Nada melhor do que algo bem grande, mesmo, para tentar preencher minhas palavras, enquanto as procuro para descrever o meu amor por este filme.

Att summera Bob Dylans artisteri känns som en tämligen omöjlig uppgift. Hans produktivitet kan närmast liknas vid en värphönas och kultstatusen överskuggar alla samtida musikikoner. Todd Haynes spelfilm ”I’m Not There” från 2007 hyllades av en samstämmig kritikerkår, men att tro att den på något sätt skulle ge en djupare inblick i Dylans sinnevärld var att hoppas på för mycket. Trots strålande skådespelarinsatser – inte minst från Cate Blanchett – lyste den etablerade schablonbilden igenom allt för ofta.

Hur som helst är filmens tillhörande soundtrack det bästa coveralbumet som gjorts. Det finns ingen skiva som har spelats mer flitigt i min iPod det senaste halvåret.

Jim James och Calexico – Goin’ To Acapulco

Albumet på Spotify:

Safe (1995)

Dir. Todd Haynes

Question: Is there a better combination in all of modern cinema than Julianne Moore and Todd Haynes?  Let’s hope his collaboration with Kate Winslet for his adaptation of Mildred Pierce can approach his brilliant takes on melodrama, Far From Heaven and Safe.  But Julianne, well, she’s never been better than these two, and that’s meant as stunning praise.

Confesso não ser um conhecedor do cinema de Haynes. É apenas o segundo filme seu que tenho o prazer de assistir. Por coincidência, ambos foram motivados pela mesma paixão: a música.

No caso do anterior (Não Estou Lá) fui atrás de um filme que tratasse do meu ídolo mor Bob Dylan; nesse aqui, atrás de algo de David Bowie, meu segundo músico favorito, atrás apenas, por óbvio, de Dylan. Mas, os filmes não se cruzam somente por essa particularidade musical, mas também em termos estruturais. A sensação que tive é que Velvet é um ensaio para o que viria a seguir com I’m Not There. A narrativa toda quebrada, com misto de passado e presente, fatos misturados com lendas e por aí vai… a questão é que, diferentemente do que vi em I’m Not There, Velvet é um pouco mais instável, às vezes soa bastante confuso, quase como um mosaico de imagens, uma colcha de retalhos, mas reparem, isso não é uma crítica, já que todos os retalhos são interessantes. O fundamental é que o filme explode na tela, bem como o movimento que expõe (a fase Glam do rock, puxado, claro, pelo camaleão) você de fato vive aquele movimento intensamente, assim como o personagem de Christian Bale, que é o repórter encarregado de investigar a vida de Brian Slade (o pseudo Bowie) e que tem sua vida, de certa forma, bastante afetada, pois quando mais jovem era fã de Slade e seu movimento.

Alternando momentos semi-documentais (como em I’m Not There) e ficção-baseada-livremente-em-fatos-e-lendas-”reais”, Velvet Goldmine é uma experiência bastante intrigante e interessante, apesar de bem complexa. A questão que me surge é, se o filme tem o mesmo impacto pra quem não curte/conhece essa fase da música, assim como os envolvidos (Bowie, Iggy Pop e até Lou Reed – inclusive tocando músicas desse último, como Satellite of Love). Costumo dizer que filmes com pré-requisitos são falhos, já que os conhecimentos externos devem somar e não sustentarem toda a bagaça, não sei, pode ser que falhe, mas comigo não falhou, não sei se porque adoro os (pseudo) envolvidos ou porque é um grande cinema.

Na via das dúvidas, grande filme.

3/4

Djonata  Ramos

LES meets UES in matrimony; image courtesy of gossipgirlinsider.com

So, I finally saw last week’s episode of Gossip Girl. For my money, there is nothing surprising about Sonic Youth performing “Starpower” and bassist/guitarist Kim Gordon marrying Rufus Humphrey and Lily van der Woodsen-Bass-etc. The reason, as I will outline chronologically below, is that flirtations with mainstream popular culture is completely in keeping with their career. This cameo isn’t an isolated incident. If anything this network-savvy band pioneered how indie does synergy.

March 1, 1988: Ciccone Youth, a side project formed in 1986 between the band and Minutemen bassist/co-founder Mike Watt releases The Whitey Album. In this configuration, they took part of their name from Madonna’s surname. They also covered some of her songs, including “Into the Groovey” and “Burnin’ Up.” For good measure, they also covered Robert Palmer’s “Addicted to Love.” Were they taking the piss or celebrating 80s blockbuster pop? Maybe both? You decide.

June 26, 1990: Goo is released on DGC, marking their major label debut. 

In 1991, the Goo video album is released, a clip accompanying each song on the album. Among them are “Mildred Pierce” which features Sofia Coppola dressed as Joan Crawford, who starred in the 1945 film noir of same name, “Disappearer,” which was directed by Todd Haynes, and a few clips directed by Tamra Davis, including “Dirty Boots” and “Kool Thing,” which also featured Public Enemy’s Chuck D.

September 17, 1991: Kim Gordon co-produces Pretty on the Inside, Hole’s debut album, released on Caroline, a subsidiary of Virgin.

July 21, 1992: Dirty is released. Two noteworthy music videos come along with it. Actor Jason Lee, then unknown, is featured as a tragic skateboarder in ”100%. The clip was co-directed by Davis and Spike Jonze, who just made some movie about kids and monsters based on a children’s book. Chloë Sevigny, once a Sassy intern, stars in “Sugar Kane,” which also showcases Marc Jacobs’ Perry Ellis grunge collection.

August 9, 1993: “Cannonball” is released as the lead single to The Breeders way-ruling Last Splash. Kim Gordon co-directs the music video with Jonze.

September 14, 1993: Judgment Night is released, along with a successful soundtrack from Epic that pairs alternative/metal acts with rap groups. Sonic Youth and Cypress Hill collaborate on ”I Love You Mary Jane.”

Cover to Judgment Night (Epic, 1993); image courtesy of brianorndorf.com

1994: Kim Gordon creates X-Girl with Daisy von Furth, a sister clothing line to Beastie Boys Mike D’s X-Large collection. I see DJ Tanner wear an X-Girl blue jumper on Full House and want one.

August 25, 1994: Sonic Youth contributes “Genetic” to the My So-Called Life soundtrack. Released on Atlantic, the compilation features other Juliana Hatfield, Afghan Whigs, Daniel Johnston, and (of course) Buffalo Tom, who every fan remembers played a show on Pike Street.

Track list to the My So-Called Life soundtrack (Atlantic, 1994); image courtesy of mscl.com

September 13, 1994: If I Were A Carpenter, a Carpenters tribute album, is released on A&M. An alternafest, acts like American Music Club, Shonen Knife, Babes and Toyland, and Matthew Sweet share time with SY, who cover “Superstar.” In late 2007, the song would make an appearance in the movie Juno.

Cover to If I Were a Carpenter (Rhino, 1994); image courtesy of whizzo.ca

October 27, 1995: CBS airs “The State’s 43rd Annual All-Star Halloween Special,” marking the MTV sketch comedy troupe’s network television debut. Sonic Youth is the musical guest. Few people watch (I am one of them), and CBS decides to pull the plug. 

May 19, 1996: Fox airs ”Homerpalooza,” The Simpsons‘ penultimate episode of its seventh season. In it, Homer goes on tour with Hullabalooza (re: Lollapalooza), taking canons to the gut to the bemusement of thousands of jaded slackers. Several acts made guests appearances, including Smashing Pumpkins, Cypress Hill, Peter Frampton, and Sonic Youth. The band also provides an “alternative” version to Danny Elfman’s iconic theme song, perhaps getting closer in tone to what creator Matt Groening had originally envisioned when suggesting that avant-jazz composer John Zorn write the show’s theme song. The song is later featured on Rhino’s Go Simpsonic With The Simpsons: Original Music From The Television Series compilation.

"I'm so disillusioned!"; image courtesy of taringa.net

June 5, 1996: James Mangold’s debut feature, Heavy, is released in the states. Moore composes the score.

June 1998: I watch the “Kool Thing” video at a Gadzooks in the Mall of America during a trip to Young Life camp in Minnesota.

July 13, 2001: Larry Clark’s Bully is released in theaters. Moore composes the score.

July 25, 2005: Gus Van Sant’s Last Days, the director’s take on Kurt Cobain’s final days, is released in the states. Gordon appears as a record executive based on Danny Goldberg trying to turn the main character’s life around. Moore also served as a music consultant.

May 2006: Former Pavement bassist Mark Ibold joins the band. This has nothing to do with matters of synergy or cross-promotion; I just happen to think he’s kinda cute. He was also featured in a comic strip, but the name escapes me. His catchphrase is something to the effect of “I’m Mark, the bassist from Pavement” but I’m butchering it. My friend Susan told me about it, so maybe she’ll share in the comments section.

Mark Ibold, perhaps around the time he was dating Oksana Baiul and before the Pavement reunion tour; image courtesy of amazon.com

May 9, 2006: Moore and Gordon appear with daughter Coco in “Partings,” the Gilmore Girls‘ season six finale. 

June 15, 2007: Pitchfork reports that SY will be contributing a track to a Starbucks compilation.

November 21, 2007: Todd Haynes’s I’m Not There is released. Gordon’s makes a cameo as folkie Carla Hendricks, who is based on Judy Collins. The casting furthers my suspicion that SY friend Todd Haynes must have been influenced by the band’s fandom of The Carpenters and preoccupation with Karen Carpenter’s tragic struggle with anorexia. They cover “Superstar.” He makes a biopic about Carpenter called Superstar. Coincidence?

September 8, 2008: Choosing not to renew their contract with Geffen, SY sign with indie stalwart Matador.

November 3, 2008: Moore and former Be Your Own Pet frontwoman Jemina Pearl cover The Ramones’ “Sheena Is a Punk Rocker” specifically for “There Might Be Blood,” a season two episode of Gossip Girl. 

February 16, 2009: Gordon debuts a clothing collection called Mirror/Dash for Urban Outfitters.

Is this bad? Hmm, maybe. I suppose it depends on your outlook. I’d say it’s no worse than The Flaming Lips performing on Beverly Hills, 90210 (although, maybe for it to be equal, Wayne Coyne would have to play a short-order cook at the Peach Pit). Beyond paying the bills and circulating their brand, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a fair amount of post-modern, art-school, post-Warholian why-the-hell-not? factoring into all of Sonic Youth’s above-ground forays. Or perhaps they (gasp!) like many of these texts and ventures. 

Perhaps the band knows that dabbling with the mainstream is tricky business. Maybe this explains why Moore (and, to a lesser extent Gordon and guitarist Lee Ranaldo, though not media-shy drummer Steve Shelley) cultivated an authoritative presence in recent music documentaries like Punk: Attitude, Kill Yr Idols, and I Need That Record! It may also have fueled a need for an outlet through which to channel more experimental projects, resulting in the band forming Sonic Youth Recordings in 1996, along with Shelley’s Smells Like label and Moore’s Ecstatic Peace label. In addition, Ranaldo has done a considerable amount of writing, creates installation projects with his wife Leah Singer, has an extensive solo career, and has performed improvisatory film scores as a member of Text of Light.

And, you know. The band is still really good. Even as folks mine their discography or weave them into above-ground mainstream corporate media culture enterprising, they’re still challenging themselves and making great music. Earlier this year, the band released The Eternal, their 16th album. Peaking at #18 on the Billboard charts, it also boasts a consistently great set of songs and a painting by late guitarist John Fahey for its cover. This blurring of art and commerce, for good or for bad, is in keeping with the band and their contributions to music culture.

Dennis Haysbert (Raymond Deagan) and Julianne Moore (Cathy Whitaker)

Going in, the concept felt odd. Unlike Fassbinder (who re-worked Douglas Sirk’s All That Heaven Allows into his own masterpiece, Ali: Fear Eats The Soul), Haynes retains the look and feel of Sirk’s films right down to the smallest detail. The result is neither derivative nor an ironic statement – it’s a loving homage that’s every bit as rich as its sources. And yet even as it keeps all the artifice and heightened drama of those pictures, it’s even more affecting.

The story is a classic portrayal of 1950s suburbia: societal rules suffocates true passions, and it covers them in alluring, manufactured surfaces. Everyone knows their place, to the point that they’re accessories to their own clothes. It’s easy to peg this to a bygone era (and understandably so, considering how impeccably it’s been recreated), but as devoted as the film is to the period’s detail, it never betrays a hint of condescension. Everything is relevant today. Laws and societal conventions may have changed, but the feelings of conformity, the importance given to appearances, and the cost of living in self-denial behind such pretenses have not gone away.

And those costs are all the more tragic by how much is self-inflicted. As tormented as Frank is about his homosexuality, he becomes far more furious when Cathy’s seen around town with Raymond. Believing her innocence is not enough, it’s how they’re perceived that really matters.

Given the importance of appearances to this story, the meticulous production is not only appropriate but very impressive. It’s marvelous to look at, and one gets the sense of the director’s hand in every detail, a misguided notion that’s really a testament to the outstanding collaborative work on display.

Cathy meets Raymond's daughter, Sarah

Sandy Powell deserves recognition for Moore’s costume designs alone. Notice how they hint at an inner kinship between Cathy and Raymond’s daughter, Sarah; how a purple dress can isolate her in her own world, then beautifully blend her in to a new one; and later how they swallow her up in public anonymity. All of this works in tandem with Haynes and Lachman’s virtuosic use of color, which do more to define these characters than the dialogue itself. In two key moments, the startling use of green breaks up the visual and behavioral status quo. In another, Cathy, too distraught to speak, is frozen in a tiny sheet of blue. And later, when she hangs on to a marriage that can only slip away, bursts of autumnal warmth scurry through a shot cast in deep, cold blue. This is possibly the best use of color since three-strip went out of fashion, and it needs to be seen in a good theater.

Cover of Persepolis (Pantheon, 2007); image courtesy of shelflove.wordpress.com

When I saw the film version of Marjane Satrapi’s graphic novel Persepolis, it was a pretty rad time to be a feminist moviegoer. In the last month of 2007 and the first month of 2008, this movie came out, along with Juno and 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. Having just completed a girls’ studies course, I was ecstatic that three different movies, each from a different country, were released with complex, resilient protagonists who were girls and young women.

Two of these movies earned Oscar nominations a few months later. Juno won Best Screenplay. Persepolis was nominated for Best Animated Feature, but unfortunately lost to Ratatouille. 4 Months, which documents the harrowing day of one college student trying to procure an illegal abortion for her roommate during the last years of Nicolae Ceauşescu’s in Romania, won the Palme D’Or at Cannes earlier in 2007, but failed to receive any nominations. For some reason. Perhaps it escaped nomination as a technicality, but I don’t understand why no one, particularly writer-director Cristian Mungiu or lead actress Anamaria Marinca, got any Academy recognition. Perhaps because it lacked the allegorical importance of No Country For Old Men or There Will Be Blood and cut to very real (and tremendously gendered) issues facing real people in the real world, many of whom reside in developing nations. 

But it is really no matter. No Country, There Will Be Blood, Julian Schnabel’s The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, and Todd Haynes’s I’m Not There were but more examples of what a very fine time this particular two-month period was for movies. But 4 Months was easily my favorite movie of that year. The movie whose source material will be the focus of this post was a very close second.

Having seen the movie upon its U.S. release, some context has changed considerably upon revisiting Satrapi’s autobiography about coming of age inside and outside of Iran from the late 70s to the early 90s, a time period where the country witnessed the fall of the Shah (aided by the United States), the swift and crushing oppression of its citizens by Islamic extremists, a devastating eight-year war with Iraq, and the neighboring country’s launch of the Persian Gulf War. In late 2007, we were still living under the Bush Administration, so the country’s positioning as part of the ”axis of evil” was in my mind, but being pretty ignorant about the country’s political history and our involvement with it past the Iran-Contra Affair, Bush’s branding of the country read more as a promise that the United States were, in fact, going to try and spread democracy by force to all of the Middle East, snatching up its real or imagined WMDs and drain its oil resources in the process. And I knew about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and was disgusted by his views on the Holocaust and heartened by the student protests around his adminstration, but was not yet aware of just what a dangerous despot he is.     

This was, of course, before this year’s highly controversial presidential election, which Ahmadinejad “won” by a suspiciously high margain over rival candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, an Independent reformist. At the time, what seemed more present in our minds in the states was what Twitter was doing to help cover and contextualize the civic protests and how quickly mainstream broadcast news was going to incorporate the still-emergent micro-blogging site’s Tweets into their 24-hour cycle, regardless of how accurate they were. 

As a result, I was a little jaded by the “Twitter users coverage of the Iran election is going to change news reporting” angle many seemed to be taking and instead wanted to know more about how the election was fraudulent, why certain people (specifically journalists, protesters, students, and politicians) were being arrested, what the stakes were, who was doing a good job covering this news story, and, most importantly, what circumstances led to the current iteration of Iran. Remembering that local branches of Barnes & Noble were donating proceeds to the Paramount upon purchase last weekend, shilling out my money to the big box chain for the sake of preserving a historical movie theater seemed as a good an opportunity to buy the book that may provide answers.

And, I’ll be honest. Reading the book left me with more questions than anything else (a similar feeling came over me when reading Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns, two books whose timelines stretch past the 70s-90s, but contain a considerable overlap in terms of time with Persepolis, focusing on what was going on with ordinary people in Afghanistan, another contentious Middle Eastern country that borders Iran). It was hard not to check some ugly American tendencies I have toward Islamic traditions — particularly toward its views on marriage, sexuality, gender politics, and dress. At the same time, I was incredulous of how pro-West rhetoric and ideology, alongside our smuggled trinkets of popular culture, could possibly reform a nation, or at least save a person.

Luckily, Satrapi is skeptical of both and, like me and other feminists from all over the world, has a lot to negotiate. She grapples with these issues head-on. She argues with teachers against the physical restrictions and societal double standards that come with the hijab and the burka (sidenote: I know that Faegheh Shirazi, who teaches Middle Eastern Studies at UT and rejects traditional Islamic dress, has written and taught courses on gender and clothing in the Middle East, but any other suggestions for further reading are welcome). She watches her female peers grow up to only want marriage and children, in large part because these are the only things their nation’s leaders believe define their worth. Particularly poignant for this co-habitator, she regrets getting married to a man named Reza because they could not legally live together (or even walk the street) without proof of marriage, dissolving the marriage and leaving for France.

Marjane and friends reject the hijab; image courtesy of rand.org

Satrapi is a smart rebel who reads constantly, thinks clearly, and never backs down from an argument. She yells at authority figures who bully her or deny that there are any political prisoners in Iran after learning about the loss of her grandfather, who was son and prime minister to the ousted king (a tie that Satrapi suggests is not uncommon).

College student Satrapi damns the man; image courtesy of butterfliesandbears.wordpress.com

Luckily for Satrapi, she gets through all of this with the love and support of her politically aware and resistant parents, their friends, and one rad paternal grandma. Not so luckily, she also knows and meets lots of folks who suffered for speaking up, speaking out, or just living in the wrong house during an aerial bombing. Something tells me that many Iranians could recount similar tales of horror.

Satrapi also learns that the ways of the West are not always ideal, either. While a pre-pubescent in Iran, she hangs Iron Maiden posters on her wall her parents smuggle from a vacation in Turkey when the government lifted border restrictions. She defiantly walks around her neighborhood, blaring Kim Wilde’s “Kids in America” from her Walkman while sporting a Michael Jackson pin. But noting that their daughter’s rebelliousness is hardly a phase and that escalating conflict with Iraq could mean the imprisonment or death of their mouthy teen, her parents send her to live with a friend of her mother’s in Vienna.

Still from the film; image courtesy of whatsontv.co.uk

Satrapi finishes high school, barely scraping by as she finds odd jobs, dates dumb boys, takes a lot of drugs, and runs into authority figures who want her to tow the line and behave. She also falls in with a group of radical misfits who dabble with nihilism, Marxism, hair dye, and punk. While Satrapi initially finds a home with these punks and new wave kids, she soon discovers their privilege has made them cowardly, pretentious, self-righteous, entitled, and lazy. Her outsider status also makes her cool, her Austrian peers clearly jealous by what she has seen and experienced without really processing the weight of it between drags off their joints and skims through their copies of the Marx-Engels Reader in their well-appointed bedrooms. It’s small wonder that, when Satrapi finally returns home to Iran after she finishes high school homeless and afflicted with bronchitis, she washes off a punk stencil from her bedroom wall. And while she’s sad that her mother gave away her cassette tapes, she probably wasn’t going to listen to them anyway. She would’ve kept the Kim Wilde tape, however.

So, ultimately, I do feel this revisit of Persepolis helped clarify my feelings about the state of Iran. It also left me with several questions and a need to know more. Ultimately, though, it left me with the sense of universality that exists between people, especially tough, smart women and girls, while at the same time recognizing the particularities that inform their realities. And continues to inform them. Back in June, Satrapi spoke out against the election results with filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalba. Something tells me that her grandmother, who passed away shortly after Satrapi moved to France at the close of the book, would be proud.

Quality time with grandma; image courtesy of rwor.org

STARING JULIANNE MOORE
SAFE, TODD HAYNES, 1995

Speaking of America and advertising…

I really like the commercial I saw the other day for the new Levi’s campaign, called “Go Forth.” The clip was essentially just some images of youthful abandon, half dressed, cavorting around with fireworks and in jeans, and was directed by Cary Fukunaga with an interesting visual flair. You can see it here:

The dialogue comes from an old wax sound recording of Walt Whitman reading four lines from his poem, “America.” Whitman has no problem singing the body electric with the young folks of today, it seems.

There’s another commercial from the from same campaign, entitled “O Pioneers!” It’s not as striking, but it’s still got a good visual style, courtesy of director M. Blash. I don’t know much about Blash, other than the trailer for his upcoming Chloë Sevigny/Jena Malone/Leelee Sobieski-starring indie film, Lying, which both bores and fascinates me, and features a great Joy Division-esque song by John Maus. Here’s Blash’s commerical:

The print aspects of the new campaign, and pretty much all of it except for that single commercial, don’t really interest me. Jeans are jeans and this is America – thanks for reminding me, Levi’s/Walt Whitman – not Russia, and I wonder again and again: How hard do you really have to advertise jeans? The same, I would think, could be said for beer, sodas, and potato chips, right? Whatever, I’m not a marketing major.

That said, I do give Levi’s a little more credit at the advertising game just because they seem to continuously go with a more interesting visual in their commercials. Their ad people keep it hip, keep it interesting. Though it aired easily ten years ago or more, to this day I still remember the levi’s commercial featuring Gael Garcia Bernal and “Playground Love” by Air. Good stuff.

Anyway, this new campaign for Levi’s comes from a firm apparently called Wieden & Kennedy. It’s funny, with all the absorbing of Mad Men and Don Draper speak I’ve been doing lately, I feel like I’m less amazed and blown away by the continuous “indomitable spirit” of this fine country and more by our want and desire to be wined and dined, to be performed to and for, to be good and properly sold on a thing. Our dominion, I’m starting to think, is the desire to conquer not new lands, but not ideals, and to think that we possess them.

MITOLOGIA DE DYLAN

Como tratar da biografia de um artista? Todd Haynes arriscou-se pelo caminho tão tortuoso quanto fértil da abordagem do criador através de sua criação. Como a abertura de uma bíblia, o que encontramos em Não Estou Lá não são fatos, mas relatos, recriações, fabulações.

Não há no filme sentenças de adoração ou reprovação, nem o velho trio ascensão-queda-retorno. Não Estou Lá é um mosaico das facetas artísticas que compõem o mito Bob Dylan. Este não deve ser tocado, nem presente está para sê-lo. Dylan é uma entidade que se mostra em formas diferentes, concretizando sua mitologia menos por sua vida factual, mas por suas peripécias recontadas em poesia e música. Uma espécie de deus.

E se Dylan é uma divindade, não pode ser preso dentro da emulsão, apenas resvalado por alternativas de encenação para lidar com sua persona em constante transformação: atores diferentes o interpretando, texturas de imagem, recriações fabulescas das peripécias. Portanto, especulação, recriação, poesia.

Não Estou Lá, dir. Todd Haynes (Telecine Cult – 23h25)

Seattle PI
Everything is coming together for Lynn Shelton, a local independent filmmaker that some would argue holds the keys to the Seattle film community’s future in her hands. “What we need” waxes George Wing, a Seattle-based screenwriter whose credits include Outsourced and 50 First Dates, “In order to succeed and become a viable market to bring in other projects, are two things: a prolific writer/director that lives and works here and a TV Show.” “More than one ideally,” he adds, “. . .of each.” Wing’s logic is based on the film scene in Austin, Texas which boasts two very big filmmaking fish, Richard Linklater and Robert Rodriguez, as well as in Portland with its two big filmmakers, Gus Van Sant and Todd Haynes. Meanwhile, everyone in Seattle is rooting for Lynn Shelton, an award-winning filmmaker who seems to be carrying on as if unworried, unhurried and undoubtably unfazed. After all, she’s already brought not only three feature-length films into fruition, one being the Sundance success story Humpday, a bro-mance that tests the loving limits of two hetero-bros, she’s also brought a Web-based TV show to our neck of the woods. That show is MTV’s $5 Cover. Now in its second season, Shelton takes over from where the show’s creator Craig Brewer (Hustle & Flow, Black Snake Moan) left off. Reporter Shawn Telford recently sat down with Shelton over tea in Greenwood to discuss the Seattle filmmaking scene and her contributions to it.

Un film che è pura poesia, un capolavoro che a molti risulterà noioso, indigesto o peggio ancora incomprensibile. In effetti è necessaria una preventiva conoscenza del mondo fantastico di Bob Dylan, perché questa è la strampalata biografia della sua strampalata vita.

Presentato nel 2007 alla 64°  Mostra del Cinema di Venezia, dove ha vinto il Leone d’argento, I’m Not There presenta un cast spettacolare, fra cui: Cate Blanchett (vincitrice della coppa Volpi e del Golden Globe per questa interpretazione), Heath Ledger, Richard Gere, Christian Bale, Markus Karl Franklin, Ben Whishaw, Charlotte Gainsbourg e Michelle Williams.

È un’opera simbolista questo film, dettagli nascosti e ricercati, citazioni sublimi e una perfetta analisi della società americana degli anni Sessanta-Settanta. La struttura del film è costruita su sei diversi aspetti della vita del cantastorie, interpretati ognuno da un attore diverso. Persino nell’affidare loro il nome il regista Todd Haynes non lascia nulla al caso, “scomodando” Woody Guthrie, forse il cantante folk di protesta più famoso di sempre, Billy The Kid e Arthur Rimbauld. Haynes non tralascia nemmeno i dettagli veritieri sulla vita di Dylan, fra cui i tanti incontri con Allen Ginsberg o il rapporto di odio/amore con la factory girl Edie, che nel film diventa Coco Rivington. Non mancano nemmeno le donne della sua vita, Alice su tutte.

La colonna sonora non poteva che essere tratta dall’immenso patrimonio musicale di Bob Dylan, affiancando i pezzi originali a cover realizzate ad hoc da artisti di grande calibro quali i Sonic Youth, Jeff Tweedy, Antony and the Johnsons, Cat Power e gli stessi attori protagonisti del film.

Magari guardarlo una sola volta non sarà sufficiente, ma se non altro potrete ascoltare       davvero della buona musica oltre che vedere all’opera uno dei migliori registi americani degli ultimi anni. Per quanto mi riguarda lo considero un capolavoro, arricchito dalle interpretazioni magistrali della Blanchett e della Gainsbourg.

e i gatti sul tetto, pazzi d’amore, gridano nelle grondaie.. e sono io ad essere pronto..pronto ad ascoltare.. mai stanco.. mai triste.. mai colpevole..

I have come to the loose end of a certain unsatisfactory conclusion in my reading of Spinoza, as aided by various posts and comments from Kvond at Frames/Sing. My dissatisfaction led me to Todd Hayne’s SAFE. The film is about a woman (Carol White) with “environmental illness.” Carol White reacts severely to chemicals that pervade the suburban Southern California environment in which she lives. So she moves to Wrenwood which is chemical free and for people in her condition, a condition that may perhaps be called (as it is suggested in the film) being “allergic to the 20th century.” Wrenwood is more than just a retreat, it is a new age community, (spiritually) led by a kind of new age priest Peter Dunning. Peter Dunning says that the cause and cure are inextricably related to each other, and in turn to the negative feelings the sufferers project toward society.

 As Kvond puts it in this very helpful post, Spinoza wants for us to understand that “Blaming (and overly praising) things external to us is largely a mistake.” Contiguous, in my mind, is this point: “Everything outside of us has an explanation (causes), but an explanation which we can never be completely clear about.” Also relevant, but slightly less so; “When we’re wrong, we’re only partially wrong”).

Could you imply from these that blaming things internal to us is largely a correct thing to do? If these go wrong, and we feel pain, should we ask ourselves, “Am I doing this to myself?, what am I doing wrong?” These are the questions that Carol White comes to ask, who ends up isolated (even from the chemically safe environment of the retreat) in a kind of igloo, looking at her reflection in the mirror chanting, “I love you, I love you, I love you.”

NOTE: We should clarify, however, what “external” and “internal” mean in Spinoza. Ultimately, these terms could only every be used confusedly, because things are only separated from each other by the imagination. “External,” for Spinoza, means that which we take to be independent of the mind, or more precisely, what we imagine as outside of our illusory unified ego.)

Spinoza does ask us to look inward, but not to assign blame. He would like for us to focus on our understanding, to build a clearer conception of our material reality, in so doing freeing ourselves to act. However, I would say that in assuming that our thoughts about what we initially take to be the cause of our sadness is wrong, and that our very thoughts are what causes the passions in the first place, we are practicing a kind of self-blame.

Todd Hayne’s SAFE is a film about what Spinoza would call the “vacillations of the spirit.” Carol persuaded to situate herself on precarious balancing beam with self-love on one side and self-blame on the other. In one scene there is a small gathering around a circle. Peter Dunning (the new age spirit leader) is asking for testimonies from everyone. “Why did they get sick?” He gets around to Nell, who’s husband had just died from the illness, “Why did you get sick?” She evades the question.

 He asks, “How did you feel?”

 “I just wanted to get a gun, and blow off the heads of everyone who got me like this.”

 “Now, nobody out there made you sick, you know that. The only person that can make you get sick is you. Right? Whatever the sickness. If our immune system is damaged its because we have allowed it to be through exactly the kind of anger that your showing us now. Does that make sense?”

 At this point many of the people in the gathering are crying, or extending comfort each other. Joining hands with his neighbor, Peter goes on to say, “Sometimes all I see is the hatred and frailty. People’s cruelty to one another, cruelty to themselves, and I realize how lucky I am. How blessed.”

Spinoza cannot (to my mind) be read simply as advocating sustained analysis of the causes of our sadness and happiness as opposed to acting out on our initial impulse. This would be all fine and good, but there is something more that Spinoza is up to.

Spinoza says that loving and hating are results of our pains and our pleasures connected with external causes. According to Spinoza, we should detach the power our affections give us from the external things we attribute them to, and reattach them in the pursuit of an ever clearer and more adequate conception of the world. This is a process in which we come to have more adequate ideas about the causes of our passions. Part five of Espinoza’s Ethics deals, apropos to my concern, with attaining human freedom. In book V p. II, Spinoza says, “If we remove a disturbance of the spirit, or emotion, from the thought of an external cause, and unite it to other thoughts, then will the love or hatred towards that external cause, and also the vacillations of spirit which arise from these emotions, be destroyed.” But with the removal of the idea of the external cause of sadness, with the implied movement inwards focusing on internal causes, the external cause of sadness is still there. Nothing is solved, the true causes of pain aren’t made clearer but are obfuscated. Oh, all that out there (society), that’s just nature, and you can’t hate it. Look within, love your own thought process and free yourself from the chaos of the outside.

 Haynes: “The reason new age thought is so big among AIDS and cancer patients is because it creates a feeling of comprehension, a way to control the sense of meaninglessness that grips the lives of the terminally ill. But within that control these doctrines of inner health assign to their sufferers the ultimate responsibility both for becoming ill and for regaining their health. And since the potential for all illness and all wellness lies within the individual, society gets off scott free.”

 Addendum: Hopefully, I will come to see a different picture of Spinoza. I still haven’t read some things which Kvond suggested I read about Spinoza and the affects, and Spinoza and politics. But I can’t seem to shake the idea of the proximity of new age thought to that of Spinoza, and how it enforces the idea of the in-curability of self and society.

Another addendum: Please read ensuing comments if you have any similar reservations about Spinoza’s political possibilities.

Bon, j’ai écrit “Drames” pour les opposer aux comédies, en gros, parce que je ne savais pas quoi écrire comme genre. Ne vous inquiétez pas, ce ne sont pas des films à kleenex! Beurk! En général, j’haïs ça. Prenons-les plutôt comme des films américains indépendants (parce qu’ensuite, on se déplace.) Comme je vous ai déjà parlé longtemps d’Ed Wood, j’ai décidé de le laisser de côté cette fois-ci.

- Happiness

Il s’en brasse, de la marde, dans ce film au titre plutôt ironique. Je me rappelle mon premier contact avec Happiness; à l’époque, mes parents étaient abonnés au TV Hebdo (bien oui, on n’avait pas l’internet!) et je lisais tououououotes les critiques de films, et un jour, il y a eu le résumé d’Happiness dans la chronique des sorties en vidéocassette (bien oui, ça fait longtemps! lol) Alors, qu’est-ce que ça dit à mon sujet lorsque j’ai été prise de l’envie folle de louer ce film où se côtoient un pédophile, un pervers qui fait des coups au téléphone, une obèse meurtrière, un Russe voleur, une chanteuse folk névrosée, une femme au foyer en pleine dénégation…? Happiness est là pour nous montrer la décadence de la vie américaine, et disons que ce n’est pas à coups de subtilités. En fait, le tout est mené par un humour noir qui est, à mon avis, absolument hilarant. Paradoxalement, ce film me met véritablement de bonne humeur lorsque je le regarde. Mais disons que cela exige tout de même une certaine qualité d’abstraction, parce que si on réfléchit quelque peu au propos du film, c’est sûr qu’on a envie de se tirer une balle. Coeurs sensibles… je ne dirais pas “s’abstenir”, mais sortir votre côté le plus sarcastique et grinçant. Enjoy.

Du même réalisateur que Palindromes.

- Secretary

Encore une histoire de critique de films sortis sur DVD (oui, Secretary est plus récent qu’Happiness), je ne sais plus si c’était dans le TV Hebdo ou ailleurs… Cette fois-ci, c’est la pochette qui “fesse”, sans mauvais jeu de mots, puisqu’elle représente un derrière féminin en jupe bien dressé en l’air, prêt à recevoir la fessée. Eh bien, je me montre décidément sous mon meilleur jour en vous exposant ce qui m’accroche dans une description de film. On dirait que j’ai l’esprit mal tourné! Donc, Secretary décrit une relation sadomasochiste entre une secrétaire et son patron, mais relation qui n’est pas uniquement centrée sur la sexualité. En fait, il s’agit d’une histoire d’amour égalitaire, où chaque partie trouve son compte et ce qu’elle recherche. Ce film a révélé Maggie Gyllenhaal, qui a fait parfois des choix étranges dans sa carrière, mais que j’aime beaucoup en général. Honnêtement, je ne crois pas avoir rencontré quelqu’un qui n’avait pas aimé ce film.

- Velvet Goldmine

J’ai vu ce film des milliers de fois! En tant que grande fan de David Bowie, je ne pouvais pas ne pas aimer ce film qui s’inspire de sa carrière et surtout d’une rumeur de relation homosexuelle avec Iggy Pop (certains vous diront que ce n’est pas une rumeur!) Le très beau Jonathan Rhys Meyer incarne Brian Slade, personnage inspiré de Bowie, et Ewan McGregor se met en nu en Curt Wild, réincarnation d’Iggy Pop. C’est un film esthétiquement magnifique, avec une direction artistique irréprochable. Plus on le regarde et plus on replonge dans les images de la carrière de Bowie (surtout dans les années 60 et 70), plus on voit à quel point ils ont mené leurs recherches. Le scénario est aussi très intéressant, assez complexe. Pour ma part, j’ai regardé le film 2 ou 3 fois avant de tout saisir (mais depuis, on peut le regarder sur DVD, et je crois honnêtement que les sous-titres anglais aident). En fait, le canevas est calqué sur Citizen Kane: un journaliste enquête sur la vie d’une star de la pop mort sur scène il y a 10 ans. Plusieurs des entretiens du journaliste (Christian Bale) sont calqués sur ceux de Kane: le vieil agent en fauteuil roulant, l’ex-femme alcoolique dans un boui-boui désert. Vraiment un film riche, avec une trame sonore entraînante si on aime le glam-rock et cette époque. Le réalisateur Todd Haynes nous a depuis donné un autre film sur la musique, le encore plus beau et encore plus complexe I’m not there.

- Mysterious Skin

Ce film est véritablement une belle découverte, qui demeure encore peu vue, je crois. Pour ma part, j’ai détesté le seul autre film du réalisateur Gregg Araki que j’avais vu, soit The Doom Generation. Je pourrais m’étendre pendant des heures sur pourquoi j’ai haï ce film. Alors, j’étais vraiment hésitante à regarder Mysterious Skin. J’aimais la pochette, et j’étais intriguée par les acteurs: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, qui est bien cute et que j’avais déjà remarqué ailleurs, et surtout Michelle Trachtenberg, qui sort tout droit d’un film de Disney, The Ice Princess, et qui a aussi joué un rôle secondaire dans Six Feet Under. Une très jolie fille. Je me suis donc lancé et j’ai découvert un excellent film, visuellement très beau et plein de sensibilité, ce qui semble être une première pour Araki, d’après ce que j’ai lu par la suite. Deux jeunes garçons ont tous deux été agressés par leur coach de baseball étant très jeunes. Adolescents, ils ont chacun leur manière de sublimer leur vécu; le premier devient un prostitué, l’autre refoule tout souvenir et est convaincu d’avoir été enlevé par des extraterrestres. Puis, ils seront amenés à confronter leur passé… Selon mes souvenirs, on ne voit pas de scènes traumatisantes de l’agression, mais il y a d’autres scènes violentes et tout le film est évidemment très chargé émotivement.  Choisissez donc votre soirée pour vous lancer, mais ne passez pas à côté.

- Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Je ne m’éterniserai pas sur ce film, puisque je pense que pas mal tout le monde l’a vu ou entendu parler. Sinon, qu’est-ce que vous faites encore ici? Ruez-vous sur ce film. 1- Jim Carrey peut être un bon acteur. 2- Kate Winslet est magnifique. 3- Ce scénario est un chef-d’oeuvre. Il fait de la mémoire un espace qu’on peut investir, et qu’on peut même effacer. Il table sur les processus inconscients, la sublimation, etc. La mise en images est aussi géniale. C’est à voir absolument.

movie of the day

En 2002, le meilleur film de l’année selon les Oscars:

CHICAGO

Pourquoi ça a gagné: Parce que c’est le grand retour de la COMÉDIE MUSICALE! (Merci Moulin Rouge!) Un genre qu’ils ont toujours beaucoup aimé. Parce que c’est réussi, que la transposition à l’écran est très adroite, que les numéros musicaux ne sont pas indignes de Bob Fosse, que le dialogue crépite, que les acteurs sont parfaitement choisis, que ça met le sourire. Parce que les frères Weinstein ont pour habitude de menacer les votants avec un fusil à pompe pour qu’ils cochent la bonne case.

Mon choix:

LOIN DU PARADIS

Pourquoi: Parce que derrière le côté délibérément artificiel de son exercice de style à la Douglas Sirk, Todd Haynes explore un monde de préjugés, de tabous, et de faux-semblants intemporels avec une finesse peu commune. Et il le fait en submergeant nos yeux et notre coeur. Carrément sublime.

Meilleur Réalisateur:

Roman Polanski
pour Le Pianiste

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce que la Shoah. Parce que BIOPIC! Parce que c’est Roman Polanski, et qu’il n’avait encore jamais gagné d’Oscar, malgré quelques petits chefs d’oeuvres. Parce que le film est superbe. Parce que, même si ce n’est pas son histoire, la sienne n’est pas si éloignée. Parce que c’est un film important. Parce que le monde entier a pleuré devant ce film.

Mon choix:

Todd Haynes
pour Loin du Paradis

Pourquoi: Parce que quand le fond naît de la forme, on a atteint l’essence du cinéma.

Meilleur Acteur:

Adrien Brody
dans Le Pianiste

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce qu’il joue quelqu’un qui a vraiment existé (BIOPIC!). Parce que tout le film repose sur lui. Parce qu’il est excellent. Parce qu’il a fait pleurer tout le monde. Parce que les personnages des favoris Day-Lewis et Nicholson n’étaient pas des plus sympathiques et qu’aux Oscars on aime bien les personnages sympathiques. Parce qu’il était le seul parmi ses compétiteurs (Day-Lewis, Nicholson, Caine, Cage) à ne pas être déjà oscarisé.

Mon choix:

Jack Nicholson
dans About Schmidt

Pourquoi: Parce qu’il n’a peut-être jamais été aussi bon, et quand on s’appelle Jack Nicholson, ça veut dire beaucoup.

Meilleure actrice:

Nicole Kidman
dans The Hours

Pourquoi elle a gagné: Parce que Moulin Rouge et Les Autres l’année précédente. Parce qu’elle joue Virginia Woolf, écrivain légendaire qui a vraiment existé. Parce qu’elle s’est mis un faux nez OH on la reconnaît plus! Quelle actrice! Parce qu’elle est belle et qu’elle s’est déguisée en moche, ça c’est une actrice courageuse qui se sacrifie pour son art. Parce que malgré ces artifices ostentatoires, son intensité fait vibrer le film. Parce que sans même la voir, sa voix nous donne envie de pleurer des les premières minutes.

Mon choix:

Julianne Moore
dans Loin du Paradis

Pourquoi: Parce qu’au-delà de la stylisation, elle suggère avec une précision presque subliminale la profusion d’émotions qui s’entrechoquent derrière les yeux de cette femme parfaitement composée. Parce que Safe, Boogie Nights, The Big Lebowski, Magnolia, The Hours.

Meilleur second rôle masculin:

Chris Cooper
dans Adaptation.

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce que le rôle est démentiel et qu’il fait des merveilles avec. Parce qu’il parvient à dominer une distribution qui inclut Nicolas Cage en grande forme et MERYL STREEP. Parce qu’il est constamment surprenant, et que ça ne ressemble à rien de ce qu’il avait fait auparavant. Parce que American Beauty. Parce qu’il en a mangé du troisième rôle avant d’arriver là.

Mon Choix:

Chris Cooper
dans Adaptation.

Pourquoi: Pour exactement les mêmes raisons.

Meilleur second rôle féminin:

Catherine Zeta-Jones
dans Chicago

Pourquoi elle a gagné: Parce qu’elle chante et danse comme une star de musical (qui l’eut cru?), qu’elle est belle comme une star du Golden Age, qu’elle est férocement drôle et qu’elle brille de mille feux dans ce rôle qui lui va comme un gant, bref, qu’elle déménage. Parce que tous les vieux shnocks de l’académie bandent pour elle.

Mon choix:

Catherine Zeta-Jones
dans Chicago

Pourquoi: Pour les mêmes raisons. Sauf la dernière.

Not too long ago, I was thinking about something to watch. I have so many different media options that it can be overwhelming. I have a nice collection of the somewhat outdated media known as the Digital Video Disc (aka DVD) filling most of my room and other areas of my apartment. Sometimes I would rather just turn on the National Geographic channel instead of trying to decide whether to watch “Ashes and Diamonds” from the Andrej Wajda Criterion collection or compare the Artificial Eye versions of Pather Panchali or the very expensive out-of-print version by Sony. I don’t know what I wanted to do but this is what happens when you have options.

Instead of getting up, I thought heading to Rocket Video on La Brea, which is a post by itself. Rocket Video is the best video store in Los Angeles and on Thursdays and Saturdays, they have 2-for-1 rentals for ‘members’. I sometimes do this when I can’t decide of what to pull out from the dvd shelf. For those that don’t know of Rocket, google:  “Rocket” or just go here. For those with some so-so knowledge of the Hollywood landscape, it’s located across the hot-dog stand that constantly has a line that goes around the place. I wonder if those at the end of the line know that they will be waiting there for 2 hours to pay $3 for a hot dog?

A couple of friends come over before I can get my lazy self to get up and for one reason or another, start to talk about David Cross. Maybe it was a reference to Cross as ‘Tobias‘ on “Arrested Development” but I don’t remember. All I know is that the conversation veered into the area of absurdity when someone mentioned that Todd Haynes could have got a better actor to play Allen Ginsberg in “I’m not There”. This person did not have a compelling reason why they believed this, who would have been a better replacement or why would they be so compelled about it that they would bring it up randomly. If I was trying to defend that claim I would have said that all people that have seen A.D. forever link Cross to Tobias and it’s not Cross we see as Ginsburg. It’s Tobias. Lets not forget that Tobias was an aspiring actor.

the best way to solve this problem was to do a direct comparison. We watched the clip from “I’m not There” and we GIS’d (google image search) Ginsburg. It’s pretty clear that Haynes could not have had a better ringer for Ginsburg than Cross. Find a professional better and email me. The next step was to find a clip of Ginsburg. The only thing we could think of off the top was the clip of him in the alley in that Bob Dylan music video.

That wasn’t good enough. We decided to watch, “The Life and Times of Allen Ginsburg” which was showing on Joost.

(This is where the story really begins)

For all those familiar with Hulu, you may know of Joost. It’s not as big but it’s sort of the same animal. For those that are not familiar of this animal, both Hulu and Joost are websites where you can watch many different types of video and film (for free). It’s essentially what will compete/replace cable/satellite television— since the only thing you need is a broadband internet connection.

I think many people would dump their paid cable bills if they weren’t relegated to their computer screens. Well they aren’t! They may just not know. For those that are into collecting TV toys, there is the fun Apple TV product. If you own this device, you can view any of your media in the music playback giant, Itunes.  With Itunes receiving most of the new digital download format, The Apple TV is worth the investment if you download a lot of media from the Itunes store. As of right now, Apple has a lockdown on those downloads you purchase so you either have to watch it on your TV or the Apple TV.  If that’s not enough to convince you, your amazing Apple TV has the ability to Boxee’d.

Boxee (from their website) is : On a laptop or connected to an HDTV, boxee’s free software lets you navigate all your personal movies, TV shows, music and photos, as well as streaming content from websites like MLB, Netflix, Pandora, Last.fm, and Flickr from one screen with a remote.

So if you combine the Two: Apple TV and Boxee, you can watch “The Life and Times of Allen Ginsburg” on your tv, as I did. And so much more and you can debate with your friends about various media. There’s also Plex. But that’s for another time.

here’s some boring video of playing with the boxee interface:

My first exposure to Todd Haynes, let’s see how this turns out!

Written By: Todd Haynes
Directed By: Todd Haynes

The amoral approach to film making is often looked down upon. It’s felt that you have to take a stance, that to simply show the events as they play out somehow condones said actions. If ever there was a movie for people to look at and say, “Oh, I get it now”, Far From Heaven is that movie. It doesn’t take a stance once, on racism, homosexuality, family life, marriage or 1950’s culture. It presents these characters and this time period as they happen and the issues faced are a natural part of the films place and time.

Of course it didn’t surprise me to see some reviewers in an uproar over the fact that Far From Heaven vilifies 1950’s values. To those people, the ones who still believe that somehow and in some way the 1950’s were a better time when the world was clearly a better place I say it’s time to take off the rose colored glasses. By taking an amoral approach Far From Heaven exposes the truth of that point in American history better than any morality play could. We have advanced as a society, some for the good some for the bad, but the 1950’s in America were far from perfect, in a lot of ways they were just as scary as today can be.

I can’t claim to be familiar with the works of Douglas Sirk, therefore the idea of Far From Heaven as a recreation of his style of film making doesn’t resonate with me. However, I can clearly see the 1950’s film and TV aesthetic at work. It isn’t a homage, but rather it is a full fledged recreation. The people are genuine, the visuals are genuine, the setting is genuine, the dialogue is genuine, the film feels like a genuine 1950’s production. Based on what I have heard about Sirk I have always wanted to explore his films, and Far From Heaven only enhances that desire, but at the same time I hope that people watch Far From Heaven and realize it is its own picture and needn’t be tied directly to the works of anyone else.

Talking about the set design seems redundant, but I shall briefly touch on that aspect of Far From Heaven. It isn’t just the set design though, it’s the way the film is shot, the colors used and the atmosphere the film is drenched with. Far From Heaven is a vibrant film, it is a film with one set after another that is finely detailed and authentic. At the same time the entire atmosphere of Far From Heaven is one of fake sincerity. Based on what my relatives have told me of the 1950’s this rings incredibly true, no one had any problems because it was better to be fake happy than honestly depressed. Far From Heaven is fake in the best of ways, yet another instance of how Todd Haynes has perfectly constructed his film.

Their are other interesting factors, such as the acting or the willingness to allow Dennis Quaid to disappear for giant chunks at a time as would befit a 1950’s husband and father. Alas, I have babbled on long enough. Far From Heaven is a beautiful picture, but it is also an honest picture. Offering a portrait of a time and place that we would rather not know about. Far From Heaven looks beneath all the formality and niceties to get to the heart of the time in question and going along for that journey was a true joy.

Rating:

****

Cheers,
Bill

Facto mundo: Todd Haynes loves himself some classic Hollywood, and it shows in every frame of his Douglas Sirk homage, Far From Heaven.  Just look at this image of the always ravishing Julianne Moore and try not to have a Technicolorgasm:

PERFECTION.  For that reason alone I’d trust this man above all other people (save for Guy Madden) to make a new adaptation of James M. Cain’s Mildred Pierce.  As it served the basis for the Joan Crawford melodrama masterpiece of the same name, one would think that I should be vying for the throne of Queen of All Bitches at such a thought, but Todd Haynes writing and directing a remake of Mildred Pierce is something I can really get behind.  Yes, Mildred Pierce is a sacred cinematic text for us gays, but an openly-gay director with that sort of eye for color has got me absolutely giddy at the thought.

But who shall be his Mildred?  Let’s take a peek:

Oh!  OH!  Kate Winslet shall be our new Mildred?  This is simply too delicious for words!  While I go calm myself down, here’s the story from Variety:

Kate Winslet is attached to “Mildred Pierce,” a miniseries adaptation based on the James M. Cain novel that Todd Haynes is writing and directing. Sources said HBO is the lead contender to get the series, but pay web sources said no deal has been struck.

Cain’s tale was famously turned into the 1945 film that won Joan Crawford an Oscar for the lead role of a bored housewife who gets into the restaurant business, an enterprise that leads to backstabbing, romance and murder.

If Haynes is working off Cain’s novel as the source material, his Mildred Pierce likely won’t end up being something along the lines of Mildred Pierce Is Far From Heaven.  I certainly hope he pays homage to both the iconic film and its even more iconic star, but he largely has carte blanche with his adaptation.  Kate Winslet’s casting further secures that this is his vision as opposed to a lazy, studio-mandated remake.

Kate Winslet’s has the glamour of Classic Hollywood, and she’s indubitably a true talent, but there’s something unexpected about her casting that really adds verve to what this new Mildred might be.  She won’t be playing it like Joan Crawford played the role.  For the Crawford fan in me, I’ll admit this to be weirdly unnerving.  Can Mildred Pierce be Mildred Pierce without Joan?  The rational part of me says, “I don’t know.”  The really gay part of resoundingly screeches, “NEVER!!!”  It’s a conundrum.

That said, the Kate Winslet fan in me finds said question terribly exciting.  She had me at Titanic, and she’s had me ever since.  I probably should remain more skeptical (at least until the first trailer, at which point I’ll be reduced to piercing shrieks of enthusiasm), but I feel strangely confident that Todd Haynes and Kate Winslet will make their Mildred Pierce into something truly fabulous in its own right.

Much love to Brynn for the news.

Front and back cover of the official 1975 "Basement Tapes" album

Of all the big-name old-school rock critics, Greil Marcus is one I had always intended to get around to but never had.  Given my newfound free time, I decided now would be a good time to start.  While several of Marcus’s books intrigued me – I’m already familiar with Lipstick Traces just from other people’s citations – I settled on Invisible Republic (aka The Old, Weird America) because of its focus on Bob Dylan and The Band’s The Basement Tapes.  The album The Basement Tapes draws from a series of recordings made in 1967 that were never intended to be released, but which nevertheless trickled out to the public through bootlegs (including the first ever rock bootleg, 1969’s Great White Wonder) and cover versions (most famously Manfred Mann’s “The Mighty Quinn” and The Byrds’ “You Ain’t Goin’ Nowhere”).  In 1975, The Band’s Robbie Robertson compiled some of the best basement recordings, as well as some Band-only, non-Dylan demos, to create the officially-released album called The Basement Tapes.  The result is my favorite album, for the following reasons:

1)      Not only is every song on the album good, but it has one of the highest percentages of gobsmackingly great songs of any album I’ve heard: “This Wheel’s on Fire,” “Crash on the Levee (Down in the Flood),” “You Ain’t Going Nowhere,” “Too Much of Nothing,” “Open the Door, Homer,” “Tears of Rage,” “Orange Juice Blues (Blues for Breakfast),” and “Yazoo Street Scandal,” just for a start.  The only other album I can think of that comes close to having as many 5-star tracks on it is Singles Going Steady – which, like The Basement Tapes, is a compilation, albeit one that’s not your standard greatest hits package.

2)      Not only does it feature two of my all-time favorite artists (Bob Dylan and The Band), but it has them working together and bringing out the best in each other.  As much as I love Blonde on Blonde and The Band, neither has quite the heft to be my favorite album.  The Basement Tapes does.

3)      The songs are based in traditional American forms of music – blues, country and, most essentially, that mysterious backwoods folk, the type of which formed the basis of the Harry Smith’s Anthology of American Folk Music compilation.  This genre of music has fascinated me since before I can remember.  Was it from spending my summers, age 10 to 17, at camp in Appalachia? Was it from my grandmother, singing old songs as we washed dishes in her small-town (now rural) Mississippi kitchen? Or was it, as Marcus implies, because these songs dwell in the collective unconscious, written by no one and thus belonging to everyone, harkening back to the weird old days before nationalization and the advent of frequent travel smoothed out all the wrinkles in regional American culture?

4)      Compounding the mystery of the old folk songs is the mystery of the basement tapes themselves.  The theories of why Dylan collaborated with The Band in their house after his near-fatal motorcycle accident, choosing to record some songs and not others, are too many to list here.  But other mysteries abound: why did Dylan start over with a fresh batch of songs for John Wesley Harding, recorded only a few months later? How was Dylan able to hammer out so many great songs, seemingly off the cuff? Why was “I’m Not There (1956),” one of the standouts not only among the basement recordings but in all of Dylan’s catalog, only ever recorded in one take and never played again in his entire career? Why are the lyrics, despite being nearly indecipherable and frequently nonsense, so compelling? On top of these questions, the low-fi and often distorted sound of the recordings (especially the ones not overdubbed for the official Basement Tapes album), some of which break off early or start in media res, make the songs sound older than they are, and like they were piped in from another dimension.  The recordings owe less to Highway 61 Revisited and more to Robert Johnson’s old warbled singles, or even the supernatural eeriness of the earliest recording of the human voice.  Listening to the basement tapes, it’s hard to believe that Bob Dylan is still alive, walking the same earth as the rest of us (not to mention Robbie Robertson and Garth Hudson).  But counteracting the ghostliness is the private glimpse into how Dylan constructs his songs and the charm of listening to him and The Band goofing off and revisiting their influences.

What I hadn’t expected before reading Invisible Republic was how much Marcus would focus not only on the official Basement Tapes album, but the entire body of recordings made at the same time, most of which remain available only on bootleg albums.  I was aware of these other recordings, but it was Marcus’s writing that influenced me to finally seek them out.  Yesterday morning was spent continuously listening to the first two volumes of The Genuine Basement Tapes, as I compared what I heard with Marcus’s “Discography” notes and with the official versions of those songs I already knew.

After hours of being seeping in Dylanalia, the obvious choice of movie was I’m Not There, Todd Haynes’s non-biopic portrait of Bob Dylan’s various personae.  Cate Blanchett’s portrayal of Dylan as Jude (The Mighty?) Quinn got the most acclaim when the movie was released, but I thought that segment suffered from being too literal in places, such as the direct quotes from Dont Look Back and the overlong enactment of “Ballad of a Thin Man.”  (The machine gunning at Newport was pretty cool though, and “See ya later, Allen Ginsberg” was a nice subtle counter-reference to the forced “Just like a woman!”) Instead, I was most drawn to the lyrical, almost abstract segment featuring Richard Gere as an aging William Bonney.  Judging from reviews, this seems to be the most misunderstood segment of the movie – due in large part, I suppose, to being drawn so heavily from the basement tapes (as well John Wesley Harding, Desire and, of course, Dylan’s appearance in Sam Peckinpah’s Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid).  This segment also is the one densest with references, from characters named Homer and Mrs. Henry, to town denizens who looked like they walked straight off the cover of The Basement Tapes (see above), to young “Woodie Guthrie’s” exclamation “This is chicken town!” But in addition to drawing from Dylan’s work, the portrayal of fictional Riddle County in I’m Not There owes a lot to Marcus’s mythologized description of Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina in Invisible Republic – the year-‘round Halloween store was a particularly nice get, and one I wouldn’t have picked up on had I not read that chapter the night before.  (Marcus is thanked in the movie’s end credits, so I’m not just making baseless connections based on the fact that I happened to read Invisible Republic and saw I’m Not There in the same week.)

Invisible Republic, like I’m Not There, opts for a fractured approach to its subject.  The basement tapes are little more than a starting point for Marcus to branch off and talk about Harry Smith, Dock Boggs, the Child ballads and anything else pertaining to the titular “invisible republic” that influenced Dylan yet also exists apart from him.  There’s no coherent, consecutive narrative to be constructed out of something that’s undocumented, that’s invisible.  This “old, weird America,” still extant but now barely visible, is as ultimately unknowable as the nature of the basement tapes, or Bob Dylan himself.

Udah beberapa kali gue mencoba untuk menonton I’m Not There, a film by Todd Haynes.., tetapi ko ga pernah berhasil. Padahal moodnya udah di set untuk berfantasi ke alam lain.., hihihihi ni film memang aneh bin ajaib, permainan warna dan B/W nya kental banget. Plot2 yang selalu berpindah dalam adegan yg tidak lazim membuat gue selalu berakhir tertidur di sekitar menit ke 60.

Apa lagi yah yg harus di set untuk menikmati film ini dari awal sampai akhir..??

Again, as Orson Welles said, “Of Course everything looks better in black and white”. I would say that’s an accurate paraphrase of how many film lovers feel about the film image on screen.

The average viewer probably is not too fond of seeing things in black-and-white. As a co-worker said, “Hey! It’s not the 1950s anymore”. Actually maybe I said that as if a co-worker said that to me. Some of the best cinematography to me is in black-and-white.

Some of my favourites include “The Third Man“, “Raging Bull” and “8 1/2“. You rarely find contemporary films that would dedicate even a few seconds to black-and-white cinematography but here’s a film that’s recent: 2007’s “I’m Not There” by Todd Haynes, cinematography by Edward Lachman. I thought it looked amazing and made me yearn for more films to be shot in black-and-white.

I guess I’ll have to shoot my first film in black-and-white. If I could only have it look like this film.

Here’s a clip with the great “Positively Fourth Street” as the audio track. There’s some stock footage in there, but still….. black-and-white is great!

Notorious, il film appena uscito nelle sale che racconta la storia del rapper newyorchese Notorious B.I.G. è solo l’ultimo di tanti biopic che raccontano vita, morte e (relativi) miracoli di grandi della musica pop e rock (in questo caso del rap). Il biopic rock è una di quelle operazioni sinergiche che tanto piacciono all’industria: il film su una star della musica parla di qualcuno di molto noto e spesso molto amato, e quindi si presume un buon incasso al botteghino. D’altro canto, l’industria musicale si prepara a vendere colonne sonore e ristampe e a godere del rinnovato interesse intorno a quel personaggio. Quanto ci vorrà prima che annuncino un biopic su Michael Jackson? Nel frattempo Notorious, diretto da George Tillman jr., non si discosta da quelli che sono stati gli ultimi biopic musicali. Il film sul defunto rapper è un teatrino fatto di infanzia difficile, dipendenze, cadute e redenzioni, amori e corna. Una struttura da soap opera che ricorda molto quella di Ray, il biopic di Taylor Hackford sulla vita di Ray Charles. Anche quel film presenta una serie di schemi – gli amori, i tradimenti e la dipendenza da droghe – che tendono a reiterarsi in maniere piuttosto schematica, finendo per annoiare. Hackford ha qualche buona idea, come quella di enfatizzare i suoni, visto che per un cieco le orecchie sono gli occhi, e l’uso di movimenti di macchina e montaggio più frenetici nel momento “Trainspotting” del film, quello del momento della disintossicazione dalla droga. Per il resto, si tratta di una regia piuttosto convenzionale.

A spiccare, in quel film, era l’interpretazione mimetica di Jamie Foxx, calato a tal punto nel ruolo da ridere e muoversi come il vero Charles. E, se ci pensiamo, il punto è proprio questo: forse in questo tipo di operazioni si punta tutto su una ricostruzione storica forte, sulla musica e sull’attore principale, che fa un gran lavoro di preparazione. E meno sulla regia. È anche il caso di Walk The Line – Quando l’amore brucia l’anima, dedicato a Johnny Cash. Anche qui al centro di tutto c’è un grande attore, Joaquin Phoenix, con una grande aderenza, fisica e spirituale, al ruolo. E un regista, James Mangold, che finora è stato più una promessa di autore che un artista realizzato. Il risultato è un film godibile, sicuramente superiore ai due sopra citati. Ma che funziona – vedi anche sottotitolo italiano – più come una storia d’amore che come un film su un artista che ha segnato la storia della musica.

Fortunatamente, non tutti i film di questo tipo vanno in questa direzione. I film dedicati a stelle del rock funzionano quanto più sono dei film d’autore, caratterizzati dalla visione di un artista del cinema su un artista della musica. E quanto più si distinguono dall’idea classica del film biografico per diventare qualcosa di più complesso. L’esempio tipico di un film rock che è molto più di un biopic è The Doors di Oliver Stone. Il regista americano gira un film che è molto di più della vita di Jim Morrison e della sua band: riesce a cogliere l’anima del poeta Morrison, le sue visioni, il cuore di canzoni come The End, messe in scena come lunghe allucinazioni dell’artista. Senza che manchino gli altri elementi del genere: attenzione per la musica, per i fatti storici, e un’interpretazione mimetica e indimenticabile come quella di Val Kilmer nei panni del leader della band.

Di recente il miracolo è avvenuto ancora con Control, dedicato a Ian Curtis, leader dei Joy Division. Anche qui a essere vincente è la visione di un artista: Anton Corbijn mette in scena Curtis e la sua band con quel bianco e nero sgranato con cui li fotografava verso la fine degli anni Settanta: così la forma del film aderisce perfettamente all’arte dei Joy Division, portandoci immediatamente in un’epoca, in un’atmosfera sociale, culturale e sonora inconfondibile. Il bianco e nero ci fa vedere quello spleen che la musica dei Joy Division evoca. Tanto che non riusciremmo a immaginarceli mai a colori.

Così come non potremmo mai immaginarci il glam rock in bianco e nero. E infatti Velvet Goldmine di Todd Haynes è coloratissimo. E va oltre la concezione di biopic. Haynes stesso – cogliendo il concetto che stiamo cercando di spiegare – lo ha definito “non un film sul glam, ma un film glam”, nel senso che più che una storia cerca di trasmettere uno stato d’animo, uno stile di vita, un mondo. Le due rockstar non si chiamano David Bowie e Iggy Pop, ma li ricordano. E la storia non è esattamente la stessa, ma ne coglie movenze, motivazioni e sensazioni. In questo modo, il film si prende le sue libertà, che sono sinonimo di creatività, ma entra nel glam rock e nel periodo Ziggy Stardust molto meglio di quanto lo avrebbe fatto un classico biopic su David Bowie (per una mancata sua autorizzazione, pare, non sentiamo le sue canzoni nel film).

Come diceva una pubblicità, Todd Haynes vuol dire fiducia. Non a caso è suo un altro dei film rock più belli degli ultimi anni. Io non sono qui stavolta non rimane nel vago: il personaggio al centro della storia è  - e si chiama – Bob Dylan. Solo che invece di un personaggio sono sei. Ancora una volta al centro di un grande film c’è una grande intuizione e una grande scelta di regia: frammentare un artista nelle sue molteplici anime, ognuna con la propria vita e la propria direzione. Un modo per dimostrare  come sia irrappresentabile un artista come Dylan. E forse ogni artista. Io non sono qui è forse il film che più di altri alza l’asticella del genere, facendo (letteralmente) a pezzi il concetto di biopic classico. Ci aveva provato, con poco successo, qualche anno prima Gus Van Sant, con il suo Last Days, dedicato a Kurt Cobain. Che è l’opposto del biopic come lo intendiamo normalmente: vanno in scena gli ultimi giorni della vita di Cobain, ma di lui non ci viene detto quasi niente. Così Van Sant racconta l’imperscrutabilità e l’insondabilità dell’anima di Cobain, il mistero della sua vita. Non ci mostra niente, ma ci comunica disagio, ansia e straniamento. Per quelli a cui non è piaciuto il film, ne arriverà forse un altro. Mentre è stato annunciato, ma non se ne è saputo più nulla, il film di Spike Lee su James Brown, e smentito il film di Tarantino su Jimi Hendrix, si parla da tempo di un nuovo film su Kurt Cobain. La sua vedova, Courtney Love, avrebbe personalmente scelto Ewan McGregor nel ruolo di Cobain. Ma di questo progetto non si sono avute più notizie. Probabilmente sarebbe un altro film sul rock (sul grunge in questo caso), piuttosto che un film rock.