It is currently Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:25 am



Reply to topic  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Directors in Triplicate 
Author Message
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Directors in Triplicate

Image

Something something something.

Angela Schanelec

Passing Summer
Marseille
Afternoon

Lucrecia Martel

La Ciénaga

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 02, 2010 2:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

I see.

_________________
Please TRIP and Die


Sun May 02, 2010 2:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Oh, makes sense.

_________________
letterboxd | ribbon says so | i got musicals | voluptuous vessel


Sun May 02, 2010 2:12 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

I like her.


Sun May 02, 2010 2:13 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Image
The first of this particular trio of films, unrelated except by director and my limited experiences, is translated as Passing Summer. I mention translation because there's a 'Mein' in the original title which seems to be easily translated and is somehow conspicuously absent, but I won't worry too much about it. The English title refers more to mood while the German title refers to pace. I'll leave it up to your own investigations if you choose to uravel that mystery. Setting: summer; surprising. By the end of the film, the summer has passed. Surprising. Perhaps there should be spoilers there, perhaps over the title. Bruce Willis Is A Ghost, the new film from Angela Schanelec. Alright, it's not important.
Image
Here are the imporant things. People in striped shirts. Always a sign of importance. Especially horizontal. Don't let those guys in the slick business suits fool you, with their subdued, slender vertical stripes nestled amongst a strong, suave shade of grey. I've got a suit like that. It fools people. Fools. There are none in this film. This is not a fool's film. This is barely a film. I shouldn't say that. It's a film. What I mean to say is that this film is aggressively uncinematic, which is to say that it's not aggressively cinematic or even actively cinematic. The shots are mostly long and few, mostly static and perhaps never panning. I recall a track. How, then, is this a film? Well, no matter what you do when making a film, the camera must be placed somewhere. It doesn't have to capture the characters and it doesn't even have to capture light, but I'm going to assume that there is one somewhere and not merely an audio track. Regardless, this film has a camera.
Image
And what does the camera capture? What an amazing question! Well, it captures people and things around them. This is innovative stuff, I'm telling you. How, why? These are more difficult questions. I've successfully avoided them for the most part, aggressively and actively, but you can only run for so long. I've said this before, and I'm saying it now, but I think this film portrays the current generation, alarmingly familiar despite being an ocean and a language away (and supposedly a culture, although that seems to be ethereal at this point), in such a way that I would identify this film, this largely unheralded film from a largely unheralded director, as among the truest and most beautiful portraits of our times as they really are and, perhaps even more important and difficult, as they are really lived.
Image
I can't go back to the sixties, to the exact summer where everyone in a certain area of a certain age group with certain interests behaved in such a way that would have drawn them into a cultural phenomena which the great majority of people of that time and age group was too remote or unaware of to participate. Revisiting it in films, so many films, I can't help getting the impression that it breezed by so many of its participants, that it wasn't even recognized by most of the people of the time, and that its presistence in popular culture and in history has more to do with its depiction than with its inhabitation. How many people were merely '12:08 East of Bucharest' style participants? I never get the feeling that people actually lived during these times, perhaps because they never really did. They participated, and the times fizzled after a 'magical summer', and those people settled into some more stable mode of living in the world. And what did it look like? I couldn't tell. I can't imagine it's drastically different from Passing Summer. I imagine it's drastically different from Zabriskie Point, hence the explosion.
Image
I don't mean to imply that the film is devoid of artistry. Quite the contrary. The question for a painter of landscapes is not what to paint (a landscape), but how to paint it. The easel placement is key. Landscape painters are rarely landscapers themselves, rearranging the world to fit their needs. Similarly, the landscape of the film seems like it is unchanged, even though it is entirely fabricated. In its defense, the horizon is far less tangible in a film than the solid line where the land rests against a blue sky. I wonder how many problems the setting sun and the darkening sky pose for the painter? Perhaps none. Peter Greenaway is a liar; all painters are liars. This seems correct. Anyway, as the days become shorter and the summer comes to its close the film reaches its end as well, but not before offering up a plethora of moving landscapes, portraits, studies, and any number of other terms that one might come up with to describe a painting of 'people and things around them'. You can tell that the images are wonderful, and I've already told you that they are relatively few in number (relative to irrelevant not-to-be-named-here films by irrelevant not-to-be-named-directors) so you will be able to soak them up in all their beauty to the extent of your capabilities as a sponge.
Image
To this point I have largely jumped around from vague explanations of technique and technical detail and tangents on what is not in the film and how others have failed where this film succeeds but without really tackling matters head on. This is in part due to my inability to fully take hold of such gentle, beautiful, non-transgressive cinema. There is no explosion at the end of the film? I can't handle that sort of thing. But I'll try. What is the point of having a relatively pointless conversation with a close friend? That seems beside the point. What is the point of listening in on a relatively pointless conversation between two strangers? That seems like a creepy question. Let's face it - viewers of narrative cinema are a bunch of creepers. Somehow the invisible fourth wall has an invisible disclaimer painted on it which allows the audience to creep in on strangers' conversations with their full permission. Perhaps it's the price of a ticket which makes them less creepers and more 'paid peepers', as in at a peep show. That's like 2 degrees of wholesomeness up from a regular creeper. It should be said that most films that seem to attempt to mimic reality fall so short of it that no viewer could possibly feel as if they were actually viewing a private conversation. I don't know that this is a credit to anyone. Perhaps I simply have too high standards or perhaps everyone else lives around people with the charisma to rival that of professional actors and entertainers and enough character arcs to weave a Persian rug with, but no. So here we have it: nothing happens, little is said, and said in a rather uncharismatic manner, and all of a sudden I feel like I'm intruding. Feeling sufficiently like a creeper, I feel like this film is sufficiently mimicking reality. I have already explained how I feel this film feels like it is of its time, now I have said that I feel that it is of a time in reality, but I'm not going to say why this is important. It's not, really. But it is what I said it is, and what it is is something rare.
Image
I didn't get this far to anoint the film as a marvel for being 'realistic' or 'rare'. This is simply categorization. I've stuffed it in a hole. I still haven't tackled it straight on. I can't seem to get an honest thought out. I've already said that this sort of stuff isn't for me. Why did I try, if you want to call it a try? It's not much of one, I'll give you that. If there's anything that's creepy it's some guy talking about someone else to everyone but never saying a word to the one being talked about. I'm going to end it by talking... to the film... by way of writing onto an internet forum which the film will never read. This makes sense. Shut up.

Dear Passing Summer,

I know it's been a long time since we last talked. Our last time together consisted mainly of me staring at you for an extended stretch of time and then leaving. In fact, both of our meetings went like that. It must have been awkward for you. I know it was for me. Some would blame you for not including me, that you put up a fourth wall which distanced me from what you had going on in your life. Others would say that the wall can never really be broken because you're pre-recorded and inanimate. I find both of these arguments compelling, and yet here I am writing you a letter. It's just that I feel like I can talk to you, like I want to talk to you and to say something more than just, "Please cease to exist." I guess I just don't write a lot of letters to films that aren't made by Godard. Anyway, I wanted to write you to finally get things out in the open, all the things that I haven't found the words to say. It strikes me as odd, though, that I am writing to you instead of the people in my life that I probably have similarly closed communication pathways with, and yet they're actual people. I'm confused.

- LEAVES

Image

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 02, 2010 2:14 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Did I say Marseille was excellent? It was... to me. To me because it had struck a feeling of something you couldn’t possibly appreciate. Couldn’t appreciate because you weren’t there. Maybe you felt something alike in your own experience... that feeling of longing for...

I don’t care to expand on this.

_________________
Blue Steel ('89) - ★★★★½
High Tide ('87) - ★★★
Piranha 3D ('10) - ★★★½
Une femme mariée ('64) - ★★★


Sun May 02, 2010 2:19 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

ᴾᵒˡᵒ wrote:
Did I say Marseille was excellent? It was... to me. To me because it had struck a feeling of something you couldn’t possibly appreciate. Couldn’t appreciate because you weren’t there. Maybe you felt something alike in your own experience... that feeling of longing for...

I don’t care to expand on this.
I will, don't worry. I've felt everything you've ever felt... in triplicate.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 02, 2010 2:20 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Those images. Beautiful. I plan on losing my Schanelec virginity to Marseille, but I'm definitely planning on giving Passing Summer a go as well, even if you weren't a fan of the film (I think?).

I'm indifferent on striped shirts by the way.

_________________
Don't you worry even if things end up a bit too heavy we'll all float on alright.


Recently Viewed

The Thing | van Heijningen Jr., 2011 | *
Take Shelter | Nichols, 2011 | ***
Martha Marcy May Marlene | Durkin , 2011 | **
Melancholia | von Trier, 2011 | *1/2
The Descendants | Payne, 2011 | **1/2


Sun May 02, 2010 2:21 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

"Somehow the invisible fourth wall has an invisible disclaimer painted on it which allows the audience to creep in on strangers' conversations with their full permission. Perhaps it's the price of a ticket which makes them less creepers and more 'paid peepers', as in at a peep show."

I like that bit, a lot.


Sun May 02, 2010 2:24 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Words too!


Sun May 02, 2010 2:24 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

jeevo wrote:
Those images. Beautiful. I plan on losing my Schanelec virginity to Marseille, but I'm definitely planning on giving Passing Summer a go as well, even if you weren't a fan of the film (I think?).

I'm indifferent on striped shirts by the way.
That's a lot to write if I'm not a fan. Granted, I didn't write much directly on the film, but that's sort of the point of a good half of that post, and that I haven't addressed it is related to the people that I do care about which is directly contrasted with Godard so... I feel like I can't make it any more obvious.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 02, 2010 2:24 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

So yeah: good thing. Going off on tangents? Good thing. Fun.
I like the bit about Brightside. Probably wasn't meant to be about him, but it was.
Nearly all of those images have remained with me, must be a bad movie.

_________________
Please TRIP and Die


Sun May 02, 2010 2:29 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Trip wrote:
So yeah: good thing. Going off on tangents? Good thing. Fun.
I like the bit about Brightside. Probably wasn't meant to be about him, but it was.
Nearly all of those images have remained with me, must be a bad movie.
But there are similar images clumped together between the films so I could have addressed a similar topic in all three posts thus making the triplicate of images comparable to the triplicate of topics and then it would have... you know, something. It could have, I should say. I can't tell if it would have or not. The possibility was there. That bridge has been crossed, however.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 02, 2010 2:33 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
That's a lot to write if I'm not a fan. Granted, I didn't write much directly on the film, but that's sort of the point of a good half of that post, and that I haven't addressed it is related to the people that I do care about which is directly contrasted with Godard so... I feel like I can't make it any more obvious.


Yeah, as soon as I made my post I realized that this was the first entry in a film thread from a director that you like. My bad.

Interesting read though. Looking forward to the next entry.

_________________
Don't you worry even if things end up a bit too heavy we'll all float on alright.


Recently Viewed

The Thing | van Heijningen Jr., 2011 | *
Take Shelter | Nichols, 2011 | ***
Martha Marcy May Marlene | Durkin , 2011 | **
Melancholia | von Trier, 2011 | *1/2
The Descendants | Payne, 2011 | **1/2


Sun May 02, 2010 2:34 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
But there are similar images clumped together between the films so I could have addressed a similar topic in all three posts thus making the triplicate of images comparable to the triplicate of topics and then it would have... you know, something. It could have, I should say. I can't tell if it would have or not. The possibility was there. That bridge has been crossed, however.


Who'd want that? :roll:

_________________
Please TRIP and Die


Sun May 02, 2010 2:37 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

That looks nice.

_________________
“Cinema is neither an art nor a technique, but a mystery.” ~ Godard


Sun May 02, 2010 11:35 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

jeevo wrote:

I'm indifferent on striped shirts by the way.


Horizontal stripes make you look fat.

_________________
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10


Mon May 03, 2010 4:40 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Are we supposed to be playing, too?

_________________
“Bisogna essere molto forti per amare la solitudine.” - P.P. Pasolini

WCoF I II IIIL'EtàL'Eau한국88ShadowsBerlin thırd ISOLATIONVistaVision


Mon May 03, 2010 5:54 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

JediMoonShyne wrote:
Are we supposed to be playing, too?
I don't even know what this means. Does this have to do with rules? I don't know anything about rules.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 03, 2010 6:31 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
I don't even know what this means. Does this have to do with rules? I don't know anything about rules.

Are there rules? And if so, why not?

Do you think of yourself as "cool" for having no rules, LEAVES? Some kind of rebel, are you?

_________________
“Bisogna essere molto forti per amare la solitudine.” - P.P. Pasolini

WCoF I II IIIL'EtàL'Eau한국88ShadowsBerlin thırd ISOLATIONVistaVision


Mon May 03, 2010 6:39 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

JediMoonShyne wrote:
Are there rules? And if so, why not?

Do you think of yourself as "cool" for having no rules, LEAVES? Some kind of rebel, are you?
There's no point in having rules if you can't enforce them. Better to make suggestions. I have none of those, either. I'm just trying to describe what's going on, that's all.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 03, 2010 6:43 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
There's no point in having rules if you can't enforce them. Better to make suggestions. I have none of those, either. I'm just trying to describe what's going on, that's all.

And what is going on?

_________________
“Bisogna essere molto forti per amare la solitudine.” - P.P. Pasolini

WCoF I II IIIL'EtàL'Eau한국88ShadowsBerlin thırd ISOLATIONVistaVision


Mon May 03, 2010 6:45 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

JediMoonShyne wrote:
And what is going on?
Something something something.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 03, 2010 6:54 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Something in Triplicate.

_________________
I Watch Films, But...
In a word, I think that, far from favoring directors’ formal inventiveness, widescreen, instead, stifles it. It is, I’m more and more persuaded, if not the only, at least the main culprit for the expressive poverty of the image today. - Eric Rohmer
Vimeo / / / Flickr


Mon May 03, 2010 6:56 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Magic Fister wrote:
Something in Triplicate.

Image

_________________
“Bisogna essere molto forti per amare la solitudine.” - P.P. Pasolini

WCoF I II IIIL'EtàL'Eau한국88ShadowsBerlin thırd ISOLATIONVistaVision


Mon May 03, 2010 7:03 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Makes me feel like a disaster is stalking.


Mon May 03, 2010 7:06 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

I'm going to turn this into a contest. If you can guess the next films coming in the thread, you will get points. Whoever has the most points... is crowned Captain Obvious. Go!

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Tue May 04, 2010 7:01 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

I watched Safe last night, LEAVES.

_________________
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10


Tue May 04, 2010 7:09 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

dreiser wrote:
I watched Safe last night, LEAVES.
Excellent. I'll watch it tonight or tomorrow night. Any change in your attitude toward it?

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Tue May 04, 2010 7:15 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
Excellent. I'll watch it tonight or tomorrow night. Any change in your attitude toward it?


Spoiler before we do the thread?

_________________
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10


Tue May 04, 2010 7:20 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

dreiser wrote:
Spoiler before we do the thread?
Oh, we're doing a thread? Send me details.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Tue May 04, 2010 8:08 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

A LEAVES/dreiser joint? Weird is good.

_________________
2014 in Film: top 25


Tue May 04, 2010 8:29 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Vasco wrote:
A LEAVES/dreiser joint? Weird is good.


If he's still up for it.

LEAVES: just pm'd you.

_________________
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10


Tue May 04, 2010 10:48 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Image
The second film of the trio needs no translation, and if it had one I don't know what it would be but the decision to translate it would surely be among the most mind-numbingly stupid decisions imaginable; the film is called Marseille. If it seems strange to you for a German director to shoot a film in a foreign country, who the hell are you? No, but, back on topic, this isn't just 'a German director shooting a film in a foreign country', it's got everything to do with being in a foreign country. On the former topic, perhaps in France the film should have been titled Die Marseille, informing those multilingual Frenchmen and Frenchwomen that the film is set in Marseille and features German people who abuse their language. Not that I really know; I'm an American, so I just assume that nobody else can properly speak another language. The only thing I know about German I learned from my brother and dad, which is that there are 13 ways to say the word 'the'. I picked one. I have no idea if it's correct, even in the incorrect state I was going for. Take it from me, the Germans in Marseille that are on camera all speak French in what must be a much more fluent tongue than my abuse of German. That doesn't say much. Whatever.
Image
Here we are, Marseille. What's first? Take a look around. Actually that's second. Why are we here? Apartment swapping. It's all the rage. Give me the keys, take my keys, have fun! That's what happens in the film. Then she looks around. The protagonist is a girl. You can almost guess it at this point, although it's still a bit ambiguous. Take my word for it. She then goes and looks around. This makes it a bit more clear. Let me synopsize the foregoing 'looking around': feet waddle waddle, eyes gaze and gaze, lips cast a little smile, tongue tosses out a few syllables, waddle waddle gaze gaze sleep sleep waddle waddle tongue toss keys toss engine starts wheels turn eyes gaze and gaze... - bar.
Image
That's not a bar like a pole like as if there was an accident, it's a bar like the one you walk into without saying 'ow.' I tried to avoid the stupid joke but I couldn't. Ow. That was my credibility talking. What has preceded this scene is a lot of streetwalking which some will find immensely boring and which some feel is among the most valuable treasures one can possibly find. It's not the best streetwalking I've ever seen, but it's not really a streetwalking film. There's streetwalking because there's newness, and it's more about that newness than about those streets which I so want to see someone walk down for some strange reason. I love brownies, I love streetwalking. I rarely go streetwalking for the sake of walking down certain streets in my hometown. It's too familiar. I rarely get to Marseille, so I like the streetwalking. And so does the protagonist. Makes sense. Our director doesn't care. Fine.
Image
Walking done, sitting in a bar. Now is the scene. In fact, a sequence of scenes... but not normal scenes. I can't even say anything about them. There's too much magic. I'll avoid them. The entire film floats on these scenes, and that I think it's an amazing film, so you'll understand when you see them. There's nothing to spoil except the experience of what is in them, each moment. These scenes provide the buoyancy. What is the point of buoyancy? To have it for the sake of having it, and more is more? This hardly seems correct. To have enough is certainly an important point, although if you don't want to sink you can simply not go into the water to begin with. Usually the buoyancy is a necessity but not the point. The point is the weight which requires a counteracting buoyancy. If the weight doesn't require any buoyancy to begin with that's fine. Perhaps you'll like it as it is. Perhaps the weight, even if not buoyant on its own, makes the buoyant material more buoyant. A catalyst of some sort. Perhaps it works this way for you, perhaps not. The metaphor sinks. Physical laws never transfer well to subjective experience, anyway. I'm not sinking, I'm joining the water! Whatever, man, whatever.
Image
Somehow the middle of the film that I won't talk about became the middle of this thing. I don't think I should talk about it. Hopefully that which I am not speaking of carries this larger thing as well as that which I would not speak of carries that other thing which I'm supposedly speaking of. Or floats. No, wait, I submerged that metaphor. Anyway... language. I need to say something here. I started off saying something earlier and it degenerated into the old 'So many ways to say The' thing and, well, yeah. German, French, it's all the same to me. Thankfully I can recognize the difference. Apparently that means it's not all the same. Well, the result is the same, for the most part - incomprehension. Amazingly enough, however, my comprehension of differing forms of incomprehension gave rise to an immensely important aspect of the film. Even though all of the words mean nothing, that they are in one language or another immediately clues the viewer into something cultural in regard to the speaker. In different circumstances it can mean different things. In Marseille a German sentence could imply a thought to one's self by a German person or a recognition of another German speaker elsewhere or a native exclamation that travels the path of least linguistic resistance. I must admit at this point that I am multilingual enough to know Merde! and Scheiße! I must also admit that this difference is not necessary to know within the confines of the film, but I felt like I had a duty to inform my readers of these most essential words in their respective languages. Truly merde knows no boundaries.
Image
Just as a language shift is important in informing context, a context shift is important in understanding what the film is trying to say, and it need not be in the form of a statement. It may merely be an exclamation, and in that case it is probably Scheiße! Even the most inecplicable series of scenes can often offer some explanation for its existence and order, even if the content contained therein remains in an entirely indecipherable language. Marseille's content is not entirely inexplicable, but the context informs the content to a significant degree. On the onehand it is partially a 'study in contrasts' on two different levels and on the other hand it is a study of two different modes of living. I want to say something about the contrast between freedom and commitment and a shared freedom and an unshared commitment and an unshared freedom and uncommitted freedom... but I'm afraid this is not the time. See the film, then we can talk. Do.
Image
If you've been paying attention, you'd know this is the end. I feel like I haven't even scratched the surface. I feel like a conversation is demanded, and all I get is a few glancing readers, a few unenthusiastic responses, maybe one person who cares. The faces seem so cold and lifeless, but then I grab them and pull them forth and shake them to life and there they are, happy, engaging, and slowly fading back. I shake again, and now I'm a shaker. Nobody likes a shaker. Some people think an idea can change a world, or a set of ideas can at least survive a weekend, but then nobody even cares to listen. I see so much in Marseille, I do, but who else is even willing to look? Not merely see it, either. Look. Look. I see so much.
Image

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 09, 2010 11:33 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Mm, Marseille looks like a beautiful and thoughtful film and the way you described the picture made me feel like I have a sense of the film without seeing it.


Sun May 09, 2010 11:44 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
it's got everything to do with being in a foreign country.

Yes. Yesssss, that was it.

I'll read the rest now.

_________________
Blue Steel ('89) - ★★★★½
High Tide ('87) - ★★★
Piranha 3D ('10) - ★★★½
Une femme mariée ('64) - ★★★


Sun May 09, 2010 12:01 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Ekinflog wrote:
Mm, Marseille looks like a beautiful and thoughtful film and the way you described the picture made me feel like I have a sense of the film without seeing it.
If that's the truth, then you'll really like the film, because I skipped the best parts.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 09, 2010 12:16 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
If that's the truth, then you'll really like the film, because I skipped the best parts.


Ah, I am quite excited to see it more so, Angela Schanelec looks like an contemplative and interesting director from what I can tell . Just need to find a copy of the film or find it online somewhere. :)


Sun May 09, 2010 12:40 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Ekinflog wrote:
Ah, I am quite excited to see it more so, Angela Schanelec looks like an contemplative and interesting director from what I can tell . Just need to find a copy of the film or find it online somewhere. :)
They should be showing all of her films in a multiplex near you. She's that popular.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Sun May 09, 2010 12:56 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
They should be showing all of her films in a multiplex near you. She's that popular.


Tell me about it, they were completely sold out when I went to see her retrospective the other day. So I'm gonna preorder tickets when they convert them to 3D later in the year.

_________________
Please TRIP and Die


Sun May 09, 2010 1:06 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

:D

I wish it were like that.


Sun May 09, 2010 1:09 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Image
Finally, after depicting the here and the there, Schanelec depicts the then in the now and the here, or something, with a loose contemporary retelling of Checkhov's The Seagull translated as Afternoon, at least by the time it reaches English. Having read the original play, I can tell you that it is a very loose retelling. This is not to say that the writers in Checkhov's tale did not use laptops, but it is to say that there was no mention of a laptop in the text that I read. Perhaps it was a translator's omission; I simply cannot say. At any rate, it arrived in the present with laptops, Germans, and purple and white striped bathing suits. You won't see me complaining.
Image
Chekhov's rule may be that a gun hanging in the wall in the first act must go off in the last, but I don't recall a lake in the play and thus there is no need for a drowning despite its presence in the film. Whether this means that Chekhov's rules don't apply to this film or that a lake is not a weapon I can't say for certain. Maybe it only applies to guns. After all, I seem to recall a ceiling in the play, but it never collapsed on a character's head, major or minor. Maybe Chekhov's rule doesn't allow for an active imagination. There's a lake in the film, and it's pictured, and the most iconic image from the film, at least from my perception which is heavily biased due to the film's poster, is a body clad in a purple and white striped bathing suit, a body clad in nothing but flesh, set atop the gently undulating surface of the water. The lake recurs in the film, but I don't remember anyone drowning in it. It's hard to remember everything, though, and maybe I forgot 'the death of a major or minor character'. Anyway, of all the things in the film there are two that stand out to me, or at least that I forced to the foreground. I get directing credit for my memory.
Image
Uno and ice cream. I haven't even played Uno, but apparently it crosses cultural boundaries and bodies of water. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Spanish game, but I had always assumed in my America-centric mind that it was invented somewhere on the street that I lived as a kid, and the site of its invention moved each time I did. (I just looked it up and it was invented in Ohio. Yeah, that's right foreigners. We invented Uno. America-centric assumption: justified) I don't have pictures of ice cream on this page, but you'll have to take my word for it. Back on topic, this film is a bit more action packed than the previous two, what with being confined to not-that-cramped quarters in a lake house on a hot, muggy summer and some contentious relationships between those in said quarters. Yet what I remember is a young kid playing Uno with his grandfather (or at least 'some old guy') and the 'grandfather' later wanting to get some ice cream, due entirely to an intense and unexpected craving, one which doesn't even last long enough to satisfy it. I don't know if Chekhov has a rule for ice cream cravings, but if he does, I'm sure it results in some eating of ice cream. What does it mean that these two innoccuous, non-contentious moments are the ones that stand out most in my mind? I'll reflect on this and get back to you at a later date. It probably has to do with American superiority, though, I'll tell you that much. After all, we did invent ice cream.
Image
I've probably said far too much about Chekhov. This film may not even be an adaptation of The Seagull. I don't know who said it was. Probably not a trustworthy source. Chekhov Chekhov Chekhov. This is a bad paragraph. Let's end it.
Image
Oh, hey, I know. Angela Schanelec, in addition to being the director and reincarnation of Rainer Werner Fassbinder (what? in what way? that's absurd. you're an imbecile), also stars in the film (what kind of a word is 'stars' in such a situation? why not simply 'acts'? is that not more appropriate? it's not as if this film is going to put her on the Hollywood Walk of Stars or anything), which may not be that surprising (given that she's Rainer Werner Fassbinder, right?) given that she began her film career as an actress (in Rainer Werner Fassbinder's films?) in films not directed by Rainer Werner Fassbinder. She had a brief scene in Passing Summer, either was not in Marseille or had all of her scenes cut (probably to boost commercial appeal for the project - alas, its American release was bumped in favor of March of the Penguins due to the inability of American audiences to emotionally invest in Germans), but is featured fully here as a... conceited bitch. She looked awfully angry for the 'poetess of emptiness', as a Variety writer called her. She's either a great actress or he's an idiot. Or a third option. Or a combination. That's all I really have to say about that. Oh, wait, her performance is likable and ummmmmmm (now we're getting somewhere).
Image



(Emptiness awaiting a poetess)



Image
While this is my least favorite of the three films (blame Chekhov), it is also well loved by others, so I would encourage people to check it out. The camera is a bit more active, there is a bit of that sweltering atmosphere which informs the viewer of the mood which drives the tension, but it may merley be a case of unfavorable comparison to the film coming next in this thread... Anyway, I really just wanted to get this one out of the way in favor of the Mar...vels to come. hint hint wink wink end.
Image

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 10, 2010 12:21 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Perdy pictures. Like I've said before, I planned on checking out Marseille, but after reading this thread, I'm going to be watching Passing Summer and Afternoon as well. I just need to get back into the movie watching mood. I haven't watched too much lately.

_________________
Don't you worry even if things end up a bit too heavy we'll all float on alright.


Recently Viewed

The Thing | van Heijningen Jr., 2011 | *
Take Shelter | Nichols, 2011 | ***
Martha Marcy May Marlene | Durkin , 2011 | **
Melancholia | von Trier, 2011 | *1/2
The Descendants | Payne, 2011 | **1/2


Mon May 10, 2010 12:27 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

This person prefers Marseille to the bunch as well, but likes Afternoon more than myself, it seems.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 10, 2010 12:31 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

LEAVES wrote:
This person prefers Marseille to the bunch as well, but likes Afternoon more than myself, it seems.


I can't put this off any longer. I'm watching Marseille tomorrow evening after the hockey game.

_________________
Don't you worry even if things end up a bit too heavy we'll all float on alright.


Recently Viewed

The Thing | van Heijningen Jr., 2011 | *
Take Shelter | Nichols, 2011 | ***
Martha Marcy May Marlene | Durkin , 2011 | **
Melancholia | von Trier, 2011 | *1/2
The Descendants | Payne, 2011 | **1/2


Mon May 10, 2010 12:35 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Just finished reading your posts. Excellent.

I've seen the films, but haven't given them extended thought as of yet. There will be re-watches, though. When I'm in the mood.


Mon May 10, 2010 2:35 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Epistemophobia wrote:
Just finished reading your posts. Excellent.

I've seen the films, but haven't given them extended thought as of yet. There will be re-watches, though. When I'm in the mood.
I think Marseille, above all, is one of the best films of the decade (as in, like, top 3, in my admittedly limited experience), and it's basically the reason I decided to devote time to the other two in such a fashion. Time and content as counterbalances in the film is just perfection. Bringing the other family into the film and treating them in a somewhat elliptical manner works both to refrain from any sort of didactic rendering of them while at the same time approaching them from a very particular angle and not overwhelming the outlook on them by conversations with each other or with the main protagonist, instead leaving a few moments of work, a few of family, a few of friends, and a few of silence. Meanwhile all I do is talk. Need friends to get back to the silence part.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Mon May 10, 2010 2:43 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

I will watch the film soon, then read the post. If you don't mind.

_________________
Please TRIP and Die


Mon May 10, 2010 6:05 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

Watched Marseille earlier this evening LEAVES. I enjoyed re-reading your write up in this thread after viewing the film. I know the film doesn't play out in a conventional Hollywood way, but a few of the transitions were a little jarring to me. I did enjoy watching it though, as it was a beautiful film to look at. I enjoyed the director's style, even though some of the edits did through me off for a second or two, so I am looking forward to taking in the other two films you mentioned in this thread.

_________________
Don't you worry even if things end up a bit too heavy we'll all float on alright.


Recently Viewed

The Thing | van Heijningen Jr., 2011 | *
Take Shelter | Nichols, 2011 | ***
Martha Marcy May Marlene | Durkin , 2011 | **
Melancholia | von Trier, 2011 | *1/2
The Descendants | Payne, 2011 | **1/2


Wed May 12, 2010 1:44 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Directors in Triplicate

The transition from France to Germany is brilliant. There's nothing to indicate a change except the language shift. Love it.

_________________
LEAVES come from TREES
Retired


Wed May 12, 2010 1:52 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Captain Terror, crumbsroom and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.