Modern Times

Charlie Chaplin, USA, 1936
3 out of 4 stars

Honestly, I am tempted to give the first two sequences 4 stars and the rest of the film 2 stars; as it is, I split the difference and ended up with the good-but-not-great 3 star rating.

This is actually my first Chaplin film, and as I am not a film student (but rather a "projectionist," in which capacity I saw this film), it will most likely be my last. I didn't find the conventions of the "silent" (with occasional speech near the beginning and sound effects throughout) film too difficult to get a hold of, and for the most part the humor was not incomprehensible.

If anything, the bar was perhaps set too high by the first sequence, in which Chaplin's "Little Tramp" desperately tries to make his way through a day at the factory, becoming increasingly unhinged with results that myself and most of the undergraduates found absolutely hillarious. No surpise that an English professor would assign this, as Chaplin demonstrates the "alienation of labor" concept far better than Karl Marx or any of his followers could hope to!

There are flickers of brilliance throghout (the first jail sequence is pretty solid), but the film increasingly becomes repetetive (near the end the Tramp ends up in yet another factory, even mirroring many of the earlier gags albeit in a different context. It seems that Chaplin was regrettably unable to maintain the high level of both social commentary and humor that he shows at the beginning.

Source: Warner DVD
15 April, 7:10 PM

The Battle of Algiers

(La Battaglia di Algeri)
Gillo Pontecorvo, Italy / Algeria, 1966
4 out of 4 stars

I expected this to be more of a "broccoli" film, meaning that it would be "good for me" but not particularly interesting. Yet from fairly early on (after some getting used to it), I was very impressed by how engrossing, even thrilling at times, a film about terrorism could actually be.

Calling it "terrorism" might sound wrong, considering that this is a film that very much celebrates the national liberation struggle of the Algerians against French colonialism (a situation that, while never all that far from our American experience, is more uncomfortably familiar to even the most clueless citizen than it has been for us in quite a while). Part of what makes this film great, though, is that while it does glamorize to an extent through sheer cinematic force, it also forces you to take a clear look not only at what's at stake but also at precisely who will, for instance, die in a bomb blast (children included). As such the film manages to transcend both propaganda and facile, disingenously "neutral" docudrama to create something altogether more compelling and troubling.

Finally, when I mention terrorism I am also referring to what is sometimes called state terrorism, as the second half of the film, roughly speaking, is dedicated to the French Army's response to the revolutionary upheaval. While their leader might arguably be portrayed in an overly-sympathetic manner, the main Algerian rebel is still clearly the hero, and furthermore, the fact that the colonel does have a sense of "honor" only makes his actions the more disturbing. As the press corps finally start to reflect a growing civilian unease with harsh military tactics (sound familiar?), the best moment comes when the colonel reminds just how implicated they are in the colonial project. I should also note that the Ennio Morricone score is quite awesome!

Source: WEA subtitled VHS
10 April, 6:10 PM

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

George Roy Hill, USA, 1969
3.5 out of 4 stars

My parents showed me this film on videotape when I was a teenager, and then, on DVD, I’ve seen it in a composition class and now again as a projectionist for a lower-division film class. Each time, it holds up as an effective, entertaining deconstruction of the Western ethos, even in an era in which deconstruction is a dime a dozen. To be honest, I don’t think I knew much at all about what was being deconstructed the first time I saw this film, as, much like the neo-noir of the 1970s, it all ends up being “the past” for today’s generation, or even mine, so some level of genre awareness is required to understand what is transpiring (for this class, it was provided by an episode of Bonanza that I was unable to sit through due to its, well, suckiness).

That said, this kind of awareness is not necessary in order to be entertained by the film, which was evidenced by the significant amount of laughter I heard from the undergrads throughout the screening. Of course, wisecracks are that eternal, postmodern form of humor that resontates throughout the ages, but the actors clearly have good chemistry and really sell the material. I do think some parts are more uneven than others, and perhaps we have ended up with a lot of bad formula films as a result, but this film overall reminds one of how the formula can work.

Source: Fox DVD
7 May, 5:09 PM

Good Night, and Good Luck

George Clooney, USA, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

A film like this raises inevitable difficulties when one sets out to evaluate it, and it is safe to say that these difficulties have been well covered by the criticism that has already been written regarding Clooney’s agit-prop resurrection of the newsman who, we are told, took down McCarthy and therefore left a lesson to us all, media people and common people alike, that we are clearly not living up to in the age of Bush II.

First, there is the question of whether this even really counts as a film. I would say yes, but just barely, and clearly filmmaking for its own sake was not key to Clooney’s agenda. It’s tempting then to ask what, exactly, this film is supposed to do. So-called intellectuals such as myself don’t really need to be educated on who McCarthy was. Perhaps I needed some education on Ed Murrow, the primary figure here, but amusingly, that has already been provided by the significant media coverage of the film. Of course, this coverage would not exist without the making of the film itself, and that leads me to conclude that the main reason that this is a motion picture is that, due to the medium, it therefore demands more attention than a book or, dare I say it, a television special, either of which might have been more appropriate for conveying this “lesson,” especially considering how much archival footage is used and how long the film spends showing us some of it.

Finally, then, we must consider how the “ignorant” would respond to such a film. I vaguely remember my roommate, who is not the brightest pulp in the package, being unsure as to what time period the damn thing took place in, but on the other hand, the undergraduate class that I watched most of it with (in my role as “projectionist”) seemed to get involved in the thing, cheering at some of Murrow’s more provocative lines.

And sure, I imagine we could have gotten the benefit of these choice tidbits from archival footage of Murrow’s show itself, but it goes back to the question of “would anyone have watched it in that case, even in a classroom?” I think the answer is no, and I have to admit that, for some reason, the film actually is pretty entertaining. It is a slight but also hard-hitting propaganda piece that has the benefit of being on the side of truth, more or less. So yeah, I recommend it, even if I’m somewhat bemused by it.

Source: Warner DVD
23 April, 6:37 PM

Dark City

Alex Proyas, Australia / USA, 1998
4 out of 4 stars

I suppose it’s silly to try to talk about this film without giving away the twist, but I fondly recall being all but blown away by the multiple reveals that really brought the film together, so I can’t help but stick to my usual “no-spoiler” policy, even though I could see this time that the twists might be fairly obvious to many people. It’s true that there were a few films that drew upon similar ideas (although with much different styles) that came out not long after this one and met with much greater success (this was a critical and commercial failure), but that isn’t as surprising to me upon this viewing. This is, after all, more of a great vision than a perfectly-executed film.

What’s interesting is that, at the outset, the film seems to be some kind of neo-noir, but the opening shot and the narration clues you in that there is a mysterious sci-fi element, which becomes more apparent once you meet the villains. These villains, I have to say, do get lamer as the film goes along, although I think the giggles of the students I was watching the film with say more about their unwillingness to go along with the film than the film itself (the next-door drilling, and the failure of one of the speakers, didn’t really help). There is a lot to overlook; I felt like of the main cast, only William Hurt and Jennifer Connelly give really good performances. But nevermind that, as this is really about the art direction and the obvious, yet brilliantly conceived conceptual mind-trips. It struck me this time, as I’m sure it has others, that this is an especially interesting form of metacinema, making interesting comments on the act of filmmaking itself (and that doesn’t give as much away as you think it might). It’s definitely something that everyone should take a look at, although it probably isn’t for everyone.

Source: Warner DVD
22 February, 5:10 PM

Hedwig and the Angry Inch

John Cameron Mitchell, USA, 2001
3 out of 4 stars

By far, the best part of this flashback-driven road film (without the road) is the music, containing all the best tendencies of rock and the musical in any number of rousing numbers. The lyrical content, as you might expect considering that the singer character is a transgendered person whose operation didn’t really go that well, is quite explicit and shocking, but it’s done with the right balance of accessibility and shock value, to the point that I think almost anyone could get behind this music with the right level of open-mindedness (which I understand is a tall order for some folks).

I’m not entirely sure, however, about the actual film this music is contained it; I think it’s good but more of a vehicle for the music than particularly great in and of itself. For one thing, I am a bit irked at how musicians are apparently considered to be the only acceptable subject matter for musicals, indicating that the convention of people breaking into song for “no reason” is really truly consigned to the dustbin of cinema, despite Joss Whedon’s best efforts. In fact, there is really only one true “musical number” here in the traditional sense, and it’s no coincidence that it was my favorite sequence.

Otherwise, most of the movie consists of one-song performances carried out at various gigs in different locations of a thinly-veiled Applebee’s knockoff; this conceit is more pragmatic than anything, as the evil of the chain restaurant is that you could plausibly be in different regions of the country even though the setting changes only superficially. These performances are entertaining, if a bit MTV-style and not exactly all that filmic. The narrative that is conveyed through the aforementioned flashbacks is compelling and develops the character fairly well, but overall, the story itself becomes increasingly underserved at the end, eventually leading, most frustratingly, to a sort of Lord of the Rings multiple ending syndrome. While I usually approve of a 90 minute running time, I feel like storyline was slashed here in order to make room for the songs. If that was the tradeoff they had to make, they chose wisely, but I would have preferred a longer film that allowed both the story and the music some room to breathe, as I feel like important questions were answered in an overly oblique manner at the end.

Source: Warner DVD
15 February, 5:10 PM PM

West Side Story

Jerome Robbins & Robert Wise, USA, 1961
4 out of 4 stars

I saw this film in my capacity as a “projectionist” (actually, I just put in the tape or the DVD) for an undergraduate class, and many of the people there couldn’t help but laugh, even though the professor asked them to look past the cheesiness that admittedly is present in the film. But much as this film is now a touchstone for its now laughably tame portrayal of gang violence, it is actually quite far from the cheesefest that its reputation suggests.

There are certainly weaknesses, such as the sometimes-uncomfortable minstrelsy of two of the three actors portraying the principle Puerto Rican characters (silly accents, mostly, especially in the singing), and the just plan weakness of the white male lead. In fact, I think the best parts of the movie don’t even include the main couple, which makes it amazing that the film works at all.

It does, however, work quite well. I found the dance to be quite exciting and dynamically filmed, and I appreciated how, minstrelsy aside, the depiction of the struggles of the immigrants and the racial prejudices puts the treatment of the same issues in most modern films to shame. The cops, after all, openly state their preference for the white gang (although there are occasional reminders that these kids are “merely” first-generation Americans, and shouldn’t take too much for granted). The fact that the white kids still fight shows that the generational gap is just as importance for them, but it also makes them more complicit in the tragedy that ensues because they don’t really need to fight, at least not as much.

Source: Warner widescreen VHS
11 January, 5:10 PM

The Panama Deception

Barbara Trent, USA, 1992
3 out of 4 stars

I tend to forget that we even invaded Panama (such is my luxury as an American), so this film was interesting not only for reminding me, but for also showing how horrifically ridiculous and overkill (literally) the whole thing was, and worse, how unjustified. The narrator describes Panama as practice for the first Gulf War, but the parallels are obviously very strong with the Gulf War that occurred after this film was made, complete with a clueless, kneejerk-patriotic media that didn’t even have the lame 9/11 excuse for failing to see through government rhetoric. It is made clear that the government’s control of what media sees was actually a new thing since Vietnam, but of course, they fail to complain about it directly to us when they are denied access (as they were during the initial bombardment).

The story is largely told through footage of the aftermath (disturbing, to say the least) and a certain amount of talking heads. Most of the “experts” seem fairly level-headed, although I think they would’ve improved their credibility by not including the allegation that the US military was testing space-age laser weapons against the Panamanian people (it’s already a massacre, it doesn’t need to be an X-Files massacre). The composition of the film itself does leave something to be desired; the director uses the cheesiest freeze-frame and wipe effects, puts a lame “TV frame” around US media footage, and dubs rather than subtitles most of the Spanish speech. This film, then, is basically good because of what it tells us and the fact that it makes us look at what happened, giving us less room to brush it off. If, say, you already knew everything about the Panama invasion, the film would hold little value for you.

Source: Rhino VHS
25 May, 12:44 PM

La dolce vita

Federico Fellini, Italy, 1960
4 out of 4 stars

I liked the previous Fellini film that I saw, but this one was leagues better Even though it’s one of the two longest movies I’ve watched this year, there were no slow spots whatsoever, especially impressive considering that’s one of my most frequent criticisms of films.

Even more than La strada, this is an extremely episodic film. Fellini fades away from one event to the other without giving any direct hint as to where we’ve gone or how much time has elapsed. Rather than causing needless difficulty for the viewer, this approach somehow seems organic and a fitting way to convey a sense of the protagonist’s progression, or lack thereof, as the case may be. I actually find myself, to a certain extent, at a loss in my attempt to explain why this was so good. It is nice to find yet another much-avowed “classic” that I really enjoyed, especially without having to make any special allowances for its age or something like that. This film really seemed closer to flawless than anything I’ve seen lately.

Source: Koch DVD
17 April, 5:12 PM

La strada

Federico Fellini, Italy, 1954
3.5 out of 4 stars

This film, my introduction to Federico Fellini, made a strong positive impression on me early on, which is good because it really tried my patience as it dragged on near the end. I actually don’t exactly know what to say about this film. I found the characters strangely compelling, an interesting balance between nuance and vapid emptiness. Everything was, fittingly, very stark but there was still a lot of dynamic camera work to say the least. The ideological contradictions were fascinating although this is probably unintentional to some extent. I do worry that his subsequent films, which like this one I will see in my role as “projectionist” for this Fellini class screening, are going to be much more self-indulgent than this one (partly from the little I’ve read). But this one mostly got on my good side.

Source: Home Vision DVD
10 April 5:10 PM

The Mission

Roland Joffé, UK, 1986
2 out of 4 stars

Total “historical epic” schlock, with corny dialogue, dumbed-down history, and all. Politically, this whole notion that there were some virtuous white colonizers that would have done the missions in a nice way is just galling, but even if you don’t agree or don’t care, the film still sucks for the above reasons. At least in this film, Robert De Niro gives no hint as to why he is so well-regarded, whereas Jeremy Irons is at least respectable.

Source: Warner VHS
13 January, 4:15 PM