Cinema Talk

All the aspects of Godard’s later years are present: the far too articulate dialogue, self-reflexive techniques, and plenty of other pretentious mush. Despite how planned and artificial it feels, it has an almost incomparable beauty to it. Godard has expanded on the poetic touches featured in Slow Motion but at the same time, has expanded on the dry lifeless feeling featured in Hail Mary. Accusing him of self-parody would be superfluous as I’m almost positive that he’s one hundred percent aware of it and that he’s participating in the joke. In fact, accusing him of anything, negative or positive, seems pointless because it’s almost as though he knows what certain people will think. Quite an oddity, these late Godard films.

There might be something of a plot here. My closet guess would be that it centers around the world as seen by Alain Delon’s character. There’s plenty of bourgeois characters talking about literature, drinking coffee, and randomly providing theology lessons. I’d like to think the movie is more about defining the conventions of art cinema: what is the image, who are the characters, and “why is it always why?” As interesting (and entertaining) as this pondering exercise is, it eventually loses it’s novelty. Godard’s ideas always seem to where thin as they are excercises in the abilities of cinema, and not in the lives of real people.

Of course, since this is more a meditation about film rather than life, it is easily one of the most aesthetically evolved films I’ve ever seen. In fact, the opening sequence feels closer to Gummo than it does to Hail Mary, and that’s even with an overwhelmingly austere technique. There’s moments here that are for whatever reason hit a perfect rhythm and resonate in unparalleled emotions. Of course, all this rhythm which could have carried the film for it’s whole running time is almost always intruded by “arty” dialogue, which is almost completely composed from quotes. This quite infuriating, but perfectly represents the downfall of many post-60s Godard films. It’s easy to admire how he much he is pushing the art, but at the same time, it never amounts to anything more than academic wank material. I’m glad this film exists, though, as I can see how these advancements can be used to push the art of cinema into new territories. Let’s call it “a step in the right direction” shall we?

Obviously, there are some considerably dated aspects that sort of taint my overall enjoyment of this film, but surprisingly, I actually think it’s one of the best movies I’ve watched as of late. It’s personal and honest, but still has a slightly detached observational quality to it. The depth of one single character is more akin to films like The Browny Bunny or I Stand Alone. It puts us into the mind of a mind, and depicts all the complex craziness that goes on inside. In other words, it’s really amazing.

The opening intertitles introduce the film perfectly: “a man sits in his room and recounts the moment leading up to becoming a murderer.” The man is François and he is quiet, reserved, but generally viewed as a nice guy by the other tenants. One day he meets a flourist named Françoise and immediately falls in love with her. Their relationship goes well, but one night François follows her and sees her interest in a dog trainer named Valentin. Around the same time, he meets Clara, a woman who is as fed up and disappointed with life as François is. They begin an affair, but François maintains his love for Françoise, who we are told, is actually Valentin’s daughter. Valentin explains that he wants her because she is his daughter and he has her best interest in mind.

That “old-fashioned” aesthetic is almost completely intact, unfortunately. To explain what I don’t like about it would launch me into a thesis about my general taste in film so in short, I don’t like that “glow” look and I don’t like fades and dissolves. Both of these are quite minor, though, because generally the compositions here are quite nice. Surely, not as innovative as what some Japanese directors were doing at the time, but good none the less.

The film’s strength don’t lie in technical details, though, but more in it’s ability to emerse the audience in a single person’s thoughts. By using what appears to be mystery plot devices, Carne crafts a powerful portrait of a tortured soul’s final moments on planet earth. The flashback and ellipses aren’t meant to create suspense, but instead provide a depth to a character that was unthought of at the time period. In fact, these narrative “devices” are probably more like the ones that Hong Sang-Soo sometimes uses. Sequences overlap, giving us a new context to everything we knew before. The film’s final sequence is easily one of the bleakest of all time and yet composed with such beauty. This may sound condescending, but it’s a testament to Carne’s compassion for his protagonist. A perfect description of the world he crafts, ugly, but with a certain admiration.

Well, I hate to say it, but this was pretty disappointing. Admittedly, my expectations were quite high considering the fact Pasolini wrote the screenplay but it seems like despite his great ideas, the filmmakers did everything within in their power to simplify every scenario. This is automatically at a disadvantage being a lot like Pasolini’s own Mama Romma, which is pretty much a perfect movie. But even without that in mind, this still seems manipulative, silly, and predictable.

Tomasso and his friends drift around town committing petty crimes in an effort to shape some sort of protest. One day he meets Irene, and falls for immediately but his violent nature only complicates things between the couple. In an attempt for atonement, he arranges a serenade for her, but the police breaks it up and he goes to jail for 18 months. When he gets out, he immediately wants to see her but she is not completely on board with his marriage proposal. Not much later, he falls ill and is sent to a rehabilitation facility. He gets out, and things look good, but he then falls ill again.

The two directors of the film, Brunello Rondi and Paolo Heusch, both went on to make Emmannuelle movies, which explains a lot of how superficial this film really is. Tomasso and his gang are so obviously made out to be cool and edgy beat generation guys. A stupid image that is suppose to substitute for substantial character depth. It’s great when a writer or director can make the protagonist a participant in socially unacceptable things, but in this case, the characters are just villains. The way they’re photographed with the overly-intrusive score make any “violent” scene feel just like it’s out of a comic-book.

When the film finally attempts to flesh a character out, the results are dubious. Not only can the Tomasso character articulate his thoughts far too well, but his actions are completely stupid. Yes, sometime your thoughts and emotions can lead you to do odd things but never for the price of making a character look like a moron. Certainly the film is made in a technically competent way but there’s absolutely nothing at it’s core. Considering the fact that Mama Romma does exist, there’s no reason to really even bother watching this, except for the fact that the girl is really pretty. Some sequences could be insightful and beautiful in a different context, but here they become a waste. I guess my words will strike some as harsh, but the film is actually okay but it’s just that the depiction of alienated youth is one hundred percent off-target.

Another subtle, extremely poignant feature from Nobuhiro Yamashita, though not quite eclipsing his previous film, Linda Linda Linda. He seems to be occupying a stylistic and thematic space ignored (or simply undiscovered) by his peers. This isn’t to say he’s a particularly innovative director, in fact one could argue the opposite, but the very easygoing, almost carefree nature of his films is quite refreshing. It would be no surprise if that, at this very moment, he is inspiring a generation of imitator with his likable and innocent poetic sensibility.

Soyo lives with her family in a very secluded rural region. Her school consists of ten people, and all of her classmates are younger than her until Hiromi moves from Tokyo. He’s personified as the experienced newcomer from the big city, and being the only boy in class, giggles are bound to occur behind his back. He eventually is befriended by Soyo, but their relationship is plagued by a series of awkward coincidences. In the meantime, similar relationship complications are brewing with the adults of the town.

Describing the plot of this a bit unexciting, it’s built more around moments than it is about a progressing stor. For the most part, the film is built around events like a first kiss, going to the beach, a town festival, and so on. It’s not completely unlike Naomi Kawase’s Shara in that sense, though it doesn’t match the sprawling multi-character approach of that film. Instead, the focus is centered on the young couple, Soyo and Hiromi, who both get a bit irritating at times. Of course, they are young and in love so expressing emotions in a sensible way is difficult but perhaps there’s not enough depth provided to explain why they would be together in the first place. Don’t get wrong, though, some of the aforementioned “moments” they are share are extremely truthful but within the film’s context feel a little bit odd.

This a minor, very nuanced compliant, though as I pretty much like everything else about the film. In an era, where cinematic poetry mostly amounts to Malick imitations, Yamashita takes a completely different route. Now, there are shots of grassy fields and voice overs but I find the overall tone to be intentionally different but equally effective. Perhaps it’s the more slow-downed long static compositions that separate it but I’d like to think there’s something not dealing with the overall aesthetic that contributes to this mood. The inconsequential, laid-back manner is probably a big help, as well, but I find that such descriptions wash out just how close to home this can hit. It has a painful truth inside wrapped inside the downplayed poetry, which is present on the surface.

If history is any indication then Johnny To will probably make fifty more films this year. More than likely, this will fade into obscurity among other lesser-known films from To. Ironically enough, it also serves as my introduction into his supposedly vast universe. This does indeed remind me a bit of Ann Hui’s Visible Secret but with a much more distinct visual style. Then again, it seems like ghost-related love stories have a bit of a following in Hong Kong but I don’t mind. The popcorn romances of America are nowhere near as charming and fun as a film like this.

Dong cheats on his flowery high-school girlfriend with the much more introverted Yan. She taunts Dong’s girlfriend, which upsets him, and eventually leads to a bizarre automobile accident that kills him. Three years later, Yan now has a steady job at a law firm and manages to run on a daily basis. Despite her success, she is unable to get over the guilt she feels for Dong’s death. One night, Dong appears and strikes up a conversation with Yan, which eventually becomes a nightly ritual. Meanwhile, Yan is working on a case that involves a personality not unlike Dong’s, further blurring the line between reality and illusion.

After watching the bleached-out look of Wolfsbergen, it was nice to watch a movie with that specifically Hong Kong saturated visual style. Not quite as refined as Ho Cheung-Pang’s most recent films but still really great to look at. Of course, this is a bit on the silly side but using this as criticism seems a bit superfluous. This isn’t really a deep character study, just a really nice love story with some endearing stylistic touches. When taken out of context, some sequences feel genuinely heartbreaking, particularly the giant montage at the end. Another attribute the film’s carefree easy-going, is how surprisingly funny it is. This seems to be a generally accepted strengths of most of his films, but I was under the impression it meant really over-the-top violence-oriented humor, which I can’t say I’m a big fan of. Of course, this is one of To’s few non-action films so perhaps that type of humor is available in those films. Here, the funny moments are very understated, almost on a “cutesy” level. A perfect way to describe the film as a whole; I don’t understand how someone could not like this.