Movies Serious Movie Discussion

[moreorless87]

Yeah Ikarie XB1 is an interesting one, not amazing by any means but as you say a kind of evolutionary link between the two kinds of sci-fi.

Marketa Lazarova is of course amazing. I have been meaning to get round The Devils Trap and Valley of the Bees too, but haven't yet. Thoughts on them if you have seen them?

I'v seen Valley of the Bees, I can imagine a lot of people finding that easier to get into that Marketa as its more of a Christian viewpoint, more open and easier to see/hear whats happening rather than Marketa is deliberately obscured with wonky shots though undergrowth and echoing dubbing.

 

[Bullitt68]

Image an anti Andrei Rublev, same black and white medieval epic but focused more of paganism, rather than graceful flowing shots everything strange and obscured playing up a paganist viewpoint, also has a scene were the narrating voice of god gets into an argument with a character and accusing him of sleeping with his pet goat.

Actually up on Youtube in full...

Cool. It's on Criterion Channel, too, which is where I'll watch it. In all honesty, I've used up all of my free time on Japanese New Wave shit. Now I have to rewatch a bunch of Stephen Chow and Michelle Yeoh movies because I have to write a chapter on each for anthologies with approaching deadlines. But once I get through that, I should probably take a break from my Asian cinema fest and return to the world of the European Arthouse.

Speaking of Criterion, one of my old professors - and one of the biggest big shots in film studies - Tom Gunning wrote the Criterion essay on Marketa Lazarová if you're interested: https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/2809-cinema-of-the-wolf-the-mystery-of-marketa-lazarov.

On the basis of his write-up, it sounded like maybe this film goes more into the eerie territory of a Solaris or a Werckmeister Harmonies or even further back a Vampyr. Either way, I'm intrigued and it's definitely on the watchlist for the near future.

For other Czechoslovakian film I think you might like Ikarie XB1, kind of a missing link between pulpy 50's sci fi like Forbidden Planet and 2001

Yeah Ikarie XB1 is an interesting one, not amazing by any means but as you say a kind of evolutionary link between the two kinds of sci-fi.

Haven't heard of that one, either, but I love the description

 

[Rimbaud82]

At long long last, I finally got round to...

Papillon (1973)

One of @Bullitt68's favourites if I remember right?

Set in the penal colony of French Guiana, the film depicts the grueling conditions endured by Henri “Papillon” Charrière and his famous escape from the notorious Devil’s Island. Papillon (Steve McQueen) has been being falsely convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. On the journey there he encounters fellow inmate Louis Dega (Dustin Hoffman), an infamous counterfeiter with a lot of money on (or should I say in…) his person. The pair develop a close friendship and over time each man, through their individual talents and personalities, becomes indispensable to the survival of the other.

It is a very good film, but I couldn’t quite love it for some reason. Given the film's reputation and its big-budget Hollywood look, I went in expecting something more like a ripping adventure. Hell the tagline calls it “The greatest adventure of escape!”. But in fact, I’d say the film's tone and pace has almost more in common with Bresson and Becker than it does with the likes of The Great Escape (1963). It’s certainly not an ‘artsy-farsty’ film, but its pacing is fairly deliberate. So while it’s not quite French arthouse, it’s not entirely some ripping yarn either. Lets just say it certainly befits an extended stay in a French prison colony.

The slow pacing and lack of character development is something I have seen criticised in a lot of contemporary reviews. Feels like that criticism somewhat misses the point, but as I say there is definitely a degree of dissonance going on between the film’s big-budget “Hollywood-ness” and its aesthetic choices. With that said, it’s not like the film is some totally dour borefest either. There are a lot of interesting and engaging scenes throughout. It is certainly a good film. The friendship which grows between Papillon and Degas is wonderful on its own, but in general the film provides a brilliant portrayal of a human spirit that refuses to be broken against a brutal, oppressive prison system.

The scenes of solitary confinement are some of the very best I think, and the dream sequences which plague Papillon provide some much needed interiority and insight into his broader character. There are some other sequences which I found just detracted from the narrative, namely the parts where he lives with some lovely native woman in their tropical paradise. Honestly felt so daft that it took me straight out of things. Overall though Papillon is a very good film, but ultimately just not one that I loved for whatever reason.

 

[Bullitt68]

At long long last, I finally got round to...

Papillon (1973)

One of @Bullitt68's favourites if I remember right?

Dude, for as big a fan of Steve McQueen as I am in general, there are some films and performances of his - and Papillon is one on both counts - that are truly special. The Magnificent Seven and The Getaway, those are just super cool fucking movies that I'll never not love, while The Sand Pebbles and Papillon are my go-to examples to showcase just what an amazing actor, not just movie star, McQueen was.

It is a very good film, but I couldn’t quite love it for some reason. Given the film's reputation and its big-budget Hollywood look, I went in expecting something more like a ripping adventure. Hell the tagline calls it “The greatest adventure of escape!”. But in fact, I’d say the film's tone and pace has almost more in common with Bresson and Becker than it does with the likes of The Great Escape (1963). It’s certainly not an ‘artsy-farsty’ film, but its pacing is fairly deliberate. So while it’s not quite French arthouse, it’s not entirely some ripping yarn either. Lets just say it certainly befits an extended stay in a French prison colony.

This is why it hasn't endured the way that The Great Escape has. They capitalized on the cachet, and Hollywood couldn't resist the punning tagline, but you're right, it's absolutely not an edge-of-your-seat thriller or a guns-blazing adventure. It's very much a '70s films: It's all about the process (like The Conversation, All the President's Men, and obviously Escape from Alcatraz) and the slow psychological burn (like Klute, Serpico, and obviously Midnight Express). There is action and adventure, but it's more about putting you in that place to endure that time with the protagonist who is transformed over time. And for as much as I love a ripping adventure, I also love the way that Papillon really puts you in that awful place and allows you to watch the toll that doing that time takes on both Papillon and Dega - and if I don't say it anywhere else, this is also one of Hoffman's best performances and easily his most underrated. The Graduate and Midnight Cowboy are obviously extraordinary, but people sleep on shit like this, Straw Dogs, and Straight Time (the latter another great '70s crime film focusing on the psychology of its criminal protagonist).

The friendship which grows between Papillon and Degas is wonderful on its own, but in general the film provides a brilliant portrayal of a human spirit that refuses to be broken against a brutal, oppressive prison system.

QFT. I love that final sequence with Dega almost completely gone and Papillon rasping his way through his final - and finally successful - escape plan.

The scenes of solitary confinement are some of the very best I think

There are some other sequences which I found just detracted from the narrative, namely the parts where he lives with some lovely native woman in their tropical paradise. Honestly felt so daft that it took me straight out of things.

Wow, really? I love that sequence. It's just one example of many where Papillon's life yo-yos between peace and anguish, happiness and torment. But no matter what, when he's in the process of escaping, even if he ultimately gets caught, there's a weird sense of joy in him. Similar to Hilts in The Great Escape, who cares less about actually escaping than just fucking with the Nazis, while Papillon wants desperately to escape and will literally never stop trying until he's taken his last breath, every second spent outside the prison provides an odd sense of victory. Even on their little boat, the sense of freedom is palpable. In that sequence, it's one of those cosmic - but still fleeting - gifts that were so few and far between for Papillon. I mean, right after he stumbles on some nuns - women of God, obviously good people who will help a poor, downtrodden soul - who give him up. It was the native people - not any (member of any) institutions - who were kind to him. Same thing with the lepers. If you're outside the system, you're good; if you're part of the system, you're bad. Papillon tries to navigate that, and sometimes gets ensnared, but for me it's fascinating all the way through.

Overall though Papillon is a very good film, but ultimately just not one that I loved for whatever reason.

In fairness, it is a confounding film in terms of its style and just its feel. (The director would become known for the original Planet of the Apes and Patton, which makes me think that Papillon was the film where he wanted to flex his artistic muscle and really go for it rather than try to stick to any mainstream Hollywood formulas). If you revisit it down the road, I suspect that it'll grow on you and come to appreciate it more over time. I know even for me, once I'd watched it and realized that it wasn't The Great Escape 2 and was operating very differently, the more that I watched it, the more that I came to love it. In short, fan or not, it's a film that rewards multiple viewings over time.

Either way, though, I'm glad you watched a Hollywood gem. What else of McQueen's have you seen?

 

[Bullitt68]

No idea why some of my text is crossed out but I don't have time to fix it.

 

[Bullitt68]

Fuck me, some of my post disappeared, too. After the gif, I wanted to say that McQueen should've been nominated for an Oscar for Papillon on the strength of that sequence alone. He should've won for The Sand Pebbles in 1966, but while I probably wouldn't have given him the Oscar in 1973 - Jack Lemmon won a wholly undeserved award in a year stacked with Brando for Last Tango in Paris, Nicholson for The Last Detail, and Pacino for Serpico - he absolutely deserved the nomination more than Lemmon or Robert Redford.

 

[Rimbaud82]

This is why it hasn't endured the way that The Great Escape has. They capitalized on the cachet, and Hollywood couldn't resist the punning tagline, but you're right, it's absolutely not an edge-of-your-seat thriller or a guns-blazing adventure. It's very much a '70s films: It's all about the process (like The Conversation, All the President's Men, and obviously Escape from Alcatraz) and the slow psychological burn (like Klute, Serpico, and obviously Midnight Express). There is action and adventure, but it's more about putting you in that place to endure that time with the protagonist who is transformed over time. And for as much as I love a ripping adventure, I also love the way that Papillon really puts you in that awful place and allows you to watch the toll that doing that time takes on both Papillon and Dega - and if I don't say it anywhere else, this is also one of Hoffman's best performances and easily his most underrated. The Graduate and Midnight Cowboy are obviously extraordinary, but people sleep on shit like this, Straw Dogs, and Straight Time (the latter another great '70s crime film focusing on the psychology of its criminal protagonist).

Good point, it is very much in keeping with that decade. Also shout out Straight Time that is indeed an excellent, underrated film.

QFT. I love that final sequence with Dega almost completely gone and Papillon rasping his way through his final - and finally successful - escape plan.

Agreed, that was one of the most excellent sequences of the film.

Wow, really? I love that sequence. It's just one example of many where Papillon's life yo-yos between peace and anguish, happiness and torment. But no matter what, when he's in the process of escaping, even if he ultimately gets caught, there's a weird sense of joy in him. Similar to Hilts in The Great Escape, who cares less about actually escaping than just fucking with the Nazis, while Papillon wants desperately to escape and will literally never stop trying until he's taken his last breath, every second spent outside the prison provides an odd sense of victory. Even on their little boat, the sense of freedom is palpable. In that sequence, it's one of those cosmic - but still fleeting - gifts that were so few and far between for Papillon. I mean, right after he stumbles on some nuns - women of God, obviously good people who will help a poor, downtrodden soul - who give him up. It was the native people - not any (member of any) institutions - who were kind to him. Same thing with the lepers. If you're outside the system, you're good; if you're part of the system, you're bad. Papillon tries to navigate that, and sometimes gets ensnared, but for me it's fascinating all the way through.

Yeah, I'm not sure what it is but I found that portion a bit out of key and didn't really connect with it. That's some fair points though. Especially about the contrast between that and "the system". The bad guys in Papillon don't even seem inherently bad, or at least not gratuitously so. There are evil purely because they are a part of this wider penal code and prison system. It's very cold and calculating. I am sure you despise Focault, but I couldn't help be reminded of certain parts of Discipline and Punish:

“Discipline 'makes' individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise. It is not a triumphant power...it is a modest, suspicious power, which functions as a calculated, but permanent economy.”

In fairness, it is a confounding film in terms of its style and just its feel. (The director would become known for the original Planet of the Apes and Patton, which makes me think that Papillon was the film where he wanted to flex his artistic muscle and really go for it rather than try to stick to any mainstream Hollywood formulas). If you revisit it down the road, I suspect that it'll grow on you and come to appreciate it more over time. I know even for me, once I'd watched it and realized that it wasn't The Great Escape 2 and was operating very differently, the more that I watched it, the more that I came to love it. In short, fan or not, it's a film that rewards multiple viewings over time.

Have seen Planet of the Apes, haven't seen Patton. You could well be right, I'll need to see what I think after a few re-watches. I certainly didn't think it was a bad film by any measure, just didn't love it like I hoped.

Either way, though, I'm glad you watched a Hollywood gem.

What else of McQueen's have you seen?

Not enough, you won't be surprised to learn <45>

Have seen The Great Escape of course, albeit many moons ago. The Magnificent Seven even more more moons ago. Other than that, Papillon I think! Not even your namesake.

 

[Bullitt68]

Good point, it is very much in keeping with that decade. Also shout out Straight Time that is indeed an excellent, underrated film

Depending on how hardcore you decide to go in any of these directions if it ever strikes your fancy - crime films, prison films, or just 70s films in general - if you haven't seen Midnight Express, that's the major one that I'd recommend out of all the films that I mentioned alongside Papillon. Some are better than others, but Midnight Express is one of those must-sees and is right there alongside Papillon for me when we're talking about GOAT prison films, even beyond just the 70s.

Yeah, I'm not sure what it is but I found that portion a bit out of key and didn't really connect with it. That's some fair points though. Especially about the contrast between that and "the system". The bad guys in Papillon don't even seem inherently bad, or at least not gratuitously so. There are evil purely because they are a part of this wider penal code and prison system. It's very cold and calculating.

I get that sense of "Whoa, this is different." It reminds me of Mutiny on the Bounty and the big shift from boat drama to island living, or even Full Metal Jacket and the hard turn from boot camp to Vietnam. It's an adjustment, but it was never so jarring that it took me out of it. But I liked what you had to say elaborating on the emphasis in the film on "the system." I love how even toward the end, the warden sending Papillon to solitary confinement looks beaten down. It doesn't matter that he's on "the other side" of the bars: He's part of this system and it's the system that grinds everybody down.

And what a surprise, a film from the 70s with a "The system is bad" message

I am sure you despise Focault, but I couldn't help be reminded of certain parts of Discipline and Punish:

“Discipline 'makes' individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise. It is not a triumphant power...it is a modest, suspicious power, which functions as a calculated, but permanent economy.”

I most certainly despise him as a human, and I think that a lot of what he had to say in the realms of philosophy and aesthetics was nonsense, but he had some gems on institutions, I'll give him that. And his panopticon shit has its merits. This is what's so interesting about Papillon the film and Papillon the character, though: He's never disciplined. Dega is. From the first scene when he needs protection to the last scene when he's gardening, you're looking at two completely different human beings. He wasn't able to hold on to his individuality. The system broke him down and he became a disciplined - which is to say, a different - individual. Papillon reappearing allowed him to just barely graze with the tips of his fingers the vestiges of his old self - and I love that little nod when he sees Papillon float away before going back to his gardening - but he was too far gone. The film gives you the two sides of the coin: The man who becomes a part of the system and the man who beats the system.

Have seen Planet of the Apes, haven't seen Patton.

Patton is extraordinary for George C. Scott's powerhouse performance alone. On the whole, it's been too long for me to even remember most of the plot points or any sense of progression, themes, aesthetic choices, etc. But Scott is unforgettable. Planet of the Apes, on the other hand, is a better premise than it is a film IMO. Papillon is unquestionably Franklin J. Schaffner's crowning achievement. His early film The Best Man is one of the most underrated political dramas out there while his later film The Boys from Brazil became a cultural phenomenon of sorts and is a great showcase for older Hollywood icons, but Papillon is where it's at

Not enough, you won't be surprised to learn <45>

Have seen The Great Escape of course, albeit many moons ago. The Magnificent Seven even more more moons ago. Other than that, Papillon I think! Not even your namesake.

You'd probably dig the experimental style of The Thomas Crown Affair and perhaps even the nihilism of The Cincinnati Kid. I wonder what you'd think of The Sand Pebbles and The Getaway, though. What you think of Peckinpah will likely dictate what you think of The Getaway, as that and Straw Dogs - made back to back - define Peckinpah for me. The Sand Pebbles, meanwhile, is very Hollywood - the budget, the scope, the "gloss" - but with a twist, particularly McQueen's characterization.

And then, of course, Bullitt is just all kinds of awesome

 

[europe1]

I started with Seijun Suzuki, but I'm not a big fan of his. Tokyo Drifter is fascinating and Branded to Kill is obviously his calling card, but neither one of them really wowed me.

On one level I enjoy Suzuki's "big horny teenager energy." But... that's also kind of his problem. When teenagers tries to wow you by being deep you can easily smirk initially at their guile, conviction and energy but the longer they keep talking the more the hollowness makes itself apparent.

So what I'm trying to say is that I like his stylish pizzazz but his movies always seem to decline the longer they go on.

Criterion Channel from Koreyoshi Kurahara

Only seen The Warped Ones from him.

Reminded me of Godard's jazzy style mixed with Suzuki's teenage energy.

And speaking of Shinoda, europe, I know that you and I are big fans of The Sword of Doom. Well, if you haven't seen Shinoda's Assassination or Samurai Spy, get on that shit ASAP. Samurai Spy especially I think that you'd dig, because it has both Leone vibes and Chang Cheh vibes.

Hai!

Honestly, I don't know that I've ever seen a Czech film

The Communist Czech made a cowboy satire flick and 10 years later its still living rent-free inside my mind.

The entire film is shoot with extreme colour filters like this, easily making it the yellowest movie ever produced.

I think it was supposed to be a satire of the Western genre and Capitalism (the cowboy is a representative of Lemonade Cola and practically bellows advertisements in extreme close-ups in-between shooting people) but the whole thing is so wackadoodle bonanza that I had no idea what to think of it.

(Stops typing about Czech films before I start talking shit about Marketa Lazarova again).

Inagaki's Samurai trilogy, the Zatoichi films

Gasp! You didn't mention MY favorite Samurai series, Sleepy Eyes of Death! (There are like 14 of these)

Inagaki's Samurai Trilogy are perfectly fine yet they seem positively antiquated when placed against their peers.

The Zatoichi films I remember varying WILDLY in quality. Some times they're as good as Samurai serials get. Sometimes they're unbearable "comedies". Lots of experimentation in that one.

and Michelle Yeoh

As an aside: Everything Everywhere All At Once is some of the biggest garbage I've ever seen and it pains me to see Michelle Yeoh involved in that travesty. Never have I seen such a poor film receive such adulation from a cinephile crowd. I suspect some people just really, really, really react with heartfelt emotion to sarcastic schmaltz because they're to jaded to do so without the sarcasm.

But obviously Yeoh's early kicky-actiony-explody stuff is borderline fantastic.

It is a very good film, but I couldn’t quite love it for some reason. Given the film's reputation and its big-budget Hollywood look, I went in expecting something more like a ripping adventure. Hell the tagline calls it “The greatest adventure of escape!”. But in fact, I’d say the film's tone and pace has almost more in common with Bresson and Becker than it does with the likes of The Great Escape (1963). It’s certainly not an ‘artsy-farsty’ film, but its pacing is fairly deliberate.

I do suspect there is a trend with McQueen movies where Hollywood expectations clash with more intimate realities.

I had to re-watch The Sand Pebbles the day after I saw it because despite seeing the movie I realized that I had ABSOLUTELY NOT seen the actual movie. I expected Hollywood adventure and looked for it everywhere yet what I got was a very humanistic character-study about growth and maturation set in an classical Hollywood adventure setting.

refuses to be broken against a brutal, oppressive prison system.

I think it's interesting to observe how all the representatives of the "Institution" are depicted in this movie (The Warden, the Nun, etc). They're not sadistic villains. In fact, they all seem very dispassionate in their duties. With soft words they tell Papillion that he has to give up. Even when they break his legs its done matter-of-factually. It's a dynamic where all personal enmity are stripped from the Institutions representatives and its purely a struggle of atomizing someone's willpower and yearning for freedom.

The scenes of solitary confinement are some of the very best I think, and the dream sequences which plague Papillon provide some much needed interiority and insight into his broader character.

I think that Dream sequence may be the best ever put on film.

Because it strikes that nebulous balance between feeling very restrained yet also utterly otherworldly. It says more about Papilion's character with use of distance, locale, space and emptiness, and wording than any usual "dream-tricks" does. There is an ostentatious to many dream-scenes that undermines their dreaminess.

Also shout out Straight Time that is indeed an excellent, underrated film.

EDIT: Basically explores microaggressions before microaggressions was a word. How handled in an undignified manner can make you crack.

 

[Bullitt68]

On one level I enjoy Suzuki's "big horny teenager energy." But... that's also kind of his problem. When teenagers tries to wow you by being deep you can easily smirk initially at their guile, conviction and energy but the longer they keep talking the more the hollowness makes itself apparent.

So what I'm trying to say is that I like his stylish pizzazz but his movies always seem to decline the longer they go on.

It's like why I'm hard on True Romance: It oozes adolescence. But there are those moments, like the confrontation with Gary Oldman and the Christopher Walken/Dennis Hopper showdown, that are absolutely transcendent. Suzuki doesn't transcend anything. It's just a wild, juveline ride of craziness...

Only seen The Warped Ones from him.

Reminded me of Godard's jazzy style mixed with Suzuki's teenage energy.

...and unlike Kurahara, there's nothing else on offer. The Warped Ones is wild and crazy and juvenile, but there's also intelligent social satire. It's operating several levels above anything that Suzuki ever even glimpsed.

But yeah, that's the most cosmopolitan of any of the Japanese New Wave films that I saw, very much in Godardian territory (just with jazz replacing classical Hollywood in the protagonist's pantheon). Black Sun is sort of like a sequel which you might like. Both The Warped Ones and Black Sun honestly gave me strong Jarmusch vibes, from the Japanese couple on their music pilgrimage in Mystery Train to a black hitman in the hood living as a Samurai in Ghost Dog. Jarmusch, too, loves the cross-culture exchanges, the strange friendships across culture/language lines, etc.

I preferred his earlier noir films, though, I Am Waiting and Intimidation.

Hai!

The Communist Czech made a cowboy satire flick and 10 years later its still living rent-free inside my mind.

The entire film is shoot with extreme colour filters like this, easily making it the yellowest movie ever produced.

I think it was supposed to be a satire of the Western genre and Capitalism (the cowboy is a representative of Lemonade Cola and practically bellows advertisements in extreme close-ups in-between shooting people) but the whole thing is so wackadoodle bonanza that I had no idea what to think of it.

This is a europe-only movie. If anyone else brought this up, I'd be losing my mind, but you...it makes perfect sense that you'd know an insane movie like this. I thought that Reflections in a Golden Eye was odd. This is from another fucking planet!

Gasp! You didn't mention MY favorite Samurai series, Sleepy Eyes of Death! (There are like 14 of these)

The blind swordsman was too much? They needed one who could see but who just had trouble keeping his eyes open?

As an aside: Everything Everywhere All At Once is some of the biggest garbage I've ever seen and it pains me to see Michelle Yeoh involved in that travesty. Never have I seen such a poor film receive such adulation from a cinephile crowd. I suspect some people just really, really, really react with heartfelt emotion to sarcastic schmaltz because they're to jaded to do so without the sarcasm.

I've yet to come across anyone who had anything less than glowing praise for it. I'm not as gaga as some that I've run across, but I loved it, too. I'm surprised that you not only don't hold it in very high esteem but that you actually hated it. I guess this is your Fury Road

Personally, I would've liked more ass-kicking Yeoh and less lesbian daughter, but I thoroughly enjoyed it.

But obviously Yeoh's early kicky-actiony-explody stuff is borderline fantastic.

Yes, Madam!, Royal Warriors, and Wing Chun are the cream of the crop IMO.

I do suspect there is a trend with McQueen movies where Hollywood expectations clash with more intimate realities.

I had to re-watch The Sand Pebbles the day after I saw it because despite seeing the movie I realized that I had ABSOLUTELY NOT seen the actual movie. I expected Hollywood adventure and looked for it everywhere yet what I got was a very humanistic character-study about growth and maturation set in an classical Hollywood adventure setting.

QFT.

I think it's interesting to observe how all the representatives of the "Institution" are depicted in this movie (The Warden, the Nun, etc). They're not sadistic villains. In fact, they all seem very dispassionate in their duties. With soft words they tell Papillion that he has to give up. Even when they break his legs its done matter-of-factually. It's a dynamic where all personal enmity are stripped from the Institutions representatives and its purely a struggle of atomizing someone's willpower and yearning for freedom.



I think that Dream sequence may be the best ever put on film.

Because it strikes that nebulous balance between feeling very restrained yet also utterly otherworldly. It says more about Papilion's character with use of distance, locale, space and emptiness, and wording than any usual "dream-tricks" does. There is an ostentatious to many dream-scenes that undermines their dreaminess.

Also QFT.

 

[Rimbaud82]

And two more I have watched of late…

Night Tide (1961)

Really enjoyed this cult B-movie featuring Dennis Hopper in his first starring role. Only came across this thanks to MUBI actually, which has a restoration presented by Nicolas Winding Refn Whatever that means. In any case, the restoration looked very good.

Set on Venice Beach the film is a delightfully weird ‘horror’ about a sailor on shore leave who falls in love with a young woman at a jazz joint who may, or may not, be a mermaid… I say horror because that’s what it was billed as, but it’s definitely not a horror in any modern sense of the word. It deals with the potentially supernatural or out-of-this-world (or considerably more mundane) but is more of an offbeat drama than anything else.

Despite the B-movie status there actually isn’t much in the way of cheap thrills and shlocky effects either. Surprisingly so. Actually the film relies much more on its carnival setting and on its strange eerie tone.Definitely pretty maladroit in places, but on the whole an enjoyably weird, quirky wee film.

The Tracker (2002)

Was very impressed by this one. An Australian film very much in the vein of some of the weirder revisionist or acid westerns, though set within a different context of course. It is an austere, but deeply poetic film set ‘somewhere in Australia’ in 1922. We come to learn quickly that the film possesses a kind of ahistorical abstractness, but one which nonetheless conveys a deeper historical truth.

Four men set out into the remote Australian bush to track down an aboriginal man accused of killing a white woman. The men are never given actual names, but in archetypical fashion the credits tell us that they are The Fanatic, a dogmatic police officer; The Follower, a raw recruit who is new to the territory; The Veteran, a older man of few words , and finally, and most importantly, The Tracker (played by the immense David Gulpilil), an indigenous Australian “native to other parts” about whom little is known. As they travel deeper into the inhospitable landscape relations between the men begin to fracture and break down.

The narrative is allegorical in its simplicity. It perhaps verges on the overly didactic, but I think it avoids that. Certainly the message that the film conveys is worth telling in any case. Some things genuinely are that “black and white”, as it were. Not to say that the film lacks complexity. After all, our main character (at least our titular character) is an indigenous man who, obviously, works for the white colonialists - and who is therefore complicit? Or not as the case may be.

The Tracker has some very interesting stylistic choices that, for most part, worked very well. For instance, although it doesn’t shy away from depicting colonial terror and violence it doesn’t revel in blood and gore. As if offering a counterpoint to the horrific, desensitizating violence we get in The Nightingale (2018) the film substitutes such scenes for a series of paintings. I honestly can’t recall ever seeing this technique before, but I thought it was brilliant actually. Recognising the inadequacy of representing such atrocities through traditional film methods, it places this violence within a less literal but perhaps more powerful context, one that thus stands symbolically for all such colonial violence perpetrated against indigenous Australians.

The other unusual technique the film uses is that of foregrounding the soundtrack, in some cases even at the expense of the dialogue. As the music was written by Archie Roach, himself an indigenous Australian, it possesses an obvious relevance to the action on screen. In this case I was a bit less convinced. Some scenes came off more like a music video as a consequence, but clearly again the director is attempting to reach beyond the limits of traditional cinematic depictions of colonialism. The visual approach does its part as well; deliberately blurred and out of focus at parts, it seems to frame the four men in a very trivial way against the vastness of the Australian bush.

All in all it is a very fine anti-colonial anti-western, one with a lot of interesting ideas and techniques. Probably the best David Gulpilil performance I have seen. Absolutely worth a watch.

 

[moreorless87]

And two more I have watched of late…

Night Tide (1961)

Really enjoyed this cult B-movie featuring Dennis Hopper in his first starring role. Only came across this thanks to MUBI actually, which has a restoration presented by Nicolas Winding Refn Whatever that means. In any case, the restoration looked very good.

Set on Venice Beach the film is a delightfully weird ‘horror’ about a sailor on shore leave who falls in love with a young woman at a jazz joint who may, or may not, be a mermaid… I say horror because that’s what it was billed as, but it’s definitely not a horror in any modern sense of the word. It deals with the potentially supernatural or out-of-this-world (or considerably more mundane) but is more of an offbeat drama than anything else.

Despite the B-movie status there actually isn’t much in the way of cheap thrills and shlocky effects either. Surprisingly so. Actually the film relies much more on its carnival setting and on its strange eerie tone.Definitely pretty maladroit in places, but on the whole an enjoyably weird, quirky wee film..

Refn actually paid for Night Tide and Spring Night, Summer Night to have good quality restorations a few years ago which I'd guess is were the "presents" comes from.

It is a weird little film, I'd guess Carnival of Souls is the most obvious thing that comes to mind but its more of a querky charming mix than that I'd say. Parts of it feel like homages to classic B-movie monster films but then you have Hopper giving a very new wave realistic performance and a lot of the visuals actually remind me more of something like Hiroshima Mon Amour.

The indicator Bluray I have of it actually includes a good amount of Curtis Harringtons avant garde stuff and you can kind of see were some of the more interesting visuals come from, I especially love the little sequence were Hopper is following the mysterious woman to the old Sea Captains house though the seaside shacks, some really nice interesting shots in that.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I never learned to like Robert Altman. A lot of hardcore cinephiles love him, especially that '70s run of his from MASH through Nashiville, but it just never clicked with me and I've yet to try them again.

I generally like Robert Altman's movies but I have McCabe & Mrs. Miller as my favorite by a good margin. It's much more straightforward as a narrative than some of the other stuff, kind of like The Straight Story or The Elephant Man for David Lynch.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Dude, I'm one of those who thinks he not only should've been nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Abyss, he should've fucking won the Oscar for that performance. Imagine what his career could've been if he'd entered the '90s as Oscar winner Michael Biehn

A bit of an old thread here but I would also say that Oscar wins and nominations often don't do much for an actor in terms of future roles.

Lou Gossett had a bit of an upswing after Officer and a Gentleman, then back down.

I don't think Burt Young really benefited a lot from his nomination. It probably helped him make Uncle Joe Shannon but that's about it. By the 90s he was doing guest spots on Law and Order and so on to pay the bills like any working actor.

Roberto Benigni.

I think Paul Winfield's nomination maybe put him on the map in the first place but then after that just a working actor.

I am trying to think of what Biehn might have done after The Abyss and up to The Rock with a bit more award prestige. All that he really did that mattered in those five years was Tombstone.

What was there from 1990 to 1995 that could have come his way that he would have excelled at?

The only ones I can think of where he maybe might have got the role and done something with it are Backdraft, Regarding Henry, Pulp Fiction, Aidan Quinn's role in Legends of the Fall, Se7en and Point Break. And he didn't need an Oscar to get an audition or consideration for Backdraft or Point Break. And Oscar or not he wasn't likely to unseat Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford or Brad Pitt for anything.

And I think if he wasn't the motivated version of himself he would have really laid an egg in Regarding Henry.

 

[Bullitt68]

So @moreorless87, @Rimbaud82, and @europe1, I think that it's going to be me and europe standing shoulder-to-shouler in the "Marketa Lazarová sucked" battle. The widescreen cinematography in the snowy landscapes looked beautiful but that's literally the only good thing that I have to say. It was just too all over the place and fragmented for me to give a shit. I mean, when the initial titles and narration are telling you that this shit doesn't matter and asks why anyone would bother caring, I have to ask myself that, too. I just didn't like the rhetorical positioning for the film and it made it impossible for me to care about any of the characters or any of the goings-on. I'm a notorious hater of Andrei Rublev - the only movie post-film school that I ever fell asleep to - but it's still a damn sight better than Marketa Lazarová.

A bit of an old thread here but I would also say that Oscar wins and nominations often don't do much for an actor in terms of future roles.

Lou Gossett had a bit of an upswing after Officer and a Gentleman, then back down.

I don't think Burt Young really benefited a lot from his nomination. It probably helped him make Uncle Joe Shannon but that's about it. By the 90s he was doing guest spots on Law and Order and so on to pay the bills like any working actor.

Roberto Benigni.

I think Paul Winfield's nomination maybe put him on the map in the first place but then after that just a working actor.

I am trying to think of what Biehn might have done after The Abyss and up to The Rock with a bit more award prestige. All that he really did that mattered in those five years was Tombstone.

What was there from 1990 to 1995 that could have come his way that he would have excelled at?

The only ones I can think of where he maybe might have got the role and done something with it are Backdraft, Regarding Henry, Pulp Fiction, Aidan Quinn's role in Legends of the Fall, Se7en and Point Break. And he didn't need an Oscar to get an audition or consideration for Backdraft or Point Break. And Oscar or not he wasn't likely to unseat Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford or Brad Pitt for anything.

And I think if he wasn't the motivated version of himself he would have really laid an egg in Regarding Henry.

It's hard to hypothetically go back in time and then predict the future, but just randomly, he could've done some good shit in a lot of the ensemble films - stuff like JFK or Natural Born Killers, Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction (nothing against Tim Roth, but Michael Biehn could've been subbed in for him in both films and who knows?), Sleepers, Apollo 13 - plus he could've been subbed in for Christian Slater in Interview with the Vampire, he could've outclassed Judd Nelson as Ice-T's partner in New Jack City, he could've been great in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man (it would've been cool to see him in Depp's leading role, but more modestly he could've been one of the bounty hunters). There was some shit out there that could've slowly but surely kept upping his credibility, so to speak, and kept him on the A-list as a part of major films, which may have inspired him to ever greater heights over time.

It's all speculation, but that trajectory would've been interesting to say the least.

 

[moreorless87]

Can't say I'm really surprised given your previously stated taste, kind of supprised you took my recommandation in the first place. <45>

 

[Bullitt68]

Can't say I'm really surprised given your previously stated taste, kind of supprised you took my recommandation in the first place. <45>

I got the urge to go European after so many Asian films, I haven't seen Czech stuff, Tom Gunning wrote the Criterion essay on it...I had to at least check it out. But yeah, not my cup of tea. Dreyer, Tarr, Bergman in his weirder moments, that's more my speed.

 

[moreorless87]

I got the urge to go European after so many Asian films, I haven't seen Czech stuff, Tom Gunning wrote the Criterion essay on it...I had to at least check it out. But yeah, not my cup of tea. Dreyer, Tarr, Bergman in his weirder moments, that's more my speed.

I think Tarr actually sails quite close to this, maybe with slightly more overt hints at intellectualism but really working by building up a mood.

I do think these kinds of films often tend to get a bit mischaracterised by critics/writers looking to focus on their medium when really I think most of their focus is on visuals/music to sell relatively simple ideas.

 

[BisexualMMA]

It's hard to hypothetically go back in time and then predict the future, but just randomly, he could've done some good shit in a lot of the ensemble films - stuff like JFK or Natural Born Killers, Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction (nothing against Tim Roth, but Michael Biehn could've been subbed in for him in both films and who knows?), Sleepers, Apollo 13 - plus he could've been subbed in for Christian Slater in Interview with the Vampire, he could've outclassed Judd Nelson as Ice-T's partner in New Jack City, he could've been great in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man (it would've been cool to see him in Depp's leading role, but more modestly he could've been one of the bounty hunters). There was some shit out there that could've slowly but surely kept upping his credibility, so to speak, and kept him on the A-list as a part of major films, which may have inspired him to ever greater heights over time.

It's all speculation, but that trajectory would've been interesting to say the least.

I agree with you that there was more for him to do...especially if (and it's a big if) he was firing on all cylinders unlike In a Shallow Grave and some other eggs he laid in the peak of his run. But when I gave it some thought I was just struck by how few roles there actually were in that five year window following the hypothetical Abyss Oscar that would have been relevant. With that time period ending around The Rock which was more or less his last meaningful role.

I think after the mid to late 90s and into the early 2000s is where a bunch more stuff opens up that he would have been good at. Basically some of the Viggo Mortensen roles like GI Jane. Some Russell Crowe stuff too. There could have been spots in LA Confidential, Cop Land, Contact, Saving Private Ryan, The Thin Red Line, The Green Mile, Any Given Sunday, Traffic, The Pledge, Crash, Troy, Collateral, Gangs of New York, antagonists in Mission Impossible or Bourne... But this is all after that window and post-The Rock where he was already relegated to straight to video with no real pathway back.

 

[Bullitt68]

I agree with you that there was more for him to do...especially if (and it's a big if) he was firing on all cylinders unlike In a Shallow Grave and some other eggs he laid in the peak of his run. But when I gave it some thought I was just struck by how few roles there actually were in that five year window following the hypothetical Abyss Oscar that would have been relevant. With that time period ending around The Rock which was more or less his last meaningful role.

I think after the mid to late 90s and into the early 2000s is where a bunch more stuff opens up that he would have been good at. Basically some of the Viggo Mortensen roles like GI Jane. Some Russell Crowe stuff too. There could have been spots in LA Confidential, Cop Land, Contact, Saving Private Ryan, The Thin Red Line, The Green Mile, Any Given Sunday, Traffic, The Pledge, Crash, Troy, Collateral, Gangs of New York, antagonists in Mission Impossible or Bourne... But this is all after that window and post-The Rock where he was already relegated to straight to video with no real pathway back.

Exactly. This is more what I was getting at: If he would've gotten that Oscar, then it's possible/likely that just the general caliber of work that he would've been doing in the '90s would've been higher, and if he'd been steadily working in high caliber films - and, of course, doing good work in those high caliber films - then he would've been in the mix for the types of films made by and with the type of talent that you're talking about. But like you said, the window closed on him. It really would've been cool if he could've gotten hooked up with Tarantino. I mean, Michael Madsen's non-Tarantino career is nothing to write home about, but his work with Tarantino is fucking astounding. Biehn would've fit in very nicely as any number of characters in any number of films, and it would've given him that built-in career cushion from which everyone from Madsen and Michael Bowen to Tim Roth and Samuel L. Jackson has benefited.