What happened in the last three months?

lafemmedelaviateur

La femme de l’aviateur

The answer is probably threefold: Books, operas and O. I have been getting into an almost obsessive reading phase ever since I bought another huge bunch of books and re-organized my bookshelves such that these books can fit in. Also, we are getting ready to move to Singapore which means no more opera for me, so I am spending an extraordinary amount of time watching them, even watching them on TV because I somehow just got into the flow. I have a list of operas online and when they will be taken down. It’s the Netflix effect: If I know that something will be taken down soon, I am more likely to watch it. (With that said, if you know where I can get my hands on a production of “Un re in ascolto”, let me know.) Finally, a trip to London and various small things with O (going to the doctor’s and the likes) took up most of my time. Oh yeah, I also forgot a forth point, which is that I was catching up on exhibitions going on in Berlin. But now, having gone to almost 7 exhibitions or so, there are “only” 5 left which will come in the next few weeks. The winter exhibitions are almost always even more interesting, because people are more likely to go to a gallery on a winter day rather than a sunny day perfect for swimming in the lakes. As a result, I barely watched any movies at all, and once I got out of the rhythm of watching stuff, I was too distracted to get back into it.

Having ranted so much on my life, the main reason for this sheer endless blog hiatus is actually “La femme de l’aviateur” itself. The worst thing about exceptionally good movies is that they send me into a writer’s block sometimes. “La femme de l’aviateur” was that kind of film, even though I personally did not expect that at all. I thought there is much to say about this film, packed with lovely dialogue from Rohmer, the Nouvelle Vague master of dialogues. I think I will always see Rohmer this way, because “Ma nuit chez Maud” blew my mind with its witty dialogue and perhaps the best female character of all of Nouvelle Vague.

One strong memory for me was myself lying on the couch, watching the film while trying to guess Lucie’s name (lovely name, and so French!). I was mesmerized with her precocious character. She is the perfect young girl of any man’s fantasies, perhaps because she appears much smarter and more full of herself than everyone around her. I loved her and the way she dragged our kind of dull protagonist along. Judging by how she spoke about Latin homework, I guessed her name was “Marie-Laure” or something similarly pseudo-high-class sounding (and I avoided “Anne” because that name was already by the protagonist’s lover). As per quick look on Google, Lucie’s actress is a certain Anne-Laure Meury, so my instincts aren’t all that much off, huh?

Other than Lucie, I did not have any super memorable impressions to share after all this time, but I remember that it was the best film in the PIFF this year (which is pretty good!) and I understand why it’s on Gorp’s fictional Sight & Sound list. The details of the film (and what they talk about) is somewhat difficult to remember or even talk about – I actually feel that way with all the Rohmers I have seen so far – but the impression of awe about Rohmer’s capability to craft a story on human interactions persists.

I think I need to watch all the other 5 films from Rohmer’s “Comedies & Proverbs” series too. Originally I was not planning to see them for the silly reason that I prefer Nouvelle Vague films in black and white, but “La femme de l’aviateur” certainly changed my mind on that.

I swear by that bookstore now

I realized that I buy books like other people buy clothing. People buy that stuff without wearing them much, and I buy books largely for the pleasure of having them and reading them… someday. Also, when I am really frustrated, carrying a boatload of cheap books back home pretty much has the same effect on me as carrying the same amount of new clothes did 10 years ago.
This time, I bought so much stuff again that I decided to change up the presentation a little bit.

DSC_0673

Except for “Amours blessantes” which I bought for Shii (pictured above) and “Frauen um Arthur Schnitzler” (not pictured because it’s in my purse), this is the breakdown of what I got:

  • William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar
  • Alexander Puschkin, Der eherne Reiter
  • Fjodor Dostojewski, Aus einem Totenhause
  • Joseph Roth, Hiob
  • Frankreich (an anthology book on French literature)
  • Robert Walser, Der Räuber
  • Iwan Turgenjew, Vater und Söhne
  • London (a National Geographic guidebook for our upcoming trip)
  • Die Edda
  • Nikolai Gogol, Sämtliche Erzählungen
  • Karel Capek, Der Krieg mit den Molchen
  • Anton Tschechow, Das Duell
  • Boris Pasternak, Doktor Schiwago
  • Takehiko Inoue, Pepita

With that said, maybe I need to check out some other stores. I got this strange idea of wanting to read more Ibsen again, and couldn’t find anything like that today. Maybe sometimes when I am frustrated again.

Why are film noirs so fantastic?

thekilling

The Killing

It’s totally off-topic, but I wanted to mention it anyways. Yesterday, Pip and I were watching an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation from the terrible, terrible first season (“Coming of Age”). One minor character made a big impression on me because he was so bad, so annoying and so horribly acted. It made me feel sorry for the desperate actors trying to land acting gigs and having to accept the worst roles ever. There was also one scene with Worf in which he had some utterly stupid lines (“Only idiots have no fear” *stern face*) that made me feel sorry for Michael Dorn to have gone through so many seasons of bad characterization before he was able to return with a better role in Deep Space 9. Considering how Star Trek was supposed to be all idealistic and such, the reality of the show is a rather bleak one for its actors (like the first Ferengi appearances or that terribly racist TNG episode at the beginning of season 1). I perceive the idiocy of these roles as worse than getting naked on camera, because it makes you look like you’re incapable of acting. So I was wondering about this aforementioned minor character and it turns out he was played by this guy. When I saw the Memory Alpha article, I had a feeling I have read this name before, and then it suddenly dawned on me. We watched “All the Way” back when it was shown in Boston, just to see Bryan Cranston on stage. (I still remember how Cranston ended the show announcing modestly that they are all hopeful for the show to make it to Broadway, and then it moved on to get a Tony Award.) It absolutely blew my mind that the poor guy who played annoying Remmick on The Next Generation (and gets his head blown off in that role) will end up becoming a great playwright later on. And if I hadn’t been curious about this Remmick character, I would never even have discovered this unlikely connection.

Now I could talk about lucky and unlucky coincidences and tie it to “The Killing” to make the previous paragraph sound like it has some actual purpose, but that would just be an excuse. I will even continue to digress by musing about how I saw some of my favorite films at the PIFFs. There are many possible reasons for that. It could be because we tend to choose films that we expect to be good (especially Gorp, who will often choose a film he has seen and loves), but it could also be because during a PIFF, I am more likely to view a film in a different way. I usually never watch films in a group bigger than 2 people, and the dynamic of multiple people seeing a film and talking about it while it goes on is very special. “The Killing” is one of those examples where the PIFF most likely affected my impression of the film. I thought that the direction and the cinematography were brilliant and found the story very suspenseful too, but maybe I perceived it that way because I saw the film from a different perspective than, say, back when I watched “Detour” by myself (another film that Gorp likes, but I thought was kind of meh).

In another curious coincidence, Coleen Gray died just recently, over 2 months after we saw the actual film! Unlike for Robert Schenkken, I simply looked her up because she struck me as strangely beautiful. This coincidence reminded me of how a French teacher back in school desperately tried to convince us that the book we were reading were not actually that old using the argument that the author was still alive, and then, a month or so later, she died at age 99.

All in all, “The Killing” is a film one must see and not write about. I read that the film influenced Tarantino’s “Reservoir Dogs” and it clearly shows. Both are wonderfully shot cheap gangster movies with some great story twists, and in both cases I think that the constraint of making their film cheap is bringing the best out of them, so I prefer “The Killing” over “Barry Lyndon” and “Reservoir Dogs” over “Django Unchained” or “Kill Bill”.

And so, the PIFF begins…

kamomeshokudo

Kamome Shokudo

If you don’t know the film and look up its Wikipedia article, you can probably guess where the PIFF went this year. In fact, we even visited the restaurant where “Kamome Shokudo” was filmed! Today, the restaurant makes hearty foods but its decor is also geared towards Japanese tourists who come for the film: You can still see “Kamome Shokudo” on the window right underneath the restaurant name like a subtitle, and it’s written in Japanese (exactly in the font the movie uses). Unsurprisingly, we saw a Japanese couple studying a Helsinki guidebook while eating. The restaurant itself is fantastic. Maybe the food is not haute cuisine, but we got lots for free (water, coffee, tea, milk and even homebrewed beer and a soup) in addition to decent prices (8-10 euro meal) to begin with, and the owners and employees are extraordinarily nice.

Just for that cute restaurant experience, it’s lucky that “Kamome Shokudo” exists. Other than that, the film is… odd. Just like all of the director’s films, it celebrates the quirkiness of its main characters to the point that it’s a little unrealistic. I guess I was not really into the philosophy of the film. I like the idea of her Japanese café in Helsinki, and I enjoyed seeing her fail in a lovely manner. But then she started talking about how Japanese food is the greatest in the world and the Finns must see that (which, in the end, they miraculously do!) and even though I thought the food looked very appetizing, I could not relate to that degree of food patriotism. In fact, I think that it borders on nationalism and find it somewhat dangerous to the ideal of understanding other cultures when people so strongly believe in the superiority of their own culture’s food.

Nevertheless, I liked the film’s wacky characters, and it was much fun to see all these touristic elements of Helsinki which we visited earlier on the same day we saw the film. It’s a very girlish movie (without being a chick flick). I would agree that its story is (despite the latent nationalism) very gentle and sweet, and I really liked how nothing much happened.

PS. It’s been 2 months since the PIFF, but life sure was busy. I want August to be the month where I get back on track with all these things I have been neglecting, including blogging.

The McDonaghs can do no wrong

sixshooter

Six Shooter

Loris noted that he wasn’t explicitly mentioned in my posting for “Leviathan”, which is surprising since we watched it together. That made me realize that I don’t explicitly mention people much at all, not even O who is doing very many interesting things these days, now that he talks and talks.

So, to make up for “Leviathan”, it so happens that “Six Shooter” is the kind of film I would have expected Loris to have seen already. It’s short, it has Brendan Gleeson in it and it’s a movie by one of the McDonagh brothers. However, Brendan Gleeson wasn’t even all that interesting in this particular film. He was kind of an everyman, much unlike the guy he met on the train, who kind of reminded me of the main character in “Trainspotting” (though this may be a somewhat unfair comparison).

In fact, that guy is rather intriguing and most definitely the main attraction of the film. I read an article on matricides and how incredibly rare they are. I discussed it with Loris and told him that I thought all the mother murderers described in the article seem much more crazy than the guy I saw in the film. I wasn’t actually able to explain why. Certainly the guy is quite crazy and most definitely a psychopath, judging by the way he spoke to the couple, but there is something strangely relatable about him (or otherwise Brendan Gleeson’s last scene with him wouldn’t be so emotional) that made him human, whereas your typical mother murderer seems like a total monster. Many things fit his description: He killed his mother in a cruel manner; he said that she was essentially abusing him verbally every day; he has no empathic feelings for anybody whatsoever. But there was no indication that his mother wouldn’t let him go, or that their relationship was so sick that he had to resort to the most absurd murder of all times to get out of his suffering. In fact, he seemed like he didn’t have a single worry in the world, and that nothing could ever disturb him. Maybe that is it that ticked me off, I don’t know.

Of course, “Six Shooter” isn’t really supposed to be an exercise in realism or psychoanalysis or whatever, and there is more going on in the film than just the young kid, so the way he is being portrayed makes a lot of sense to drive the plot and perhaps the film was also a little funny in a dark and twisted way.

Berries, cherries, nectarines and oranges

leviathan

Leviathan

The idea of blogging “Leviathan” is so painful (just like the film) that I almost skipped it to move with the rest of my backlog. To me, it feels like way more than 10 days have passed since I last wrote a blog posting (but then again the last few days felt rather eventful as well) and I had the impression that I am in a huge writer’s slump. In reality, there were 9 days between my postings of “Fitzcarraldo” and “La Ricotta”, and that just shows how much I have been dreading to write about “Leviathan”.

Just like “Biutiful” and a fair number of films I never watched because I thought they would be too painful (“Lilja 4-ever”, “Tess”, and others that I have surely forgotten by now), “Leviathan” follows the formula: “Protagonist leads a terrible life. Then everything gets worse. And worse. And worse. And then it ends in the worst way possible.” That sums up these films pretty perfectly, and it’s only a matter of how we are being hit in the guts throughout the film.

Besides being so… incredibly… sad, I think “Leviathan” also actively makes me uncomfortable, though in this case it’s a sign that the film does an incredibly good job at ripping your heart out and throwing it right in your face. To be honest, I don’t even want to think about the film or discuss its storyline for that reason.
I could also tell that “Leviathan” was even more ambitious than “The Return”, and even though I still vividly remember how awestruck I was for its beauty and lovely religious symbolism, I would say that “Leviathan” fulfilled my high expectations. It was pretty much everything I expected the film to be, and it’s one of these films which has no weakness at all, or so it seems to me. Direction, acting, story-telling, costumes – everything is absolutely perfect. Next to “Melancholia”, it also wins my personal award for the most beautiful interior design of a post-2000 film.

In this respect I am happy that I saw the film in theaters. Its astonishing cinematography makes it absolutely worthwhile, and it actually helps to watch a film of this type in a movie theater because it forces me to focus on it during its 2 1/2 hour run. With that said, we were in the Cinema Paris and it felt like we were there forever. They failed to show the film with subtitles and then they had to start it twice (!) all over again just to realize that the subtitles were still not showing up. At some point they finally made it work, but it made us get out of the theater really late.

This might sound weird, but one of the most memorable scenes in the film was how Dmitri told Lilya he wants to take her to Moscow and she responds by putting a hand on his arm (or stomach?) and saying “Dima” (and then perhaps something else). Even though I don’t remember that scene well, I can still recall how desperate I felt in that moment, even more so than in some of the other more explicitly desperate scenes, like every single time something bad happens yet again to Job… errr, Nikolai, especially the last scene with him when he was already imprisoned.

This ending also is somewhat open to discussion and interpretation. The synopsis on Wikipedia, for example, is quite explicit in its interpretation and it differs from mine. In fact, I would almost say that you can tell how cynical a person has become depending on how bad they think the characters in the film really are. (You have the choice between somewhat bad with some good characteristics or just purely very, very bad.) I thought that was interesting, and considering that I interpreted the characters’ actions in a milder manner than whoever wrote that Wikipedia article, it seems that hope is not yet lost for me, hehe.

Unlike “Slumdog Millionnaire” or a bunch of other Chinese or Iranian films, I think that “Leviathan” is the good kind of film that has been made for the Western audience. I would say the film is ultimately not very Russian, but there is this nagging feeling of “Damn, this could happen anywhere”, and that makes it feel like a special kind of horror movie that haunts me till today.

I am craving blueberries

laricotta

La Ricotta

I currently have a list of things to do before Pip arrives, and everyday I am working on this list because there are only a few days left! On days like these, I don’t actually feel like watching movies at all, and that actually reminded me of the fact that I was in a similar situation when I watched “La Ricotta”. It was basically the result of an optimization problem: How can I spend the least time watching something with the least effort while feeling very accomplished (i.e. having seen something I wanted to see for some really good reason)? Well, “La Ricotta” was shown at the Berlinale this year and it was on Youtube and it was short and a pleasant film. All of these made it the perfect choice – it satisfies my desire for a short film which also made me feel successful (in having seen another Berlinale film).

The danger of this kind of almost utilitarian thinking is that I tend to not take these films for what they are, and just focus on what I get out of them. I wasn’t emotionally open to let “La Ricotta” make me laugh or cry or even think too much. In concept, the film is absolutely fantastic, and I remember that I was amused while I saw it, but the movie is actually so much more. It’s comical and tragical at the same time, its humor is very black but there is also so much humanity in the absurdity of its sad ending scene. While I was most unimpressed when I saw the film, thinking about it in retrospect and about how the film crew made fun of our lovable, bumbling protagonist who is protecting his family, I am overcome with sadness and distaste for humanity. I thought the story was very memorable. As I said, I think the concept of the film is an amazing gem, but I am not sure if I was just personally not so fond of its execution (there is so much going on in this short little film) or if I simply was not in the mood for it.

I don’t like Pasolini enough to go to the exhibition on his life at the Martin-Gropius-Bau, but I certainly always am interested in seeing his name and indeed, “La Ricotta” was a worthy watch. Perhaps I should check out his Decameron? He he he.

A little over a year ago…

Do you remember this posting? I visited the same bookstore again and came home with the following items. (Sorry for the blurry pictures.) This time I spent about 30 on these, with “So geht das!” being the most expensive title (10 euros).

IMG_20150603_205200

  • Michael Bulgakow, Aufzeichnungen eines Toten
  • Italo Calvino, Der Baron auf den Bäumen
  • So geht das!

IMG_20150603_205050

  • Martin Walser, Liebeserklärungen
  • E.T.A. Hoffmann, Lebensansichten des Katers Murr
  • Frank Wedekind, Frühlings Erwachen/Der Marquis von Keith
  • Kenzaburo Oe, Reißt die Knospen ab (Nip the buds, shoot the kids)

IMG_20150603_205126

  • Karel Capek, Geschichten aus der einen und der anderen Tasche
  • José Saramago, Die Stadt der Blinden
  • Thomas Mann, Lotte in Weimar
  • Alexander Puschkin, Jewgeni Onegin

Ah, Claudia Cardinale

fitzcarraldo

Fitzcarraldo

There are a few opera tourism things I want to do. I want to see La Scala, La Fenice and the Opéra Garnier from the inside, and attend Glyndebourne, but most of all, I want to see the opera house in Manaus. For someone like me who has never been to South America, Manaus is a great representation of everything that fascinates me in one. To be honest, I watched “Fitzcarraldo” just because of that (and because I feel ashamed that I had never seen a Werner Herzog film before when 6451 is a fan).

I am seriously disturbed by Klaus Kinski and that is why he works amazingly in this role. He is totally not likable, and manages to create a character that we find sympathetic and repulsive at the same time. There is something fascinating about how this character walks the thin line between passion and obsession – I think it’s an intriguing kind of madness, and puts “Fitzcarraldo” into a string of films with more or less lovable outsiders who would be absolutely unbearable in real life, but work great as protagonists in a film because such people simply are interesting. He overshadows Claudia Cardinale in a mostly boring but rather pleasant role, and I was positively surprised that she is not treated as a sex object here. I can accept that.

To be honest, some aspects of the film (mainly due to Klaus Kinski’s crazy face) made me uncomfortable, but the end was so utterly satisfying and grand that I realized the movie is a big feat. If I were ever to fail in life, I would want to fail this way.

A painting

pina

Pina

In Vienna, Loris and I had a discussion about what kind of art we are not particularly into. For me, it’s theater (it makes no sense, but I rarely go out to see a play). For him, it was dance and ballet especially. Well, I love dance and ballet especially, but there are some limitations to that. Most of all, I don’t really get modern dance. For classical dances, I simply love the beauty of how it looks. Mostly it’s an esthetic appreciation – I like to look at beautiful bodies moving, I am in awe at the excellence of primaballerinas and how they execute these movements. I like how a ballet tells a story in movements, especially “Onegin” is simply wonderful when told in movements instead of words, and that is even more amazing considering how much I love Pushkin’s text. I love Giselle’s madness scene and found it incredibly intense last time I saw it. But that is where it ends. I think that dance can be great at evoking emotions, but only when I see them. For most modern choreographies, I simply have no idea what it’s supposed to mean, what the dancers are trying to express and it puzzles me how all those raw emotions going into them largely escape me.

“Pina” explains that a bit, but while I was very interested in these people’s stories, I couldn’t quite see what they meant. For the most part of the film, I was just enjoying the imagery, the beautiful choreographies and the incredible comfort of watching a visually stunning 3D film on a big screen sitting in Pixelmatsch’s living room. Pixelmatsch, the biggest Lokalpatriot this world has seen, also loved all the shots in Wuppertal. The only thing that irked me a little bit was the way everybody spoke about Pina Bausch. They treat her like a saint, which is a little disturbing to me. I agree, however, that she was a wonderful choreographer, and I liked many little details in her choreographies. My favorite choreographies were the “Seasons” (The part illustrating winter is the best!) and “Café Müller”, with its very lovely repetition of couple interactions. All in all, it was an awesome experience.