décidé à en découdre avec lui. Le personnage d’O'Brien sera finalement manipulé par son nouvel employeur, et plongé dans une affaire de meurtre où il risque bien plus que sa carrière. Le Traquenard a pour lui un humour corrosif qui redonne un coup de fouet au genre, et qui souligne l’élasticité des frontières de ce dernier. Une histoire d’amour n’est d’ailleurs jamais loin, et le couple que forment O’Brien et la délicieuse et méconnue Ella Raines, femme fatale magnifique comme seul le polar sait en renouveler l’espèce à chaque film, est l’autre point fort d’une pellicule rythmée qui contient dans son final son quota de suspense et d’action. The Art of Noir était aussi l’occasion de découvrir le médiocre The Threat de Felix E. Feist (1949), film court (à peine plus d’une heure) dont la seule utilité a sans doute été de préparer le terrain à un métrage plus long dans le cadre d’un double-programme de l’époque. Enfin L’Homme à l’affût d’Edward Dmytryk (1952) peut se vanter d’être, malgré ses travers psychologisants, le tout premier film de l’histoire sur un serial killer. Se déroulant à San Francisco, l’intrigue et la mise en scène de Dmytryk annoncent à la fois l’affaire du Zodiac, et la chasse à l’homme sur les toits de la ville de L’Inspecteur Harry de Don Siegel. Façon habile de boucler la boucle référentielle du Festival.

Reste une question pour la prochaine édition : qui pour succéder à Eastwood ? Le choix du Prix Lumière implique en effet des contraintes et des enjeux commerciaux importants. Quelle autre personnalité peut ainsi faire vendre en quelques minutes des milliers de places et ainsi remplir les deux plus grandes salles de spectacle de Lyon ? Si un Scorsese ou un De Niro pourraient faire l’affaire, on doute qu’un cinéaste européen ou asiatique feraient se déplacer autant les foules. A voir et à suivre l’année prochaine.

Julien Hairault

Bande-annonce / trailer de L’Enfer est pour les héros (Hell Is For Heroes, 1962) de Don Siegel, avec Steve McQueen.

Extrait (générique de début et premières séquences) de Dans l’ombre de San Francisco (Woman On The Run, 1950) de Norman Foster, avec Ann Sheridan & Dennis O’Keefe.

The relationships between directors and their screenwriters are often complicated.  Ranging from the contempt of Alfred Hitchcock, who often refered to his writers as “stooges”, to the more respectful attitude of Arthur Hiller, who once said, “I get on my knees to a good writer.” 

Film, of course, is a collaborative art and debate over which creative artist is most responsible for a film’s quality has been on going since the dawn of cinema.  Out of dozens of people involved in the production of any film, the field of contenders was whittled down to the director and the screenwriter.  Those siding with the former argued that the director is the main contributor to pictorial design in a medium that is essentially visual.  The supporters of the latter maintained that the writer was most responsible for a film’s themes as developed through plot, character and dialogue.  The belief that the director was the principal creator of a film production was given greater impetus in the 50’s with the introduction of the “auteur theory” as presented by the critics of the French film magazine “Cahiers du Cinema.”  The theory’s tenets, first formulated by Francois Truffaut, himself destined for superstar director status, stated that certain directors had not only an overwhelming technique as displayed in their mise-en scène, but were most responsible for their film’s overall qualities such as consistency of theme.  The theory has its detractors, especially among screenwriters and other creative artists involved in film.  An industry wag once suggested that the “auteur theory” is the art of making the screenwriter, cinematographer, production designer, editor and countless others disappear. 

Among the most prominent of the above implied magicians was Alfred Hitchcock.  One of his most frequent collaborators was John Michael Hayes who in the 1950’s scripted some of Hitchcock’s most famous and successful films, including REAR WINDOW (1954) and TO CATCH A THIEF (1955).  A good example of Hitchcock’s dismissive attitude can be found in an incident where Hayes proudly showed the director a ceramic statuette he had won for writing REAR WINDOW.  “They make toilet bowls out of the same thing,” was Hitchcock’s crude response to the Edgar Allan Poe award. 

Despite such attitudes, several directors have forged relationships with writers that are very different.  Even though he became one of the most respected directors in Hollywood history, Billy Wilder always considered himself primarily a screenwriter.  Unusual in an industry and town that, to put it mildly, always looked down on writers.  Wilder began a writing partnership with Charles Brackett in the 1930’s and within a few years was directing such Wilder/Brackett screenplays as THE LOST WEEKEND (1945) and the terrifyingly cynical SUNSET BOULEVARD (1950, with D.M. Marshman).  The latter was a bitter story of a defeated Hollywood screenwriter.  He later began writing with I.A.L. Diamond, directing their works SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959) and THE APARTMENT(1960) among others.  The partnership lasted untill the 1980’s.  Perhaps because he continued as a writer, Wilder never took on airs as the great director.  After all, the films he directed were always distinguished by their smart dialogue and characterizations-hallmarks of good screenplays-and not by anything inherent in Wilder’s mise-en scène.  Wilder poked fun at the film world’s attitude toward writers with his gently mocking tombstone epitaph, “I’m a writer.  But then nobody’s perfect.” A joke, of course, but also a clever reminder of the final line from SOME LIKE IT HOT, one of Wilder and Diamonds greatest achievements. 

In 1976 Martin Scorsese and Paul Schrader made TAXI DRIVER , the most important of their frequent collaborations.  A close examination reveals Schrader as the primary creative force behind the film.  Scorsese’s camera pyrotechnics are impressive, but it is a piece driven by character and shocking acts of violence, and Schrader wrote the whole thing with a gun next to his typewriter.  Of course, much of the film is improvised by the cast, which adds yet another dimension to the idea of film as a meeting of minds. 

There are frequent examples of usually terrible directors clicking with a talented writer and providing audiences with an unusually good film.  Such a lucky fellow was Brian de Palma with THE UNTOUCHABLES (1987).  David Mamet was responsible for the script. 

Ironically, the French, who gave birth to the “auteur theory”, also placed a premium on dialogue writers like Henri Jeanson.  Also of note is the major role writers played in one of the most important movements in French film history.  Jacques Prévert working with director Marcel Carné created films like PORT OF SHADOWS (1938) and DAYBREAK (1939), both bolstered by Prévert’s poetic voice.  The latter about a murderer cornered in his attic by police, was a masterpiece of the school of “poetic realism.”   The movement was characterized by romanticism tempered by a profound pessimism about the human condition, but with a deeply felt optimism about the power of film art.

So here we are…my first ’sector7′  post.

I’ll be honest I haven’t blogged much, aside from a few posts written for a friend’s site (binarycrumbs) I’ve predominantly engaged blogging as a reader.  I suppose I’ve always had a nagging suspicion that I don’t have much to say, at least not much that people would actually want to sit down and read. Then why am I doing this now you ask? I suppose there’s two reasons; firstly, to write.  Blogging is an absolutely fantastic way to ‘force’ yourself to sit down and write, a way to get the creative juices flowing.  Secondly, I’ve started to believe that everyone has something to say which others might enjoy hearing.  I regularly find myself reading several blogs covering a wide variety of topics from informative to mundane, I wouldn’t have the pleasure of reading them if they weren’t being written.  With that in mind I’ll use this first blog to introduce myself along with the topic I intend to focus on, cinema.

As the title of this post states I want to be a film director.  I can’t say when or how I came to that conclusion, only that I did, do and will always want to have that be my occupation.  Of course I have the history that many of today’s filmmakers have, shooting increasingly more elaborate videos in the backyard with friends, editing them on VCRs and eventually computers.  However important those times may have been in shaping my career choice, it was only later, when I began to watch films that affected me profoundly that I realized what I wanted to do.  Over the next 5 posts (because this one is already too long) I will talk about the following 5 films that made (and make) me want to direct:

Raging Bull | Martin Scorsese| 1980

In the Mood for Love | Wong Kar Wai | 2000

Badlands | Terrance Malick | 1973

The Decalogue | Krzysztof Kieslowski | 1989

Rear Window | Alfred Hitchcock | 1954

Martin Scorsese | 1980

What praise can I give this work that hasn’t already been heaped upon it?  For an aspiring director this film is both inspirational and crushing, it’s such a perfect blend of performance, writing and directional technique.  The camera moves are so precise, it’s a testament to Scorsese’s ability to use everything at his disposal yet never pull the viewer out of the film with a ‘look at me I’m directing’ moment. In my opinion, De Niro’s performance is one of the greatest ever put to film, he hits every note from the understated meeting with Cathie Moriarty’s character to the ‘I’m not an animal’ prison cell scene. The true greatness of this film is that no aspect is subpar or even average, it’s brilliant on every level.  The exploration of masculinity (especially in light of his violent occupation) through Jake La Motta’s fear driven existence is performed and written perfectly and to this day remains uniquely relatable. The end result is that this movie works for me, so well in fact that I still get a sensation of awe as the credits roll. Undoubtedly Raging Bull is a masterpiece and remains one of the greatest influences on my desire to direct films.

Au revoir, Shosanna!

Toda vez que alguém me diz que falas e diálogos são recursos cinematográficos pobres e evitáveis, eu fico com uma puta dó do sujeito, porque de duas uma: ou ele é meio limítrofe, ou ele nunca teve o prazer de ver um filme do Tarantino, do Rohmer ou do Mankiewicz, o que é muito triste.

Não bastasse a força da palavra, é inegável que uma conversa, se bem feita, tem também um enorme poder imagético. Estou certo de que Groucho Marx nunca funcionou tão bem no teatro como ele funcionou na tela grande.

Para acabar com esse preconceito que a galera tem com diálogos, sugiro Bastardos Inglórios, em especial a primeira cena do filme. Se você não tem tempo ou dinheiro para conferir esse grande filme, aí vai uma série de vídeos do youtube com grandes diálogos cinematográficos:

Pulp Fiction e o diálogo mais carne de vaca da nossa geração.

Os franceses não ligam pra gente.

There is no Santa Claus.

Esse Godard, viu, quanto bom-humor!

Joe Pesci I – Diálogo é com ele mesmo

Joe Pesci II – Tô falando

Joe Pesci III – Gênio

No shock here.  The virtually unbroken string of bad biopics apparently continues with Amelia. I will see it out of almost unqualified admiration for director Mira Nair, but nothing in the many reviews I have seen suggests that the film transcends  standard, tired biopic conventions.

Gus Van Sant’s “Milk” probably came the closest to reviving the whole genre. In fact, Van Sant may have fully succeeded (your call). But there are, I think,  some good reasons that biopic screenplays usually stink up the house:

including every obligatory “sacred”  historic moment,  regardless of  how well they fit  into a coherent story or how true they might be

the over-investment in making sure the actors look and sound like the people they are playing. I have always felt that  physical resemblance only works when the effort put into makeup, however precise,  is exceeded by the even greater  performance of a brilliant actor.  It makes perfect sense that the two best “look-alike” performances I have ever seen were by actors who are consensus members of the pantheon — Bruno Ganz in Der Untergang and Sean Penn in Milk. )

the unavoidable hagiography

the drive to be so exhaustively complete  that the story sinks from the weight of its self-conscious authority

a director so obsessed with a character that he or she seems to get lost in the confusion of who the filmmaker is and who the character is. (Kevin Spacey and Bobby Darin?) Rare but spooky.

The baffling thing here is that a great filmmaker like Mira Nair took on Amelia.

Mira Nair. The Mira Nair who made Monsoon Wedding and The Namesake. The brilliant, luminous Mira Nair.

We need to remember that authenticity and accuracy are historical, not dramaturgical, concepts.

The very best films about lives don’t take on the heavy and weighted obligation of completeness. They pick an episode in a life and, through the unfolding of events and character during that episode, reveal aspects of a complex life. Capote, Henry and June, and Downfall (Der Untergang) are three good, random examples. These films also succeed by embedding the main character in a world of comparably interesting ,  and maybe even more  interesting,  characters.

I’ll leave you with one admittedly unconventional recommendation and one worry.

Recommendation: My favorite biopic really isn’t a biopic at all.  But with its crazy sensibility, hilarity, cast of grotesque characters, and overwhelming quirkiness, Tim Burton’s Ed Wood is my favorite “life-story” of them all.

Worry: Spielberg, as you may know, is doing Lincoln. I believe Liam Neeson got the part. My fear is that Lincoln’s  complex, even anguished , life could be buried beneath “Private Ryan” schmaltz,  expensive costumes, overwrought John Williams music,  the flood of signature close-ups of Lincoln’s face, and the quest for accuracy.  None of these equal compelling drama and conflict.  In fact, all this nonsense often hides a lack of compelling narrative.

We’ll see.

4 of the Top 100 in one picture: Martin Scorsese receiving his Oscar from three close friends: Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg

With only one director left to go (and if you haven’t figured out who it is, you’re not paying attention), this is a good time to throw up the complete list.  I’ve gone ahead and provided links to all the directors, as well as listing what particular film I decided to focus on.  It was not always necessarily their best film, but rather the one I wanted to write about.

The first thing is, if there is a director here you were expecting to see and didn’t see them, you can go back to my Introduction, where I mention various directors who didn’t make the list and why.

Second, I will probably do a revision of this list sometime after the Oscars.  Because cumulative awards points are one of the categories I have used to make this list, I will re-calculate everyone after the awards season has concluded.  Also, in December, TSPDT re-does their list (they do it annually) and I will also be changing some point totals based on those re-calculations.

Third, almost certainly at some point, some younger directors will start to make the list.  Sofia Coppola finally has a fourth film in post-production, and unless it’s a complete disaster, she will be making a future version of the list.  Several other directors who were mentioned in the Intro still haven’t made a fourth film and at least three of them have just come out with their third films this year, but they will probably make a future version (those include Joe Wright, Stephen Daldry, Rob Marshall and Spike Jonze).  If I have someone who moves up the list, I will do an individual post for that director, with whatever rank they have acheived, and then will re-list all the ranks in the next February re-calculation.

But that’s it for now.  Here’s the complete initial list: The 100 Greatest Directors of All-Time.

100.  David Cronenberg (A History of Violence)

99.  George Stevens (The Diary of Anne Frank)

98.  Michael Mann (The Last of the Mohicans)

97.  Werner Herzog (Aguirre, the Wrath of God)

96.  Robert Redford (Quiz Show)

Uma Thurman, Robert Redford (#96), Meryl Streep (Actress #1), Mike Nichols (#45) and Amy Adams

95.  Jean Cocteau (La belle et la bette)

94.  Bernardo Bertolucci (The Last Emperor)

93.  Gus Van Sant (Milk)

92.  D.W. Griffith (The Birth of a Nation)

91.  James Whale (The Invisible Man)

90.  Wes Anderson (The Darjeeling Limited)

89.  Rob Reiner (The Princess Bride)

88.  Richard Brooks (The Professionals)

87.  Alejandro Amenabar (The Others)

86.  Mike Leigh (Topsy-Turvy)

85.  Krzysztof Kieslowski (Red)

84.  Paul Greengrass (United 93)

83.  John Schlesinger (Cold Comfort Farm)

82.  Andrei Tarkovsky (Solyaris)

81.  Joseph L. Mankiewicz (Cleopatra)

80.  Satyajit Ray (The Chess Players)

79.  Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amelie)

78.  Michael Powell (A Matter of Life and Death)

77.  Tom Tykwer (Perfume)

76.  Sam Peckinpah (The Wild Bunch)

75.  Louis Malle (May Fools)

74.  Jonathan Demme (The Silence of the Lambs)

73.  Sergio Leone (Once Upon a Time in the West)

72.  James L. Brooks (Terms of Endearment)

71.  Michael Curtiz (Yankee Doodle Dandy)

70.  John Sayles (Lone Star)

69.  Pedro Almodóvar (Talk to Her)

Warren Beatty being directed by Robert Altman on the set of McCabe and Mrs. Miller (1971)

68.  Danny Boyle (Trainspotting)

67.  Warren Beatty (Bulworth)

66.  Alan J. Pakula (All the President’s Men)

65.  Alfonso Cuarón (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azakaban)

64.  Alan Parker (The Commitments)

63.  Tim Burton (Ed Wood)

62.  Anthony Minghella (Truly, Madly, Deeply)

61.  Jim Sheridan (In America)

Laurence Olivier being directed by William Wyler on the set of Carrie (1952)

60.  Laurence Olivier (Hamlet)

59.  George Cukor (The Philadelphia Story)

58.  Ridley Scott (Kingdom of Heaven)

57.  Baz Luhrmann (Moulin Rouge!)

56.  Jean Renoir (The Grand Illusion)

55.  Neil Jordan (The Crying Game)

54.  Erich von Stroheim (Greed)

53.  Bob Fosse (All That Jazz)

52.  Terry Gilliam (Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas)

51.  George Lucas (Star Wars)

50.  Zhang Yimou (House of Flying Daggers)

49.  Terrence Malick (Badlands)

48.  Milos Forman (Amadeus)

47.  Preston Sturges (The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek)

46.  Fred Zinnemann (From Here to Eternity)

45.  Mike Nichols (Angels in America)

44.  John Boorman (Excalibur)

43.  Stephen Frears (The Queen)

42.  Hayao Miyazaki (Spirited Away)

41.  F.W. Murnau (Nosferatu)

40.  Federico Fellini (Nights of Cabiria)

39.  Steven Soderbergh (Out of Sight)

38.  Frank Capra (It’s a Wonderful Life)

37.  Kenneth Branagh (In the Bleak Midwinter)

36.  Cameron Crowe (Almost Famous)

35. Oliver Stone (JFK)

34.  Robert Altman (M*A*S*H)

33.  Fritz Lang (M)

32.  Howard Hawks (The Big Sleep)

Alfred Hitchcock and Francois Truffaut while working on their book

31.  Francois Truffaut (Day for Night)

30.  William Wyler (The Best Years of our Lives)

29.  Luis Bunuel (The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie)

28.  Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia)

27.  David Lynch (Mulholland Drive)

26.  Sergei Eisenstein (The Battleship Potemkin)

25.  Sam Mendes (American Beauty)

24.  Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather)

23.  Charlie Chaplin (Modern Times)

22.  Christopher Nolan (The Prestige)

21.  Elia Kazan (A Streetcar Named Desire)

20.  Peter Weir (Dead Poets Society)

19.  Sidney Lumet (Running on Empty)

18.  Clint Eastwood (A Perfect World)

17.  Quentin Tarantino (Jackie Brown)

16.  Orson Welles (Touch of Evil)

15.  John Ford (The Grapes of Wrath)

14.  John Huston (The Maltese Falcon)

13.  Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain)

12.  Roman Polanski (Chinatown)

Jack Nicholson and John Huston being directed by Roman Polanski on the set of Chinatown (1974)

11.  Peter Jackson (The Lord of the Rings)

10.  Woody Allen (Annie Hall)

9.  Billy Wilder (Sunset Blvd.)

8.  Joel and Ethan Coen (O Brother, Where Art Thou?)

7.  David Lean (The Bridge on the River Kwai)

6.  Alfred Hitchcock (North by Northwest)

5.  Ingmar Bergman (Smiles of a Summer Night)

4.  Stanley Kubrick (A Clockwork Orange)

3.  Steven Spielberg (Raiders of the Lost Ark)

Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg on the "set" of the first Tintin film

2.  Martin Scorsese (GoodFellas)

1.  Akira Kurosawa (Ran)

Je ne sais plus trop si j’en ai parlé ici mais je suis fan de ce film, Casino.

Ce film de Mônsieur Scorsese (avez-vous vu Les Infiltrés ? ou Les Affranchis  aussi ?) avec un De Niro impeccable et un Joe Pesci génialement déjanté (j’adore ce gars !). Mais il y a aussi Sharon “sexy” Stone, James Woods (toujours excellent dans les seconds rôles).

Ce film est épique : déjà par la longueur du film (près de 3 heures) mais aussi par les thèmes traités, à savoir l’argent, le pouvoir, les trahisons, la fameuse Mafia omniprésente telle une pieuvre gigantesque, la passion du jeu, l’amour, l’ascension puis la chute de ce même pouvoir et ce même amour. Ca parle fort, ça utilise des “fuck” au moins 350 fois, ça gesticule beaucoup avec les mains, ça canarde dans tous les recoins, ça explose de partout.

Et puis la musique, enfin les musiques (d’Otis Redding aux Rolling Stones, etc.)… Une vraie plongée au coeur de Las Vegas comme on peut l’imaginer.

Si mon écriture devait m’emmener au-delà, vers l’écriture d’un scénario pour le cinéma, il est certain que je m’inspirerais de ce film notamment !