My second session with Quentin Tarantino about Inglourious Basterds. Read the first part here. Read the original story here (in Norwegian).

Why did you want to do a World War II Movie?

QT: World War II is the biggest event in the 20th century. I’m not a world war aficionado, but I have a very good working knowledge of it. I’m an academic at heart, even though I quit school at a very young age. I read a lot of books about the subject, and I didn’t have a researcher who read the books and broke down the information. I’m a one man band that way.

There is a lot of things you can know intellectually, but you read about what exactly happened, you know of it and understand in another way. You understand it, you feel it. This research was very eye-opening. I’m different now. I did a tremendous amount of research of something that ended up never being in the movie: how black troops were deployed in a segregated army, about them in training in America and what happened to them overseas. That was really a gigantic eye-opening experience. I knew about racism at that time in America, that’s just intellectual knowledge, but to actually learn about it and realise the depths of it, untill the civil rights laws were passed in 1967! The true depth of the second class citizenship that blacks in America experienced, until my own lifetime. It opened up my eyes to a lot.

You actually ended up rewriting history in the movie?

QT: I didn’t plan on doing it. I had an idea where I was going, but it’s like when you don’t have directions to a friend’s house, but you’ve been there before: You’ll get going, figure it out, remember something and you’ll find your way there. That’s kind of how I structure my stories. I have an idea where I’m going, but I really want the characters to take me there.

I don’t want to take the lead, my characters have to take the lead, and I follow them. You’re using your scenario as the main road, but many times you’ll meet a fork or a roadblock in the road.  So now I’m doing this movie, and history itself was the roadblocks. What the hell am I doing? My characters don’t care. They’re free to change history, and that’s what happens. This is a western, it doesn’t have to be historically articulate. My characters changed the course of history.

Did you read war comics growing up?

QT: Yes! I never got into Sgt. Rock, but I was really into Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos, the Marvel version of Sgt. Rock. I imagined doing a movie version when I was a kid, and I do a shot at Sgt Fury in True Romance. I was always attracted to comic books that read more like movies, as opposed to the more fantastical comics. I couldn’t imagine making a movie out of Dr. Strange, that was too wild. I read Werewolf By Night, Sgt. Fury and westerns like Kid Colt or Two-Gun Kid, theya all seemed like movies.

In the movie you show us the Germans as cultural people, while the American soldiers are more brutal and barbaric.

QT: It’s more a situation of what’s on the surface. On one hand you can say that Hans Landa is cultured and refined, but he has a ton of agendas that aren’t on the surface. Everything he does, he does for an effect. He’s talking to you , because he wants to get something out of you. Everything he does is a piece of theatre, to put you on ease or on edge.

An example: In the opening scene, who says he smokes a pipe at all? He knows the farmer LaPatit smokes a pipe, so he brings a pipe with him as a prop to annoy him. And what does he bring? He brings the Kalabash, the Sherlock Holmes pipe. “I fucking know what’s going on, don’t think that I don’t.” It’s all a piece of theatre, and the same goes for Aldo (Brad Pitt’s character).

What Aldo does is theatre. Aldo is very, very intelligent, but he doesn’t play the cultured guy, he plays the hillbilly, he plays the illiterate. But just listen to his dialogue, you realise he’s not illiterate, he’s just as mush a a wordsmith as Landa is, but in a different way. He’s creating a different illusion for what’s going on behind him. Everything he does, is also a piece of theatre, according to who he’s dealing with whoever he wants to deal with.

I love these characters, they are very interesting.

You have always used music from other movies as your soundtrack, but this time all the music is from other movies.

QT: I have different feelings about it. I don’t wanna hire a composer, so if I wanna use music, it will probably be taken from something that I know, or like and have. I just don’t wanna hire composers and give them that kind of power. I don’t wanna hear the music at the end of the day, I wanna hear the music before the day. I wanna choose the music myself.

I truly don’t understand [whispers] how other directors do that, it’s unfathomable that you would let somebody else have that kind of power over your movie, I just do not understand it.

It doesn’t really make any sense for me, it would make sense to do what I do, and that’s why I do it. Never say never, but I wouldn’t probably have someone in a movie takes place in 1943, and having a David Bowie song out of the radio. Like The Rolling Stones’ “Satisfaction” out of a 1944 radio. However, any music that I put in the movie, that’s not source music, but over the soundtrack, that’s score. That’s my choice, I could have rap music, anything I want. If it’s score that’s not being practically played in the room for the characters, I could play anything I want, it’s just up for me to pull it off. (For instance Tarantino uses David Bowie’s “Cat People” in a scene in the movie.)

It sometimes seems that you want to remind the audience that they’re watching a movie, with tools like voiceover, chapter titles and pointers.

QT: Well, I don’t know if I’m trying to remind the audience that they’re watching a movie, but I have never watched a movie and didn’t know that I’m watching a movie. That sounds smartass, but it’s true. Every book I’ve read, I knew I was reading a book, every movie I’ve ever seen, I knew I was watching a movie, however caught up in it I was. You always know you’re watching a movie when you’re watching a movie. I always want to have the freedom to do whatever I want. And many serious movies have very pansy voiceovers.

But maybe you want to remind the audience that they’re watching a Quentin Tarantino movie?

QT: I use my tools so that I don’t waste time, so that I tell the story as easily as I can. In the case of the scene at the movie theatre, they bring up quite a few times that Goebbels, Goering, Bormann and Hitler will be attending the show. And I could show many conversations to tell this, but who wants to watch that shit? I just point an arrow, there’s Goering, and that’s it. No wasting time, there’s Bormann, arrow. I really believe in making it simple, instead of machinations and bending over backwards.

But the movie also include a discussion about Mexican standoffs, and a Cinderella scene, your typical ladies’ shoe scene. This don’t happens anywhere else than in Tarantino movies?

QT: Again, that came organic when writing the script. That was one of those things I didn’t plan on, and also one of my staples. I’ve used the Mexican standoff many times in the past, it’s my equivavelent of the Sergio Leone showdown. I didn’t know that this movie would have any, but all of a sudden it happened, they all had guns under the table pointed at each other, but I didn’t know that this would happen before it happened. I didn’t try to push my themes into the movie, my themes just organically rose, and I felt very excited.

Whoever said that the standoff at the end of The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly obviously hadn’t seen this epic duel. What Ennio Morricone’s film score masterpiece was to the 20th century, so “Don’t move the boat!” shall be to the 21st.

Two years from now, you’ll be watching Woodpecker Vs. Snake adapted to the big screen with a $300 million operating budget, directed by Michael Bay and starring Will Smith  as the Woodpecker and Eric Bana as the Snake, with a surprise cameo from Jack Nicholson as “Don’t move the boat!” guy. Mark my words.

(via Lindsay Robertson)

This is a short story, micro-fiction, in fact, that I’ve penned on the 8th of January 2007. To understand this story, you need to understand that it is direct homage, and build-up on the Man with no Name trilogy which is the character, or even Archetype portrayed by Clint Eastwood in Sergio Leone’s “Spaghetti Westerns“. As many homages, in a way it does not only pay respect to the genre, but breaks it down to its components in such a manner that there’s hardly any story left. The other influence is The Gunslinger, the first book of The Dark Tower series by Stephen King.

This will also be relevant for the upcoming entry, “The Primacy of Colour”, which deals with genres and how we buy into the wrong stuff, the ‘trappings’, things for instance that look like mecha anime, but hardly are. This is only about 500 words long, so I hope you enjoy it.

His horse neighed as it had smelled fresh water, he kept on riding, till he spotted the familiar noise and odor of the saloon.
As he went in, the room fell quiet, all eyes were raised at him. Calculating, watching, as his eyes took to the dim-lit room. Going to the barkeep he could feel the weight of their eyes on him, on his worn clothes, on his holsters and the iron he was packing.
He ordered ale and kept feeling them, as their eyes drew back to what they were doing prior.

***

He bartered with the man keeping the livery stable. He did not comment on the blood on the floor, hid by fresh hay but its scent still hanging heavy in the air. It never did to comment on such.

Leaving the stable, he was confronted by two men, one of them he’d seen in the saloon, this person had seen his money. The other man was unknown to him, but he was dressed sharply. Sharply enough for a town such as this at least.
He spat on the ground, and looking at them from under the rim of his hat, he waited, knowing they’ll state their business. Or they’d go away. Either was fine with him. He spat again.
“Hold it right there!” the sharply dressed man said.
“You stole from me, and I want my money back, or else you’d find yourself dead, par’dner“, his drawl indicated he used the last word as an insult, or at least meant to.
As he watched this silently, people started pouring out of the saloon, and out of his office the sheriff came out.
“What’s this about Earl?”
The sharp man, Earl, looked quickly at the sheriff and back at him, “He was in my store and stole gear and food sheriff!”
The sheriff gave Earl and his friend a calculating look, and looked back at him, “Is that so?”
He looked from under his hat with cool blue eyes, and squinted at the sun, “Can’t say it is.”

***

A tumble-weed had blown across his path like a tired old cliche.
He looked at the wounded man kneeling in front of him, his gun not empty but not quite full in his hand, his other gun quite empty and holstered again.
“Get him, get him and kill him” the man told his dog.
He glanced at the dog, his eyes as cool as the lead he had put into the dog’s owner.
The dog at least knew better, and didn’t get any closer. He turned away.

***

He knew this was only the beginning. His job in this town, were he to take the one of cleaning it, was just beginning.
But he was too tired, there was always another town. The job never ended, and all he got for his problems were more holes in his body, more holes in his mind.

He rode out of the town onto the trail, just one town like so many others.

If people are curious, there’s actually another micro-fiction written in the same venue, of the same character.

Brilliant. Time to talk about our Ten lists once more, so settle in for the long haul and try and keep up. Much discussion ensues as Sam tries to extol the virtues of Ingmar Bergman, praise the magical realism of Billy Liar and attempt to make sense of All About Lily Chou-Chou. John continues the theme, causing slight, though understandable, consternation with his uncensored views on Raging Bull and confessions of multiple tears during Schindler’s List. Tom rounds the night off in business-like fashion with praise for The 400 Blows, controversial dislike for the second half of Stalker and man-crushed love for Le Samourai.

Download The Movie Overdose Episode 40.5

Remember to email us, sugarplums!

Quentin Tarantino gioca al rovesciamento ed al rimescolamento di tutti i paradigmi sulla Seconda Mondiale, con la solita perizia nel rielaborare i linguaggi ed i repertori cinematografici

“Se il cavallo cambia colore…” con Bastardi Senza Gloria il regista Quentin Tarantino sforna un’altra collezione di personaggi all’altezza di quelli che lo hanno reso inimitabile

“Penso che per tentare di accoppare lo zio Adolfo, cambierebbe colore al cavallo!” :  lo zio Adolfo è Adolf  Hitler ed a volerlo “accoppare” è  Brad Pitt, nei panni di Aldo Raine, un mercenario americano sboccato e baldanzoso, seguito da un pugno di uomini dal sangue cattivo, i “Bastardi”. Siamo nella Francia calpestata dai nazisti, e questi signori dalle facce squilibrate, assoldati dai servizi segreti statunitensi, hanno tanta voglia di far masticare ai nazisti le loro stesse budella, senza trastullarsi in generosi convenevoli. La loro missione incrocia i piani di Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), una giovane ebrea che asseconda compiaciuta il suo odio puntiglioso per i cani del regime. Gli stessi uomini colpevoli di aver perforato tutta la sua famiglia a sputi di fucile, soddisfacendo il ghigno saporito del loro superiore, il colonnello Hans Landa (Cristoph Waltz).

Nel film la vendetta della ragazza, architettata con fine disprezzo, si gioca tutta in casa Tarantino, ovvero dentro a un cinema. Il luogo in cui il regime celebrava i suoi ampollosi progetti, e che il regista trasforma in una scatola incendiata, in cui Hitler e compagnia si affrettano a raggiungere i piani inferiori. Il tutto incattivito dal suono beffardo delle risa inebriate di Shosanna, che divampano nella sala insieme alle fiamme, mostrandoci una rappresentazione inedita dell’ebreo. Quest’ultimo, infatti, viene spolpato di un pietismo ormai ricotto. Non è più una vittima docile e lacrimosa, che condisce l’ingiustizia subita con uno sguardo spaesato, bensì una figura che si fa carnefice glorioso e consapevole. Lo stesso Führer viene rimpicciolito, giocosamente messo ai margini e ridicolizzato nelle sue scenate cariche di comica isteria, mentre il nazismo diventa solo lo spunto per la storia di un regista che si rallegra della sua irriverenza.

Neanche a dirlo, il film tira fuori i muscoli nella sceneggiatura maleducata, costruita su un pericoloso ricambio di lingue che nella tensione della simulazione e della dissimulazione può rivelarsi un dannato punto debole. Una schermaglia di battute aguzze e punteggiate da sorrisi viscidi che puzzano di sparatoria, capaci di sbottare in risate sguaiate…E basta. Pure, Tarantino non dimentica di tirare l’osso a critici e cinefili. Il suo film è anche stavolta un covo di citazioni che vanno dal b- movie a Sergio Leone, abbassando il capello a Castellari addirittura nel titolo del film, un plateale omaggio a Quel Maledetto treno blindato. Un serie di richiami che spiazzano e rendono il tutto ancora più sfizioso. Soprattutto, con la sua nuova trovata, il regista ha tirato fuori un personaggio all’altezza della sposina attillata e dei sicari di Pulp Fiction, il Cacciatore di Ebrei, meglio noto come Hans Landa. Una creatura dal sadismo calcolato, un mentitore melenso e rigonfio di un autoritarismo inclemente e sofisticato, che Cristoph Waltz interpreta con cinica ironia, guadagnandosi il Premio all’interpretazione maschile del festival di Cannes. Scritto questo, probabilmente su Bastardi senza Gloria resta da dire solo una cosa: Tarantino ha cambiato colore al cavallo.

Claudia Papaleo

A fistful of pellicule

Une fois encore avec Tarantino, les bas-fonds de l’analyse critique auront été atteints, ses Inglourious Basterds étant taxés au mieux de gaudriole guerrière, au pire de révisionnisme. Des reproches qui marquent peut être maladroitement la déception liée au traitement final adopté puisqu’aux relectures initialement envisagées (mais surtout fantasmées par la presse dite spécialisée) des Douze salopards de Aldrich et de Pour une poignée de salopards (titré Inglorious Bastards) de Enzo G. Castellari, Q.T préfère nous emmener sur un terrain moins balisé et n’applique ses intentions de départ qu’aux basterds en titre dont les apparitions à l’écran seront finalement limitées. Mais qui oserait s’en plaindre vu le monument pelliculé qu’il nous offre ?!

Dans une interview donnée aux Cahiers du cinéma à l’occasion de la sortie cannoise du film, Tarantino déclarait que il n’y a « pas besoin de dynamite quand on a de la pellicule». Un propos à la signification double puisqu’il renvoie à la fois à la séquence montrant les bandes de 35mm amassées derrière l’écran prête à être enflammées afin de provoquer un incendie vengeur, et constitue à la fois une analogie guerrière ayant trait à la capacité du medium de prendre position en dynamitant des idéologies iniques. Stigmatisé un amuseur de génie par une critique à côté de ses pompes, Tarantino nous a offert des films qui se sont toujours montrés d’une grande profondeur que leurs qualités esthétiques et leurs vertus excitantes semblent occulter. Inglourious Basterds n’y échappe pas même si dans l’ensemble il a été plutôt bien reçu, certains en viendront rapidement à opposer les mêmes reproches lus ou entendus depuis quinze ans (trop de dialogues, trop de références, maniérisme impersonnel, etc.) voire inaugureront dans l’absurdité en le taxant d’héritier des grosses comédies type 7ème compagnie ou Z.A.Z. Bien que le film soit sorti sur les écrans depuis quelques mois, il n’est pas prêt de sortir de nos mémoires tant il demeure jubilatoire sur tous les plans. Sans doute le film de l’année 2009 et il se doit d’être apprécié en version originale car jamais depuis McTiernan l’appropriation linguistique ne se sera révélée aussi bien mise en scène et décisive. Une fiction que le réalisateur de Reservoir dogs soumet à sa vision, à sa perception de plus en plus affinée et affirmée du 7e Art.

Il était une fois…

Inglourious Basterds se joue et (re)joue des conventions, des références et de l’Histoire pour réaffirmer une fois de plus et sans doute définitivement la puissance du cinéma sans oublier de donner corps à un récit remarquablement construit. Nous suivons différents personnages, le commando de chasseur de nazis, Shosanna la rescapée, le colonel Landa le chasseur de juifs et les instigateurs de l’opération Kino, dont les actions convergeront vers le cinéma parisien tenu par Shosanna et où doit être projetée l’avant-première de la dernière bande propagandiste de Goebbels en présence du gratin allemand et de Hitler.
Comme toujours, Tarantino s’amuse toujours autant à parsemer son film de références en tous genres qui ici seront difficilement repérables pour la plupart car mettant en jeu le cinéma allemand des années 30/40. De toute manière peu importe car le réalisateur ne cède jamais à la facilité d’une succession de citations simplement illustratives, mais les utilise pour nourrir son cinéma et son projet de mise en scène. Ce sont bien plus que des clins d’œil pour initiés puisqu’elles permettent autant de caractériser des personnages de comic-books (les basterds du titre) afin de leur donner une véritable épaisseur (le lieutenant Raine est un double hommage : à l’acteur Aldo Ray, prototype même de l’incarnation du soldat américain et au personnage du major Rane interprété par William Devanne dans Rolling thunder) qu’elles renforcent la scénographie et la dramaturgie.
Et comme toujours, Tarantino démontre avec jubilation qu’il excelle dans les longues scènes de confrontations verbales, ciselant des dialogues qui claquent, faisant du verbe l’arme de prédilection de son univers. C’est encore plus remarquable dans ce dernier film. Non seulement, il respecte les différentes langues usitées dans un contexte de seconde guerre mondiale (le français, l’allemand, l’anglais, l’italien pour un gag savoureux et hilarant) mais leur utilisation renforce l’immersion dans une fiction où tous les personnages se montrent excessifs. Pour exemple, l’allemand ne sera sous-titré, et donc rendu intelligible, que lorsqu’un personnage familier le comprenant sera présent à l’écran. Ainsi le spectateur sera aussi désorienté et plus tard terrifié que Shosanna lorsque celle-ci subit les avances d’un officier nazi (fierté de la nation pour avoir descendu un maximum d’alliés) puis sera convié à la même table que Goebbels où viendra les rejoindre le bourreau de sa famille, le chasseur de juifs Hans Landa, qui va s’évertuer à la soumettre à un interrogatoire que dissimule mal son inquiétante suavité. Mais le plus fort est que l’intention du réalisateur nous explose à la gueule dès la magnifique scène d’introduction de vingt minutes convoquant admirablement Sergio Leone et dont la théâtralité mortifère expose sans ambages l’importance que va revêtir la maîtrise du langage sous toutes ses formes. Landa tisse un impitoyable piège sémantique parfaitement dissimulé par nos habitudes de spectateurs. Le passage du français à l’anglais dans les échanges entre l’officier et le fermier semblent ainsi respecter une convention hollywoodienne telle qu’usitée dans des films comme K19, Les Insurgés ou Walkyrie alors qu’il s’avère un habile moyen de cryptage à l’encontre de la famille juive planquée sous le plancher et nous-mêmes confortablement enfoncés dans nos fauteuils.

Les dialogues ont une importance capitale dans toute son œuvre et manifestement encore plus dans ce film, notamment dans sa pierre angulaire, la fameuse scène dans la taverne située dans une cave – promptement conspuée par de nombreux spectateurs (la scène, pas la cave). D’une durée désarçonnante, elle surprend donc par sa longueur mais aussi par son ampleur et son rythme. Tarantino rejoue ses scènes fétiches de personnages discutaillant autour d’une table mais en parvenant à se renouveler de manière incroyable, rythmant le tout de digressions humoristiques, cinéphiliques pour faire monter progressivement la tension jusqu’à l’explosion de violence concluant la séquence. Le réalisateur réussit même à nous conditionner, à nous faire prendre conscience du danger de la topographie des lieux d’abord au travers de la répétition par le lieutenant Raine que le risque encouru est immense puisque si cela tourne mal, les possibilités de s’échapper d’un tel endroit sont réduites, puis en jouant sur cet enfermement en réduisant ses cadres, aucun plan d’ensemble de la cave ne nous permettra d’apprécier son agencement (l’endroit où se tenait l’officier de la gestapo ne nous sera révélé qu’au moment où il prendra la parole). Du grand art tant formel que dans l’écriture.
Bien sûr, la grande force du film rédise dans cette réflexion sur toutes les formes de langage, parlé et cinématographique, cette mise en abyme constante du cinéma et de la réalité, comment les deux s’interpénètrent, s’apprivoisent, s’opposent, se complètent…

Cinéman

Toute l’œuvre de Tarantino se définit par le rapport étroit qu’elle entretient avec le cinéma. À tel point que les personnages ne devront leur salut qu’en parvenant à décrypter les images et les codes que s’est appropriés Q.T. Plus encore que dans Kill Bill, cette approche est parfaitement identifiable dans Boulevard de la mort. Le premier quatuor de jeunes filles périt par méconnaissance cinéphile (l’obscure filmo de Stuntman Mike n’évoque rien pour elle) alors que le second groupe retourne la situation à son avantage par leur reconnaissance (Point limite zéro de Richard Sarafian est explicitement évoqué à table par les belles). Là encore avec Inglourious Basterds, tout est une question de maîtrise des références et du langage cinématographique.

Q.T exprime certes sa cinéphilie par l’intermédiaire du lieutenant Hicox (Michael Fassbender) non pas pour impressionner la galerie mais pour définir la mission et ses instigateurs. Il est engagé par le général interprété par Mike Myers au vu de ses impressionnants états de service qui dans l’univers tarantinien consiste non pas dans des faits d’armes mais dans la capacité analytique dont font preuve ses personnages. Ses deux livres d’analyse critique ont été publiés, c’est ce qui lui vaut d’être considéré comme le plus apte à mener à bien l’opération Kino (qui en allemand signifie…cinéma !). Une scène loin d’être gratuite car elle définit le personnage de Hicox qui parviendra dans la taverne à déjouer un temps la suspicion du major de la Gestapo grâce à ses connaissances cinéphiliques (un film de G.W Pabst, L’Enfer blanc du Piz Palu, en l’occurrence).
Cette mise en abyme du cinéma est ainsi illustrée tout au long du métrage et notamment lors de l’interlude pop contant l’histoire de Hugo Stiglitz qui en plus d’éclaircir et renforcer le background du personnage, se révèle un enrôlement littéral et figuratif du renégat puisque Raine et ses hommes le libèrent de sa geôle pour l’engager dans leur entreprise d’extermination et s’apparentant à un véritable casting (sont évoqués ses talents particuliers). Le lieutenant Raine, toujours, se réjouit des exploits brutaux de l’Ours juif (Eli Roth) aussi excitants pour eux (voire plus) qu’un spectacle cinématographique. Ou encore, cet échange lors de l’avant-première de Fierté de la nation où Hitler félicite pour son travail, son meilleur film, le producteur Goebbels.

Tarantino a beau convoquer un monde allégorique dès l’introduction de son film (« Il était une fois, dans une France occupée par les nazis »), un monde entièrement dévoué à son art et sa passion (sa cause ?), il n’instaure pas une appréhension passive puisque la bonne interprétation des images sera aussi décisive pour les spectateurs (démontrant clairement un respect sincère de son audience) et des personnages entretenant un lien de plus en plus fort avec le cinéma (actrice, projectionniste, critique…). Envisageant certes son medium de prédilection comme refuge mais surtout comme moyen ultime de lutter contre la barbarie (physique, idéologique, culturelle), le réalisateur n’en reste pas moins taraudé par l’expression de sentiments viscéraux. S’il continue à s’appuyer sur une démarche purement théorique (comment adapter les images que j’aime et transformer emprunts et citations pour nourrir mon récit), le cinéma de Tarantino se développe de plus en plus autour de l’idée de faire correspondre les émotions que ses personnages suscitent ou subissent avec leur représentation filmique. C’est particulièrement prégnant lors de la séquence dans la cabine de projection où les sentiments de Shosanna envers Fredrick Zoller semblent évoluer selon les expressions affichées par ce dernier dans le film projeté. Q.T parvient avec Inglourious Basterds à une impressionnante symbiose entre caractérisation, narration et images de cinéma.

Puissance du cinéma

C’est vraiment remarquable lorsque Zoller rejoint Shosanna, incapable de supporter plus longtemps l’inhumanité que lui retourne le film de ses exploits. Déterminée à réaliser sa vengeance, elle est contrainte d’abattre dans le dos le soldat qu’elle peine à éconduire. Après avoir manifesté une violence surprenante, elle ne peut s’empêcher peu après d’exprimer une humanité absente chez les autres personnages en s’approchant du corps gisant au sol. Une compassion fatale puisque Zoller en profite pour l’abattre. La mort de Shosanna est la dernière occasion pour Tarantino de la magnifier (superbes plans de Shosanna habillée de rouge dans l’encadrement d’une porte ou songeuse en regardant par la fenêtre, entre autres) puisqu’avant de tomber lourdement au sol, son corps criblé de balles et violemment projeté contre la vitre de la cabine est filmé au ralenti sur une musique lyrique. Un effet grandiloquent qu’il ne concède qu’à la jeune juive. Cette fin esthétiquement mise en valeur intervient juste avant que le montage de Shosanna n’entre en jeu, de sorte que lorsque son visage apparaîtra sur l’écran, nous aurons l’impression d’une incarnation totale de son esprit, de son âme sur la pellicule. Le réalisateur utilise à merveille son art d’élection pour livrer des images d’une beauté presque effrayante tant leur puissance semble se déverser dans la salle. Ainsi, le plan moyen de Shosanna filmée en légère contre-plongée et s’adressant à la caméra permet d’être raccord avec les images précédentes de Zoller et de donner plus de force à ce renversement. Tarantino subvertit un cinéma propagandiste en lui adjoignant un style rappelant le cinéma expressionniste allemand, et lorsque les flammes de la pellicule en train de brûler atteignent l’écran, celles-ci donnent à ce visage d’ordinaire si doux une dimension infernale et fantastique exaltante.

Quand bien même l’analogie avec le cinéma semble surlignée au stabilo, comme lui reprocheront certains, Tarantino ne lie pas la résolution de ses pistes narratives à un lieu consacré au 7è Art par facilité ou pédanterie mais bien parce que dans le programme du film cela procède d’une logique implacable. Les renvois constants à son amour pour le cinéma infusent toute son œuvre et Inglourious Basterds ne fait pas exception. Comment pourrait-il en être autrement pour ce cinéphage compulsif, véritable génie de l’écriture dont le talent et la vision parviennent même à influencer la réalisation de Tony Scott sur True romance ?

Un film, deux réalisateurs

Roi du détournement d’intention, Tarantino déjoue une fois de plus nos attentes en laissant au second plan le commando de salopards sans gloire pour se concentrer sur les deux véritables « héros », Shosanna et le colonel Hans Landa. Et oui, ce dernier est le seul personnage apparaissant dans les cinq segments et dont il semble tirer les ficelles jusqu’au retournement final.
Landa veut tout maîtriser jusque dans ses moindres détails. Il donne une terrible preuve de ses capacités d’entrée de jeu dans cette ferme normande. Ce désir ne fera que s’accentuer. Ainsi, l’expression dont il n’est pas certain de l’exactitude au moment de chausser le pied de Diane Kruger, il en vérifiera la validité lors de la confrontation avec Aldo Raine. Par le biais de cette expression a priori anodine, Tarantino va jouer sur trois tableaux en même temps. Premièrement elle illustre le fétichisme du réalisateur pour les pieds (voir les nombreux plans anatomiques de cet ordre dans Boulevard de la mort) et les digressions étranges (la conversation sur les burgers dans Pulp Fiction, la discussion sur la signification de Like a virgin dans Reservoir Dogs…) mais ici elle va permettre à l’officier nazi d’accroître sa position dominante. Comme démontré précédemment par le film, celui qui maîtrise le langage maîtrise les événements. Non seulement cette expression détermine le rapport de force entre lui et Aldo l’apache mais elle le déstabilise par son incongruité et le trompe sur la trahison un moment envisagée de l’actrice/espionne. Mais c’est sans doute dans la lutte métatextuelle que se livrent Q.T et Landa pour la maîtrise du récit, de l’histoire (et de l’Histoire) que le film se montre réellement délectable et impressionnant. En laissant s’échapper Shosanna après l’exécution de sa famille, Landa affirme sa supériorité et peut être même a t-il déjà compris le reste du film (il lui offre un verre de lait lorsqu’ils mangent un strüddel !) et le rôle qu’il veut y tenir. C’est lui qui mène la danse et qui permet in fine aux basterds de réaliser leur mission. Mais Tarantino par l’intermédiaire du lieutenant Raine, figuration des B-movies irrévérencieux et excessifs qu’adorent l’artiste, n’a pas dit son dernier mot. Aldo l’esthète de la gravure sur front de croix gammée, s’il n’empêche pas Landa d’obtenir l’immunité au moins inscrira pour toujours son infamie.

Cette lutte opposant le réalisateur à son personnage de fiction rappelle la virtuosité d’un autre génie, Johnnie To qui dans le surprenant et génial Breaking News entretenait des rapports similaires avec une jeune lieutenante de police chargée d’interpeller des gangsters retranchés dans un immeuble.
Cette reprise en main physique opérée par l’Américain aura été annoncée par la reprise en main artistique de la projectionniste juive. Le film est vraiment remarquablement construit puisque l’on assiste dans le dernier chapitre à un spectaculaire renversement vindicatif quasiment symétrique avec le segment introductif. Shosanna prend les rênes du film au départ mené par Landa en dressant un piège non plus basé sur la linguistique mais le langage cinématographique grâce à son montage pirate inséré dans le film de Goebbels. De même, l’exécution de Hitler est un écho au massacre de la famille Dreyfus et l’on apprécie de voir la diaspora nazie subir le sort des juifs : confinés dans un espace clos avant d’être brûlés vifs. Enfin, les voir pris de panique devant les flammes et l’impossibilité de s’échapper renvoie à l’image des rats que Landa associait aux juifs. La boucle est bouclée.

Pour le réalisateur de Pulp Fiction, le cinéma est apte à racheter l’Histoire, à la venger de manière extatique et cathartique. Non pas au mépris d’une vérité et réalité historique, que Tarantino n’a d’ailleurs jamais recherchée, mais bien par la puissance métaphorique du medium cinématographique.
Dialogues et réalisation au cordeau, le film emporte définitivement l’adhésion par son mélange des genres, à la fois film de guerre, de commando, de complot militaire, comédie, comic-book (voire pulp et fumetto) et mise en abyme constante du 7e Art où chaque partie se retrouve ponctuée et se conclut par un climax violent, jusqu’à l’apothéose finale, ce retournement ultime et vengeur. Si les inglourious basterds du titre seront finalement peu présents à l’écran, les quelques scènes montrant leurs exactions (ils scalpent en gros plan, défoncent la tête des nazis à coup de gourdin !) conditionneront le récit tout entier puisqu’à la simple évocation de leurs noms, Hitler entrera dans une rage folle, les soldats allemands trembleront de peur et Landa s’efforcera d’y apposer un visage. Et nous, d’applaudir avec entrain le cinéma total que nous offre Tarantino.

Nicolas Zugasti

Lire aussi notre chronique cannoise dans VERSUS n° 16, disponible à la vente sur le site.
Retrouvez aussi notre dossier complet sur Tarantino dans VERSUS n° 5, en vente en PDF avec le nouveau numéro ; et notre article sur Boulevard de la mort dans VERSUS n° 12.

Italy 178m, Colour
Director: Sergio Leone; Cast: Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, Eli Wallach

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is perhaps the quintessential “spaghetti western” which, while thin on plot and dialogue, is an extravaganza of sight and sound owing to Leone’s trade-mark use of alternating close-up and vista shots and Ennio Morricone’s unforgettable theme music. While the film was violent for its time, particularly for the western genre, the violence was swiftly executed which heightened the sense of danger and served to punctuate periods of tension between the interactions of the characters. Eastwood, Van Cleef and Wallach play very  memorable characters which are supported by excellent acting and superb direction (Klaus Ming November 2009).

AS Roma 1-1 Inter – I’m not exactly sure how to feel about this result; on one hand, we really needed 3 points. On the other, we really made Mourinho mad. Though I’m a bit disappointed with the result, I think that there are more positives to be taken away from our play in this match than negatives. I’m going to break it down in terms of Sergio Leone’s 1966 spaghetti western masterpiece:

The Good: For one, we dominated in the early stages of the game and it could/should/would have been at least 2-0 if Mirko Vucinic had buried an absolute sitter very early in the match. However, to his credit, he did score on a fantastic header on 13′ that kept Roma ahead until Samuel Eto’o equalized. Jérémy Ménez caused Inter all sorts of trouble throughout the match, winning fouls and balls and basically making a menace of himself (the match commentator showed no hesitation whatsoever in abusing the ménez/menace pun). Phillipe Mexès marshalled the backline with skill and confidence, and the team finally looked like we were succeeding in adopting Ranieri’s more defensive style. Stefano Okaka did brilliantly in his role as substitute, with an incredible run not long after coming onto the pitch; Marco Motta and David Pizarro were in excellent form as well. I’ll also add Claudio Ranieri to the list for finally transforming the Roman nightmare that was a defense into the rock which held Inter to a single goal this afternoon – and for slamming Mourinho in the post-match press conference. A draw against Inter might not be exactly what we needed, but it is by no means a bad result and

The Bad: Inter’s goal was scored after a series of almost comically botched attempts by Roma to clear their back line. The blame is partly Motta’s, part Andreolli’s, part everyone’s who had a chance to get that ball the hell out of there but failed to do so. I’m also gonna go out on a limb here and put Ranieri’s substitions, or at least, his subsitution of Jérémy Ménez for Max Tonetto in the bad category. Maybe it wasn’t so much a bad move tactically as that I just disagreed with his tactics; by taking off our most voracious offensive threat for a defensive-minded player Ranieri showed that he was aiming to take home a point, while I was still foaming at the mouth for all three. Also, he needs to run some sort of drills in training that will teach i Giallorossi how to bury a sitter. If Vucinic or Ricardo Faty had buried their chances tonight, I would be a much happier Romanista.

The Ugly: Patrick Vieira. His elbow in the face led to Daniele De Rossi having to leave the pitch; he was taken directly to the hospital, where they discerned, I believe, that his cheekbone is fractured. If what I’ve heard is correct, he goes into surgery in the morning. I’ll let this sink in: Danielino will probably be joining Francesco Totti in the stands for the next little while. Er Pupone and Er Capitano Futuro sidelined? This is more than a major setback for Roma. If every other player on the pitch tonight had spontaneously combusted, it would have been less of a setback. Some might say that this is karma, a long time coming for what DDR did to Brian McBride at the World Cup in 2006. To those persons, I say fuck you, and continue to attack the punching bag to which I have taped a likeness of Patrick Vieira.

Okay, I admit it. All in all, this was definitely a positive result for Roma – a sign that we are stepping in the right direction and that perhaps the players are finally beginning to comprehend exactly what it is that Ranieri requires of them. However, it’s not all Clint Eastwood yet, and I for one will be anxious until I learn a little more about Danielino’s condition.

Brilliant. Time to talk about our Ten lists once more, so settle in for the long haul and try and keep up. Much discussion ensues as Sam tries to extol the virtues of Ingmar Bergman, praise the magical realism of Billy Liar and attempt to make sense of All About Lily Chou-Chou. John continues the theme, causing slight, though understandable, consternation with his uncensored views on Raging Bull and confessions of multiple tears during Schindler’s List. Tom rounds the night off in business-like fashion with praise for The 400 Blows, controversial dislike for the second half of Stalker and man-crushed love for Le Samourai.

Download The Movie Overdose Episode 40.5

Remember to email us, sugarplums!

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is my all time favorite movie. For some reason I am very atracted to Sergio Leone’s western fantasy. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve seen it on DVD or TV. What I lacked, until a couple of days ago, was the experience of seeing it in it’s full glory in a movie theater. This was fixed last Wednesday when the local student movie club, Elokuvakerho X, finished the Fall’s movies in the company of Blondie, Tuco and Angel-Eyes. Each time I’ve seen the movie I’ve payed attention to different things, this time I mostly looked at how this great movie is built and mostly three aspects of that: Firstly the way excitement is built up and then suddenly erupts into action, second a sort of duality in the characters and dialogue, and finally the allusions towards Christianity.

The first scene already shows how Leone builds tension. The scene begins with the face of a bounty hunter. Then we see two bounty hunters facing him some distance away. The three men are walking towards an abandoned building. From close-ups of the mens’ faces we can tell they are very tense. Then for what seems a very long time the camera shoots the men nearing the building, one from the left and two from the right. There is no music, only sounds of the environment: Like the wind blowing or a horse moving. The tension just keeps building up, the men finally reach the building and after getting their weapons ready, rush in. Gunshots follow and the man the three bounty hunters were chasing, The Ugly or Tuco, jumps out of the window. A buildup and then a violent outbreak of tension. Tarantino’s films work much in the same way as is evident from Inglourious Basterds, where the beginning scene is very similar to The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. But instead of silence Tarantino uses dialogue.

Then on to the duality. A lot of the dialogue in the film uses the phrase “In this world there are two kinds of men…” What follows can be, for example: “those with loaded guns, and those who dig”. Similar phrases are used so often in the film that one can’t help but notice and wonder how it affects the story. When you look at the plot of this movie you realize that in the center are two men: Tuco and Blondie. Almost the entire movie revolves around these two, who contrast each other extremely well. Blondie is a quiet wall, speaking only rarely, while Tuco talks almost constantly and shows his feelings very openly. The relationship of these two kinds of men develops in very interesting directions in the movie and it’s rather open to discussion how one might analyze their relationship.

One way of looking at it is a religious approach. Tuco is very straightforwardly compared to Jesus in the movie. At a scene in the missionary Tuco stands next to a painting of Jesus very noticeably. Blondie is also compared to a golden haired guardian angel and Tuco compares him to Judas frequently. The way blondie saves from hanging by shooting the rope could be interpreted as a symbolic death. Especially the ending where Tuco stands precariously atop a cross marking a grave is rich with symbolic meaning. I won’t be so brave as to draw any conclusions, I was just wondering about these aspects while watching the movie. Comment is free: Draw, aim and fire.

Como cada año en el mes de Noviembre, la asociación ASAFAL, amigos del ferrocarril en Almería organiza un ciclo de cine donde los trenes son los protagonistas indirectos.

Este año una de las películas que se proyectará es HASTA QUE LLEGÓ SU HORA, de Sergio Leone, una magnifica obra de arte protagonizada entre otros por Henry Fonda, o  Charles Bronson, y como sabrás rodada en parte en nuestra provincia, mas en concreto en el Rancho Leone construido al efecto para la misma.

La película la podrás disfrutar el dia 13 de Noviembre a las 20 horas, como siempre en la sala de el Museo de Almeria en Carretera de Ronda. El resto de las películas que conforman el ciclo son las siguientes:

06/09 BREVE ENCUENTRO (David Lean, 1945)
13/09 HASTA QUE LLEGO SU HORA (Sergio Leone, 1968)
20/09 EL FERROVIARIO (Pietro Gemi, 1956)
27/09 LA VIDA ES UN MILAGRO (Emir Kusturica, 2004)

La entrada es gratuita hasta completar aforo, y siempre a las 20 horas.

Cada película será presentada por una persona relacionada con el tema.

In 1919 the Volstead Act brought a swift end to nightlife, and the refined craft of the American bartender was outlawed. It was thought that to drink Alcohol was to have a life shadowed by death. It was thought by some that these were Death & Company.

Death & Company is a bar in the East village, NYC. It’s on a leafy street and it sits behind a large windowless carved wooden front. You can’t make reservations, the doorman will simply take your number and call you back if and when there is a seat available.

Once inside it feels so exclusive. There is a no standing policy, so the air is very relaxed and sophisticated. The perfect number of people in a bar.

We ordered a Jane Russell and a Sergio Leone from the huge moustachioed man behind the bar.

I couldn’t honestly tell you what was in either cocktail now, but I can tell you that they were damn fine – and strong.

The care and precision that went into making these drinks was hypnotising and the vigour with which he mixed them was amazing and a little intimidating. If you are in the East village, you MUST give this place a go.

Cheers!

Bottoms up.

Titolo originale: Chi bi

Regia: John Woo

Cast: Tony Leung,  Takeshi Kaneshiro, Zhang Fengyi, Chen Chang, Wei Zhao, Jun Hu, Shido Nakamura, Chiling Lin, Yong Hou, Tong Jiang, Jia Song, Dawei Tong, Qingxiang Wang, Yong You, Ba Sen Zha Bu, Zhao Wei, Hu Jun

Distribuzione: Eagle Pictures, Cina, 2008

Guarda il trailer

Cina, 208. Durante la dinastia Han, il primo ministro Cao Cao (Zhang Fengyi), sfrutta la debolezza e l’inesperienza del giovane imperatore Han Xiandi  e lo convince a dichiarare guerra al regno di Xu situato all’ovest dell’Impero e governato da Liu Bei (Yong You). Il piano di Cao Cao consiste nel conquistare tutti i regni e successivamente autoproclamarsi imperatore della Cina unificata. Liu Bei costretto alla ritirata,  invia il suo consigliere militare Zhuge Liang, (Takeshi Kaneshiro)  presso il Regno Wu, nel sud, nel tentativo di convincere il suo regnante, Sun Quan (Chen Chang) ad unire le forze. Lì Zhunge conosce il Vicerè di Wu, Zhou Yu, (Tony Leung)  e i due diventano ben presto amici oltre che alleati. Infuriato dall’apprendere che i due reami si sono alleati, Cao Cao invia un esercito di ottocentomila soldati e duemila navi a sud, al fine di ottenere una facile vittoria e portare a conclusione il suo disegno politico. Così l’esercito del primo ministro si accampa nella Foresta Crow, sulla sponda opposta alle  Scogliere Rosse, dove sorge la fortezza di Zhou Yu,  sul Fiume Yangtze. Sarà una battaglia epica, senza esclusione di colpi.

John Woo lascia per un attimo Hollywood, dove ha realizzato tra l’altro Face/off e Mission: Impossible II, e torna a casa per realizzare una stupenda pellicola epica basata su uno dei testi fondamentali della  cultura e della tradizione cinese  Il romanzo dei Tre Regni  scritto da Luo Guanzhong più di seicento anni fa . Non bada a spese per questo ambizioso progetto, costato ben 80 milioni di dollari, la più grande produzione mai realizzata in lingua cinese, ma il risultato è davvero ammirevole. Il materiale è tanto: si pensi che il prodotto originale distribuito per il pubblico cinese ha una durata di 4 ore  divise in due episodi, rispetto ai “soli” 148 minuti della versione singola per il resto del mondo, i personaggi sono ben delineati e analizzati con minuzia e precisione, i costumi e le location sono da favola,  la trama è avvincente nonostante la durata e le battaglie hanno una struttura e delle scene  coreografate da  Corey Yuen e realizzate in modo magistrale. Il compito era molto arduo e una delle difficoltà maggiori che sia il regista che gli sceneggiatori si sono trovati ad affrontare è stata sicuramente quella di mettere insieme tante prospettive diverse su un momento storico che ha segnato la storia e la cultura cinese in modo molto profondo.  Osservando il prodotto finale si può affermare con certezza che tutte le difficoltà che il progetto presentava sulla carta sono state superate in modo egregio.

Il merito di questa riuscita, oltre alla magistrale regia del ritrovato regista orientale, fatta di primi piani intensi, di un connubio riuscitissimo tra musica e azione, e di omaggi ripetuti al maestro Sergio Leone, è da imputare anche al cast formato da attori veramente all’altezza della loro fama, su tutti Tony Leung,  a modesto parere della sottoscritta uno dei migliori attori non solo del cinema orientale ma a livello mondiale, un interprete poliedrico e versatile, nonché molto talentuoso, e Takeshi Kaneshiro, attore di grande intensità, fascino e talento, che ha lavorato con registi del calibro di Zhang Yimou ne La foresta dei pugnali volanti, e di Wong Kar-wai in Hong kong Express (tra l’altro proprio assieme allo stesso Tony Leung), che danno senza dubbio un tocco in più ai rispettivi personaggi, il vicerè Zhou Yu e lo stratega e consigliere militare Zhuge Liang.

Personaggi chiave della pellicola sono anche le donne, che appaiono come combattive e desiderose di fare la propria parte per salvare il loro regno. Esse sono solo due, Sun Shangxiang, sorella di Sun Quan, una ragazza molto coraggiosa pronta a tutto per sconfiggere Cao Cao, interpretata da Wei Zhao,  e la bellissima Xiao Qiao, moglie devota di Zhou Yu, interpretata dalla bravissima Chiling Lin, qui al suo esordio come attrice,  fondamentale nel corso della battaglia decisiva.

In definitiva una pellicola davvero ben realizzata, che riesce a non perdere la propria forza nonostante i tagli operati dallo stesso Woo per questa versione unica:  un vero gioiello nel quale confluiscono eroismo, amore, coraggio e sacrificio.

Conclusione: Imperdibile.

Voto: 9  

La copertina dell'LP della colonna sonora.

Tra pochi giorni partirò per San Francisco per presentare un paper sul cinema di Tonino Valerii, concentrandomi sul versante Western. Ne ho approfittato in questi giorni per rivedere i suoi film di quel genere, tra cui il celeberrimo Il mio nome è Nessuno, e per vedere C’era una volta il West, grande capolavoro di Sergio Leone.

Beh anellidi, han voglia gli americonzi a chiamarlo “Spaghetti Western” con tono di denigrazione. Delle sceneggiature così, una costruzione dei personaggi da mozzare il fiato, una scelta di facce di attori assolutamente superlativi… non mi stupisco che il cinema italiano di quell’epoca sia considerato da molti, tra cui Tarantino, come una pepita d’oro.

Inoltre, va detto, vedere Henry Fonda prima eroe degli eroi, e poi cattivo dei cattivi, è davvero una bella esperienza. Consiglio a tutti di vedere i due film uno dopo l’altro, a voi la scelta dell’ordine.

In our continuing series this week of films we couldn’t include on our upcoming DVD release, Celestial Navigations: The Short Films of Al Jarnow, this is the earliest reel we found during our excavation of Al’s 16mm archive.  It includes some silent pencil tests from his first film, The Owl & the Pussycat, along with a comical take on Sergio Leone’s, The Good The Bad & The Ugly, with some Mr. Potatohead characters. Enjoy.

The festival is beginning to take its toll on me, especially as I also have to work during these afternoons, so I only managed to fit in two films in my schedule. By shear chance, both of them were South Korean and both starred the always good Kang-ho Song.

Song is one of Korea’s biggest moviestars, but he also is a very competent and versatile actor, often adding a touch of humour in his roles. I first became aware of him in Swiri (from 1999) by Je-gyu Kang, who five years later made the good war film Brotherhood. After Swiri, Song did J.S.A. Joint Security Area, which was his first collaboration with Chan-wook Park. Park used Song in his next project, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, as well. Park went on to make the internationally acclaimed Oldboy, without Song this time. He gave him a cameo in Sympathy for Lady Vengeance before granting him the undisputed lead in Thirst, which is the first film I saw today.

Thirst is a gorgeously filmed vampire story. For the first hour it is really good, at times exceptionally so. There are scenes we haven’t seen before and the protagonist is definitely not your typical vampire. Song plays a devout catholic priest who becomes a vampire through a tainted blood transfusion after having briefly died as a test subject for an experimental vaccine. He soon realizes his predicament, and not feeling it is a sin, as he didn’t ask for this to happen to him, he considers it an illness and not inherently bad in any moral way. There is initially no big change in his personality and he makes sure that he doesn’t harm anyone in order to procure the necessary quantities of blood, tapping blood from coma victims at the local hospital who are not likely to miss a bottle or two of the red stuff.

Soon, however, he is introduced to Tae-joo, a young woman forced into servitude of her sickly husband and mother in law. The priest, soon to be ex-priest, and Tae-joo begin an erotic relationship which is very well represented in the film. The scenes of love making all seem natural and as a result comes off as truly erotic and not the silly wish fulfilment fantasies of countless Hollywood films. Unfortunately, it turns out that his love is a bit of a femme fatale who uses him for her own ends. From this point in, I felt the film became overlong, dwelling too much on its grantedly beautiful frames, but not advancing the plot in any surprising ways, or at all. I won’t spoil the film, so I’ll limit myself to saying that for me, at least, the film didn’t reach its potential. I saw where the film was heading and it didn’t make any meaningful detours from that direction. As a result, a short trip felt far too long. What made this second half of the film worth staying, was the stellar work of Ok-vin Kim, an actress I’d never heard of before. She really made the character of Tae-joo a full bodied creature, upping the menacing aspects of her arc in the film. I’ll recommend the film with caution, as it is very well made and looks fantastic, with some really breath taking scenes. Just be aware that the recommendation is not unconditional.

The Good, the Bad, the Weird also stars Kang-ho Song. In this film he plays almost an amalgamation of the two characters he has played in the films of my favourite Korean director, Joon-ho Bong. I assume anyone with an interest in Korean films has seen Memories of Murder, in which Song plays a policemen with a temper and some intellectual shortcomings. I personally found this even better than David Fincher’s Zodiac, being a very similar story. Song also played in the environmental monster film The Host, which was a bit of a hit internationally as well. Here he played a well meaning buffoon, possibly short of some marbles.

As The Good, the Bad, the Weird gives Song the chance to essay a character who seemingly has two personalities, he can really let loose with his two most typical screen personas. Song, of course, is the weird one of the title.

The film is directed by Ji-woon Kim, who among others has made the solid A Tale of Two Sisters and A Bittersweet Life. Kim is a very visually oriented director, often presenting tableaus which are easier to admire than really like, but in The Good, the Bad, the Weird, he uses his considerable talents to give us the purest entertainment this side of Indiana Jones (disregarding the fourth near-abomination). The title of the film makes the countless nods to Sergio Leone quite clear, but more than a Spaghetti Eastern, I felt this was an adventure film, an action film like they don’t make em anymore.

The plot is all a bit of nonsense, with a treasure map serving as a MacGuffin for countless inventive chases and spectacular fight scenes, not with kung-Fu, but guns, cannons and everything that can be fired from a steel tube. In between the action scenes, we get to know the characters just enough to care about them. There is also a sub-plot regarding how Korea has been stolen by the Japanese, and as a result the three protagonists are men with no country, all now making a life lived in the eternal present in a soon to be mythic Manchuria. This gives them the chance to reinvent themselves, something Song’s character has done most successfully, gladly accepting the role as a happy-go-lucky small time thief and adventurer. Again, I can’t say more, as it would spoil a plot point towards the end.

The plot, however is not the important thing here. The unbridled entertainment on display is all that counts. I laughed out loud many times during the film and too often during the action scenes, I found myself sitting with my mouth open for a longer time than is considered proper in polite society. The only thing that was a let down was the ending, which I felt was too abrupt and disappointing in its stock situation. I felt that it was unnecessary to emulate Leone to such a degree at this point. That particular scene can probably never be bettered anyway, so it was a bit of a suicide attempt for Kim to try to get away with it. Be sure, by the way, to watch some minutes into the credits, as some resolution can be found there. Heartily recommended, but not for those who feel that all art should be slow moving, reflective and involve the deeper meaning of life, come hell or high water.

Jag har en viss förkärlek för westernfilmer. En kvarleva från min barndom, en barndom som utspelade sig på den tid repriser av westernfilmer var A-ok på SVT. Ja det kanske nu idag inte är förbjudet att visa repriser av gamla westerns, men tittarbehovet finns måhända i väldigt låg grad. Det sker således väldigt sällan att det går westernfilmer på TV.
Hollywood försöker då och då lyfta upp westerngenren, nu senast en cover av 3:10 to Yuma som gjorde en hyfsad vinst, hyfsad alltså, inte wowjowsamschwoookihey-hey-hey vad pengar vi tjänade.
Och det är väl där westernfilmen är idag. Men några års mellanrum kommer en ny film med ett par kända namn som gör en acceptabel vinst och därmed motiverar ett nytt försök om några år igen.

Henry som vår Frank

Men, om vi nu inte behöver westernfilmen längre? Borde vi inte fundera lite mer på vilka miljöer vi vill att våra historier utspelar sig i?
Vill vi att de ser ut såhär? Lysande dramaturgi och musik som är lika mycket film som själva cellulosan?

**spoiler*** slutscenen i mästerverket Once Upon A Time In The West

Eller vill vi se Johan Falk?

Inte Henry Fonda som vår Frank

Efter att Clint Eastwood gjort stor succé med filmerna i dollar-trilogin, kände väl amerikanarna att nu fick det vara nog.Stjärnan måste hem till staterna. Och det med en rejäl western på amerikanskt vis.

Regissören Ted Post fick, faktiskt efter att självaste Sergio Leone tackat nej, uppdraget att regissera Clintan i denna rätt sävliga historia om kofösaren Jed Cooper(Eastwood) som falskeligen anklagad för boskapsstöld hängs i första bästa träd, men överlever, återhämtar sig och återupptar snart sitt gamla yrke som marshal i territoriet för att kunna spåra upp och hämnas på de män som försökt hänga honom.
Häng dom högt skiljer sig från de relativt simpla spagetti-westerns Eastwood nu antagligen hade rutin på att spela in. Här skulle han plötsligt agera mer aktivt, med avsevärt mer dialog.

Och för att vara en western från slutet på 60-talet är det märkbart mycket dialog i filmen. Man märker tappra försök att skapa någon sorts socialrealism mitt i det torra präriedammet. Och det lyckas väl sådär. Svenskättade Inger Stevens gör en lågmäld kvinna som givetvis fångar Eastwoods intresse.
Manuset låter oss i parti och minut förstå att hon varit med om tråkigheter , och det krävs en sårad Eastwood som lämnas i hennes vård, för att hon ska tina upp.
Mellan kyssar och nojsiga utflykter på prärien ägnar sig Cooper åt att systematiskt spåra upp de fulingar han är på jakt efter.

Regissör Post låter historien tralla på till den väntande finalen då allt en gång för alla ska ställas tillrätta. I sanningens namn är man naturligtvis aldrig orolig för att Eastwood ska misslyckas med att få sin upprättelse.Häng dem Högt är en rätt lågmäld western som kanske åldrats aningen för mycket.
Men intresssant i jämförelse mot de otaliga europeiska westerns som massproducerades i kölvattnet av Eastwoods dollar-filmer…

Roma Dal 29 ottobre 2009 al 30 gennaio 2010 Viale Palmiro Togliatti, 2  orario 11.00 -19.30 Mostra fotografica a Cinecittàdue Arte Contemporanea Ingresso libero  Le celebrazioni ad ottant’anni dalla nascita e a vent’anni dalla scomparsa di Sergio Leone continuano nello spazio espositivo di Cinecittàdue Arte Contemporanea, con un’esposizione curata da Gian Luca Farinelli, direttore della Cineteca di Bologna, e prodotta da Cinecittàdue Arte Contemporanea. Una mostra fotografica in uno dei luoghi simbolo del grande Maestro. Un viaggio attraverso gli scatti più celebri e significativi per ricordare, immersi nel suo mondo, Sergio Leone, una tra le personalità più rappresentative del cinema italiano e mondiale. Cento fotografie di grande qualità scattate da Angelo Novi, provenienti dal ‘Fondo Novi’  dell’Archivio fotografico della Cineteca di Bologna, saranno esposte nel loro magico bianco & nero, in formato 50x 70. Il progetto di allestimento è dello Studio Purini – Thermes. Una mostra ‘tradizionale’ se comparata a quella presentata all’Auditorium per il Festival Internazionale del Cinema di Roma, dove in quel caso l’immaterialità dell’allestimento ha giocato sulla relazionalità fra lo spazio e le immagini scorrevoli. Qui si ritorna al ‘tradizionale’ per chi ama soffermarsi davanti ad un’immagine, carpire i segreti tecnici ed estetici adottati dall’autore-fotografo, lasciarsi affascinare dal glamour e dalla bellezza dei volti degli interpreti dei film, colti sempre dall’occhio elegante di Angelo Novi.  Sono immagini inedite sia perché molte di esse sono esposte per la prima volta sia, soprattutto, perché contengono piccoli segreti, piccoli particolari difficilmente percepibili dalle immagini in movimento e che solamente la stampa, ottima, della fotografia, riesce ad indicare con precisione, diventando quindi una straordinaria fonte di informazione intorno al cinema e ai suoi protagonisti.  Le immagini di Angelo Novi appartengono a pieno titolo all’età d’oro della storia della fotografia e Novi, che lavora sul set di un altro artista, pare essere in perfetta sintonia con Sergio Leone. Quei piccoli particolari che lui ha saputo vedere e restituire durante il lavoro sul set, diventano ora racconto espressivo e dunque importanti contributi per ampliare la conoscenza dell’opera del grande regista.

Claudia Cardinale, "Once Upon a Time in the West"

 I’m not going to add much to the encyclopaedia’s worth of stuff written about this, surely the greatest Western ever made.  The audacity of killing off Woody Strode and Jack Elam in the first scene; those locomotives, screaming and screeching their way through virgin landscape; the casting-against-type of Henry Fonda, Hollywood’s decentest man, as a psychopath; that unforgettable, instantly recognisable Ennio Morricone score; and, most of all, that final, glorious  gunfight, Fonda’s eyes flickering momentarily right and left to judge the best angle of the sun to gain an advantage against the stony-faced Charles Bronson.

I first saw this in 1968 in the George cinema in Barrhead.  You have no idea what Claudia Cardinale’s mascara and cleavage did for my bedtime fantasies - I must have rescued her from a whole trainload of  bad guys, and then didn’t know what to do with her afterwards  - or how much the smirking, spitting Fonda frightened the shite out of me.  Seeing it again on a big, big screen, beautifully restored, is one of life’s infinite pleasures.

Oh, Henry Fonda!  Oh, Charles Bronson!  Oh, oh, oh, Claudia Cardinale!

Spaghetti Westerns and Sergio Leone are the cinematic equivalent of bacon and eggs. Peanut butter and jelly. Or any other divinely matched pairing the world would not be quite the same without. (although I could get along quite well without bacon and eggs, but for sake of argument…) Although slim in number, the seven feature films that make up Leone’s body of work had the remarkable effect of reinventing a dead genre (the Western) with his own brand of grit, realism and sweeping beauty. In watching his films today, it is little wonder that the director’s first job was as an assistant on Vittorio de Cica’s The Bicycle Thief—the good guys and the bad guys are equals as flawed, corruptible, f’d up humans. Hence the eternal humanity of Leone’s work.

To mark Leone’s 80th birthday, and the 20th anniversary of his death, the Rome Film Festival has paid tribute to the Italian director with a special exhibition of photographs taken from the Leone family archives, the Cineteca di Bologna and the Experimental Centre of Cinematography.

A selection from the exhibit follows below:

Clint Eastwood on the set of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966)

Claudia Cardinale on the set of Once Upon a Time in the West

Charles Bronson on the set of Once Upon a Time in the West

Elizabeth McGovern and Robert De Niro in Once Upon a Time in America

James Coburn on the set of A Fistful of Dynamite

Pulp Fetish Fiction

 Ormai lo sapete, Tarantino è un feticista. Il suo amore per i piedi delle donne è noto sin da Pulp Fiction, quando un lungo dialogo sui massaggi ai piedi (sono sesso o privi di sensualità?) introduceva Uma Thurman/Mia Wallace che girava a piedi nudi per casa, e ballava a piedi nudi al Jack Rabbit Slim’s. Poi i piedi di Uma, nei panni della Sposa, sono stati al centro di un primo piano insistito in Kill Bill Vol.1. E poi è stata la volta di Grindhouse, con i piedi di Rosario Dawson solleticati da Stuntmen Mike. Anche Bastardi senza gloria ha il suo momento fetish: al centro ci sono gli arti di Diane Kruger. Ma la sua gamba stavolta è martoriata: il tenente Aldo Raine di Brad Pitt infila addirittura un dito nel foro di una pallottola. Rivediamo i piedi di Diane Kruger più tardi, quando, come Cenerantola, le viene fatta provare una scarpa che aveva perso. Ma non c’è un principe a portargliela, e l’esito non è “e vissero tutti felici e contenti”. 

 Tracce di rosso

 In ogni film di Tarantino c’è una scena completamente ammantata di luce rossa, di solito ambientata in qualche night club o locale notturno. Qui, nonostante ci siano molti bar, nessuno è a “luci rosse”. Il rosso però campeggia, negli addobbi del Terzo Reich che decorano il cinema per la première del film di propaganda nazista che viene organizzata a Parigi. Rosso è anche il vestito di Shosanna, e rossi sono i segni di guerra, come quelli di una pellerossa, che traccia sul volto con il suo rossetto. Rosso fuoco come il vestito che indossa, premonizione del fuoco che appiccherà al cinema. “Guarda questi occhi così rossi/Rossi come una giungla in fiamme” recita Cat People (Putting Out The Fire) di David Bowie (tratta dalla colonna sonora di Cat People, nota da noi come Il bacio della pantera) che fa da colonna sonora alla scena.

Serial killer

Tutti sappiamo della fluvialità tarantiniana in fase di scrittura. Così Kill Bill è diventato un film doppio. Ma Bastardi senza gloria ha rischiato di diventare una serie tv. Tarantino non riusciva a smettere di scrivere, tanto che a un certo punto ha cominciato a considerare l’idea di produrlo come serial. A dissuaderlo pare sia stato Luc Besson, che si è detto deluso, in quanto i film di Tarantino erano una delle poche cose ancora in grado di spingerlo ad andare al cinema. L’idea di vedersi il nuovo Tarantino a casa in tv non gli andava proprio. E così Tarantino ci ha ripensato. Allora, grazie Luc!

Italia Mon Amour

La passione di Tarantino per il cinema italiano è evidente. È noto ormai che l’ispirazione di Bastardi senza gloria arriva da Quel maledetto treno blindato di Enzo G. Castellari. Oltre che con un cammeo, Castellari è omaggiato con il nome di Enzo Gorlami, l’identità italiana che si inventa Brad Pitt/Aldo Raine alla premiere del film tedesco: è la storpiatura di Enzo Girolami, il vero nome di Enzo G. Castellari. Ma gli omaggi al cinema italiano non finiscono qui. Il generale inglese che dà l’incarico al tenente Hicox si chiama Ed Fenech, omaggio alla diva del cinema italiano anni Settanta Edwige Fenech, già omaggiata da Eli Roth con un cammeo nel suo Hostel 2. Antonio Margheriti, nome di copertura dell’Orso Ebreo di Eli Roth, è un regista italiano, noto con il nome d’arte di Anthony M. Dawson, famoso per i suoi film di genere (tra questi Space Men, del 1960).

Il titolo

Inglourious Basterds è il titolo americano di Quel maledetto treno blindato. Il titolo originale si scrive proprio così, con due errori, e non Inglorious Bastards: sembra che Tarantino abbia scelto questo titolo storpiato proprio per differenziarsi dall’altro film.

Ma la leggenda vuole che il film di Castellari fosse catalogato così, con il nome sbagliato, nella videoteca in cui lavorava Tarantino. 

Stiglitz, chi era costui?

Hugo Stiglitz è il nome di uno dei bastardi guidati dal tenente Aldo Raine. È un ufficiale tedesco famoso per aver ammazzato vari componenti delle SS. E per questo è assoldato di diritto tra i bastardi.

Il nome è preso da quello di un attore messicano, Hugo Stiglitz, appunto, che tra gli anni Settanta e Ottanta ha girato parecchi horror. Tra cui, in Italia, Il triangolo delle Bermude, e Incubo sulla città incontaminata di Umberto Lenzi.

Tarantino non intendeva fare un omaggio all’attore e al genere, ma ha scelto questo nome proprio perché gli piaceva come lo pronunciavano gli attori tedeschi che interpretavano i nazisti.

Capitoli (de)generi

Come molti dei suoi film, anche Bastardi senza gloria è diviso in capitoli, come se fosse un’opera letteraria. Stratagemma che permette a Tarantino di spaziare tra i generi. Ecco come viaggia tra i generi Bastardi senza gloria. “È Sergio Leone e Lubitsch per i primi due capitoli, poi diventa un noir alla francese e poi si ispira ai film della metà degli anni Sessanta” ha raccontato Tarantino.

“Il finale è macho-sanguinolento-tarantiniano”.

(Pubblicato su Movie Sushi) 

Partirà oggi la kermesse romana dedicata al cinema italiano e internazionale.
Tanti i film, le anteprime e gli eventi in cartellone, nonché tante le occasioni per fotografare star più o meno famose.
Come ogni anno all’Auditorium ampio spazio sarà dedicato alle mostre e alle retrospettive.

Vi segnialiamo in particolare queste:
SERGIO LEONE, UNO SGUARDO INEDITO

Ad ottant’anni dalla nascita ed a vent’anni dalla sua scomparsa, il Festival Internazionale del Film di Roma ricorda il grande Sergio Leone, una tra le personalità più rappresentative del nostro cinema italiano e mondiale, attraverso una mostra-evento, dal titolo SERGIO LEONE, UNO SGUARDO INEDITO.
Curata da Gian Luca Farinelli, direttore della Cineteca di Bologna, la mostra si avvale dell’estro creativo di due personaggi d’eccezione, i premi Oscar® Dante Ferretti e Francesca Lo Schiavo, che attraverso un allestimento scenico unico e di grande emozione, restituiranno al pubblico i “tesori” e le straordinarie innovazioni di quello che forse è ancora oggi il regista più “citato” dai cineasti di tutto il mondo.
La mostra sarà inaugurata dal Presidente della Fondazione Cinema per Roma Gian Luigi Rondi, dalla famiglia Leone, da Dante e Francesca Ferretti e dal Premio Oscar® Ennio Morricone il 14 ottobre alle 18 presso lo Spazio Espositivo dell’Auditorium Parco della Musica. L’esposizione sarà aperta al pubblico fino al 23 ottobre dalle 12 alle 18, e dalle 18 alle 20 per i possessori del biglietto per una delle proiezioni del Festival.
Prodotta da EQUA, in collaborazione con il Festival Internazionale del Film di Roma, la mostra si avvale del diretto coinvolgimento della Cineteca di Bologna e della famiglia Leone, e del prezioso contributo dell’Assessorato alle Politiche Culturali e della Comunicazione del Comune di Roma, della Regione Lazio, di Acea, Fondazione Roma e di Poste Italiane, con il patrocinio dell’Assessorato alle Politiche Culturali della Provincia di Roma.
Dal 29 ottobre 2009 un’ulteriore mostra fotografica, che ricorderà il grande regista, sarà aperta al pubblico presso lo spazio espositivo di Cinecittà 2 Arte Contemporanea. Qui 90 fotografie inedite ripercorreranno la vita privata e professionale del grande maestro, dagli esordi ai suoi successi internazionali. Il progetto dell’allestimento è curato dallo Studio Purini.

Dal 14 ottobre 2009 al 23 ottobre 2009
Spazio Espositivo del Parcheggio Superiore, Auditorium Parco della Musica – Viale Pietro de Coubertin, 30
Orario: 12 -18 e sino alle 20 per i possessori di biglietto di una delle proiezioni del Festival
Ingresso libero

CAPE FAREWELL: ART AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Per la prima volta in Italia sarà presentata in collaborazione con il British Council la mostra Cape Farewell: Art and Climate Change a cura della Cape Farewell Foundation.
I lavori sono il risultato di una esperienza reale di un gruppo di artisti che hanno vissuto per un certo periodo, insieme a scienziati e ricercatori, a Cape Farewell, in Groenlandia. Questo soggiorno ha dato vita a creazioni molto singolari: fotografie, sculture e installazioni alimentate dall’energia solare o scavate nel ghiaccio.

Dal 14 ottobre 2009 al 23 ottobre 2009
AuditoriumArte – Spazio Hag – Viale Pietro de Coubertin, 30
Ingresso libero
Orario: 9 -22 (tranne durante lo svolgimento degli incontri)
Inaugurazione: 14 settembre 2009 ore 17:30

MACRORADICI DEL CONTEMPORANEO
CESARE ZAVATTINI INEDITO
Con la mostra “Cesare Zavattini inedito”, prende avvio il progetto “MACROradici del Contemporaneo”, curato per il MACRO da Francesca Pola, in sintonia con la nuova linea curatoriale del direttore Luca Massimo Barbero, che intende differenziare e variegare l’indagine, le ricerche e l’offerta culturale espositiva del museo, che spazia dalla storia recente sino alle nuove generazioni. Il progetto intende rivelare alcuni protagonisti storici della realtà artistica di Roma attraverso nuclei inediti di opere, biografie meno note, oggetti e feticci: personaggi trasversali, scelti soprattutto per il pubblico giovane come presenza viva nell’oggi, disvelati anche in touchscreen e cassettiere che racchiudono centinaia di opere, fotografie, documenti, con i quali i visitatori sono chiamati a interagire, e poi ancora filmati e proiezioni video, unendo la preziosità dell’oggetto artistico al virtuale tecnologico: il visitatore si trova così immerso in una sorta di archivio vivente, del quale può avere esperienza diretta e immediata.
www.macro.roma.museum

Per maggiori informazioni:
www.romacinemafest.org

Sergio Leone