Links
Archives
The image is true as long as it is untouched by the eye. As soon as it's seen it looses it's meaning.
Sonntag, Oktober 26, 2003
Enemy at the Gates
Uh huh. Happily I didn't pay for this one.
Plot: Sniper duel during the decisive battle for Stalingrad (WW2).
Production Mantra: Make sure the russians look worse, much worse than the germans.
The opening sequence - a little boy taught to hunt wolves by his grandfather - reminds again of the power of images that made Hollywood great, and Hollywood made great. The rest is what you have to expect when Hollywood makes a war movie with russians and germans in it, and no All-American Rick or Joe to save the day.
Even if dissidents have been shot, even if the red army sometimes had to fight "two men one rifle", the whole motivation for the outrageous pictures used to vilify the red army evades me. They say that you should not explain by malice what can be explained by stupidity - but if so, this kind of stupidity is more dangerous than malice.
The expose is supposed to show the cruelties of Stalingrad, but was interrupted by someone suggesting "now shouldn't we make this russians shoot their own people?" every five minutes. Obviously, the opinion of this person was very important to the producers, but s/he got bored after a few scenes.
Locking their soldiers in like on a road trip to Trblinka? Sending their own people underequipped running against an entrenched german position (twice), with the only machine gun at their back to mow down those that try to withdraw - that's the perfect russians Nazi Propaganda told the germans about.
Contrary, the Germans are an almost always an impersonal group of people on a surreal boy scout trip, mechanized war (like planes up in the sky), or Daddy-Farmer-turned-soldier just wanting to have a smoke and go home, or "told" war. A single one scene where you do see German soldiers "do" the cruelties of war.
The German Whermacht Major Koenig? The typical "lone wolf on revenge" - a character that usually has some credit to go beyond what's ok for most people.
tbc..
Plot: Sniper duel during the decisive battle for Stalingrad (WW2).
Production Mantra: Make sure the russians look worse, much worse than the germans.
The opening sequence - a little boy taught to hunt wolves by his grandfather - reminds again of the power of images that made Hollywood great, and Hollywood made great. The rest is what you have to expect when Hollywood makes a war movie with russians and germans in it, and no All-American Rick or Joe to save the day.
Even if dissidents have been shot, even if the red army sometimes had to fight "two men one rifle", the whole motivation for the outrageous pictures used to vilify the red army evades me. They say that you should not explain by malice what can be explained by stupidity - but if so, this kind of stupidity is more dangerous than malice.
The expose is supposed to show the cruelties of Stalingrad, but was interrupted by someone suggesting "now shouldn't we make this russians shoot their own people?" every five minutes. Obviously, the opinion of this person was very important to the producers, but s/he got bored after a few scenes.
Locking their soldiers in like on a road trip to Trblinka? Sending their own people underequipped running against an entrenched german position (twice), with the only machine gun at their back to mow down those that try to withdraw - that's the perfect russians Nazi Propaganda told the germans about.
Contrary, the Germans are an almost always an impersonal group of people on a surreal boy scout trip, mechanized war (like planes up in the sky), or Daddy-Farmer-turned-soldier just wanting to have a smoke and go home, or "told" war. A single one scene where you do see German soldiers "do" the cruelties of war.
The German Whermacht Major Koenig? The typical "lone wolf on revenge" - a character that usually has some credit to go beyond what's ok for most people.
tbc..
Samstag, Oktober 25, 2003
My name is Tanino (Cinema! Italia!)
The best one of those I've seen this year.
Italian boy meets sweet American tourist girl, spending a few beautiful days.
He misses here when she's long back to the US, and he ever wanted to go to the US to meet his Movie Maker Idol, Chinaski, so to escape his small home town and civil service, and the memories, he goes to New York. Yet, Sally is not very happy to see him again...
A beautiful comedy, being charming rather than funny at all cost.
In closing - The "Cinema! Italia!" this year didn't live up to the expectations that were set last year. Yet, Italy clearly still has it's own nteresting voice in making movies.
Italian boy meets sweet American tourist girl, spending a few beautiful days.
He misses here when she's long back to the US, and he ever wanted to go to the US to meet his Movie Maker Idol, Chinaski, so to escape his small home town and civil service, and the memories, he goes to New York. Yet, Sally is not very happy to see him again...
A beautiful comedy, being charming rather than funny at all cost.
In closing - The "Cinema! Italia!" this year didn't live up to the expectations that were set last year. Yet, Italy clearly still has it's own nteresting voice in making movies.
da zero a dieci (Cinema! Italia!)
german title: Zweite Ausfaht Rimini (Second Exit Rimini)
A good movie, with material to be great, if you can stand the italian cheesyness in the middle.
Four lifelong friends, mostly married, established, around 35, plan to go to Rimini (which is to Italians what Acapulco is to US Americans). Rimini - where they've been as teenagers for the last time. The girls they've been there some with 20 years ago agree to join them (except one - which is substituted by one of the girls lady lover).
It's hard what makes this movie charming - definitely a big part is played by the the opening sequence, talking about being graded by outsiders all the time (which gives the movie the title - from zero to ten). Beyond, it's technically not more than an midlife-crisis-comedy with a cheesy everybody-is-singing-and-dancing sequence in the middle (which, I've learnt, is very italian, but gets on my nerves nonetheless.). Yet it's quite charming, or maybe it just had the right rhythm for the evening I've been there.
Very recommendable, but nothing spectacular.
A good movie, with material to be great, if you can stand the italian cheesyness in the middle.
Four lifelong friends, mostly married, established, around 35, plan to go to Rimini (which is to Italians what Acapulco is to US Americans). Rimini - where they've been as teenagers for the last time. The girls they've been there some with 20 years ago agree to join them (except one - which is substituted by one of the girls lady lover).
It's hard what makes this movie charming - definitely a big part is played by the the opening sequence, talking about being graded by outsiders all the time (which gives the movie the title - from zero to ten). Beyond, it's technically not more than an midlife-crisis-comedy with a cheesy everybody-is-singing-and-dancing sequence in the middle (which, I've learnt, is very italian, but gets on my nerves nonetheless.). Yet it's quite charming, or maybe it just had the right rhythm for the evening I've been there.
Very recommendable, but nothing spectacular.
Angela (Cinema! Italia!)
A few updates stacked up. As last year, the local theatre showed some new italian movies that are not in mainstream distribution. Saw two really astonishing movies last year - "Sangue Vivo", and "Amor nelle speccio" (!"Love in the mirror").
Angela - not much to say here. A true-story-turned-into movie. Wife of a Mafiosi and drug dealer enjoys "helping" her man with the job, and has an affair with one of his protegees. Decent movie with solid acting. It might have some merits - first, as an "no comment, just watching" account of Mafia myth and reality - but it's to much dramatized for this. Second, a mainstream hollywood consumer it might see it "exotic european" without being to artsy. Yet, it's nothing beyond that.
It's not a bad movie, no, just nothing that makes it worthwhile. Good TV material. I even think 30 years ago it would have been an interesting movie. But not so today.
Angela - not much to say here. A true-story-turned-into movie. Wife of a Mafiosi and drug dealer enjoys "helping" her man with the job, and has an affair with one of his protegees. Decent movie with solid acting. It might have some merits - first, as an "no comment, just watching" account of Mafia myth and reality - but it's to much dramatized for this. Second, a mainstream hollywood consumer it might see it "exotic european" without being to artsy. Yet, it's nothing beyond that.
It's not a bad movie, no, just nothing that makes it worthwhile. Good TV material. I even think 30 years ago it would have been an interesting movie. But not so today.
Samstag, Oktober 11, 2003
Blue Velvet IMDB
David Lynch's version of "The Graduate" (IMDB). Starting like an easy-going teen movie, but can drag you into a weirdness, a weirdness that is less in the story than the way the story is told.
Coincidence that this movie dragged me into becoming a artsy movie lover? I remember well seeing it for the first time - I was a teenage boy, fairly messed up, trying to get away from the heavy christmas business. A small theatre was showing "Blue Velvet" around 11 (a.m.). I don't know which line caught me, or maybe it was just the only thing that looked like evading the eat-chrismas-eat-chrismas-eat-christmas liturgy. A small room, dark weathered wood on the floor, slightly neglected - likey you imagne the first showplaces for movies. Just a few people, the bizarre storytelling, the abyss behind the picket fences - I was hooked. Afterwards, walking the abandoned streets, I knew something had happened to me. I still remember my father being angry, but saying nothing - as usual. I didn't even remember much of the movie, and was caught off guard the second time viewing it - being years later, I hadn't expected this amount of violence and sex, the intensity.
Blue Velvet has technical and visual shortcomings, i's almost like Lynch is still experimenting with hist style - it's clearly there, but after knowing his later works, it seems weaker, almost fake. Yet - for me - Blue Velvet remains the rabbit hole to the strange world of movies.
P.S. Not suitable for a usual date
David Lynch's version of "The Graduate" (IMDB). Starting like an easy-going teen movie, but can drag you into a weirdness, a weirdness that is less in the story than the way the story is told.
Coincidence that this movie dragged me into becoming a artsy movie lover? I remember well seeing it for the first time - I was a teenage boy, fairly messed up, trying to get away from the heavy christmas business. A small theatre was showing "Blue Velvet" around 11 (a.m.). I don't know which line caught me, or maybe it was just the only thing that looked like evading the eat-chrismas-eat-chrismas-eat-christmas liturgy. A small room, dark weathered wood on the floor, slightly neglected - likey you imagne the first showplaces for movies. Just a few people, the bizarre storytelling, the abyss behind the picket fences - I was hooked. Afterwards, walking the abandoned streets, I knew something had happened to me. I still remember my father being angry, but saying nothing - as usual. I didn't even remember much of the movie, and was caught off guard the second time viewing it - being years later, I hadn't expected this amount of violence and sex, the intensity.
Blue Velvet has technical and visual shortcomings, i's almost like Lynch is still experimenting with hist style - it's clearly there, but after knowing his later works, it seems weaker, almost fake. Yet - for me - Blue Velvet remains the rabbit hole to the strange world of movies.
P.S. Not suitable for a usual date
