Author: Sasa

Letter from an Unknown Woman

What can I say, I loved the film. Just yesterday, I have read the book, and I find it astonishing how well the adaptation touches the original atmosphere of the book. So, there are a few deviations but those are so minimal and of such non-existent importance. Even the chronology and a lot of lines have been directed ported into the female narrator’s voice. While it might sound surprising (considering how the setting was changed from Vienna of the 1920s into Beijing of the 1930s and 40s), I find it very explicable how it is possible to transport the very essence of the story including most of its text into a film adaptation set in China.
First of all, the main character does not relate much to her time, she is mostly a thoroughly timeless character and whose love has no boundaries, especially not her environment. Everything in the world is him, and he – as a character – is never going to change. The whole story could just take place with a famous actor or pop singer today and the Unknown Woman’s love would still feel exactly the same.
Second, and most importantly, you can see how much admiration the makers of the film have for the book. I have known beforehand that Stefan Zweig’s colorful and slightly kitsch style is very, very popular in Asia; it’s just the type of romanticism that Asian people seem to like. I even find the Chinese translation of the lines of the book to be even more beautiful than the original German, which already heaviness and melancholy. To me, it seems that it’s very easy to transport these kinds of feelings into an Asian language: The Chinese language has so many words that differentiate different types of love, and also puts an emphasis on the heaviness of such a love. At some point, the Unknown Woman says that she fell in love with him at first sight. „Love at first sight“ has a very common expression in Chinese (which, of course, has 4 words), but in Chinese, it does not only say „love“ but it says „endless love at first sight“, with the word for love expressing the type of love which designates lovers on a passionate, sexual, romantic basis. It means that you have very deeply fallen in love with someone at first sight – forever. In Chinese, that expression has the connotation of being a very heavy and desperate burden rather than some happy and romantic illusion which might fade. Asian cultures have this ideal of unconditional, eternal and immensely strong love, and they cherish this love and make tributes to them in their movies („Dolls“ is also a brilliant example).
With that said, it does not surprise that the Ophüls version from 1948 is supposedly less faithful to the original book, because the Unknown Woman takes some sort of revenge on the author. It makes her more realistic and gives her masochistic character another more human, and perhaps also deeper psychological level. But it is not what happens in the book.

What can I say, I loved the novel and I was prepared to love the film, which I did in the end. It is also interesting to see what different kinds of impacts film and book make on me. While the book puts the Unknown Woman’s thoughts into words and makes them understandable for us, the film mostly shows her expressions and her movements. All in all, the book made me much more emotional because I felt like those words were just there, on my lips, but I am unable to put such thoughts into words; the book gave me the feeling to ‚be‘ that woman and to love such a man. However, it was the film that touched to the verge of crying. While I have found the majority of the film beautiful instead of heavy and melancholic, I thought that the very last scene, in which the Unknown Woman meets the old servant, was indescribably sad. Throughout those years, she has become a stunningly beautiful woman who walks out with expensive jewels and a marvelous dress, and it is in that moment that she has to face the hardest situation in her life. It is in that moment only that it dawned on me how immensely sad her fate is, and I felt tears in my eyes.

Finally, I cannot say that I recommend this movie, because it really is not the type of film that you have to see if you are not interested in the topic at all. It is indeed very stylish with many beautiful shots with old Chinese houses, cities and landscapes, and Xu Jinglei is a wonderful actress who is amazing at subtly transporting feelings. The film deserves its award in San Sebastian absolutely. It totally is my type of movie and it does what it wants to do brilliantly, but I would not put it onto my list of best movies ever.

Infernal Affairs III

Of course I have seen the first and the second movie; it’s even been years ago and I would see them again in a heartbeat. Just as I have expected, this is totally not the case for the third part. I think that the contents of the movie were quite memorable (unlike the storyline of the other two parts which I feel I have forgotten already, and so I keep re-watching them to remind myself again).

The most redeeming factor of the film are a. the nice soundtrack and cinematography, b. the brilliant actors and c. the nice ending which actually made sense. While the end was a little sad for our favorite character Lau, I ended up sympathising with Yan’s friends a lot, and have come to like the fact that their efforts in honor of their friendship were rewarded.
In the end, while it was actually good and actually worth a watch, I admit that the film is a treat for die-hard fans of the prequels, but most definitely not interesting from any other aspect at all.

L’Eclisse

Okay, so the truth is: Watching this movie hurt. Not because it was bad, that is very far from it, but because it was absolutely brilliant. For the first part of the movie, I was mainly astonished at its style; in fact, I have never ever seen a cinematography that is as beautiful as this, not even with Godard. On the other hand, I was surprised at the directionlessness of the plot during the first 30 minutes of the film.

Very slowly, however, I came to understand what the whole building up of the story is about. In retrospect, the whole first part of the movie was to introduce us to the two main characters, which is why we had this long breaking up talk at the very beginning, why we saw Vittoria with her mother and with her friend playing Africans, why we had these extremely long scenes at the trading floor. It was all to show us the environment in which these characters live, and by extension, showing us why they were unable to truly get close to each other.

Maybe that is what I have found to be so disturbing, sad and hurtful – right in the moment when the both of them grew closer, they both decided not to pursue that relationship anymore. Whatever reason it might be, whether it really was just running away or realizing that the other is a horrible match for you or something completely different doesn’t matter. The scary thing is that something made this relationship end, and this type of end feels incredibly horrible to me.

In many aspects, “L’Eclisse” is wonderful. Especially when the two main characters met and started engaging in a relationship, the film became interesting and even a little suspenseful in its slowness. More than anything, however, “L’Eclisse” is one of those wonderful Antonionian portraits of the Italy of its time, and I can’t wait to see the other two of Antonioni’s Italian trilogy. I also surely will be seeing „Zabriskie Point“ at some point, just out of curiosity.

Blowup

I am in the process of watching the second half of “L’éclisse” also by Antonioni and I have no idea what I should think about this director. While “L’éclisse” is the ultimate good-looking borefest, “Blowup” actually was interesting and beautiful at the same time. Both films are similar in many ways: They both build up the story very slowly, they both emphasize on the cinematography and small gestures. I suspect that this is Antonioni’s style. However, in the way both films deal with relationships, they are utterly different.

And what beauty this film is! I never cared about the mod subculture and probably never will in the future, but this film feels like it serves as brilliant portrait of the 60s that I have never quite really taken an interest in before.
Right now, I am not sure where my fascination for this film actually comes from. The aspect of photography completely relates to my personal interests, not to mention how every single photo taken in the film is absolutely marvelous. To me, “Blowup” feels like an ode to photography as an art form, as a way to look at the world, at this something on the verge between reality and illusion. It’s all about pictures, and it fits to Antonioni like nothing else; every single of his shots look like it could just as well be an art photo.
Another reason why I might have been so fascinated by this film is that I haven’t seen anything for quite awhile. While the last films I have seen were quite great and some of them also rather subtle and deep (like “Je rentre à la maison”), it’s been awhile and I barely remember much of them anymore. After killing time with random things and studying, I felt so immensely refreshed to see a film like this. More precisely, I felt like myself again.

Personally, I think Malcolm McDowell would have been the perfect actor for the main character. That might have made it to one of my favorite films, but now it’s just a film that I find pretty damn good.

The film has an audio commentary: I looked into it for about 2 minutes and already got to see so many interesting details about the film – I wish I had the time to listen to it, so that I would have more to say about the film and comment on its style with a little more background knowledge. Maybe next time.

A Time to Love and a Time to Die

I don’t actually think Douglas Sirk’s other movies will be as good as this. This movie impressed me so much that I had nightmares from it for three nights afterwards. This did not happen to me in the last movie I have seen (which was this Russian propaganda one). Now it sounds like a bad thing, but objectively, it just shows that the story in the film was so good that it affected me so deeply.

I have read that Douglas Sirk’s films were dismissed as melodramatic at the time, until some Nouvelle Vague directors such as Truffaut discovered him and started worshipping him to the point of cult. To be honest, I can understand both: „A time to love and a time to die“ was very melodramatic and the trailers to his other movies look so melodramatic that I cannot bear it. I was wondering what such a director would do with Erich Maria Remarque’s somewhat dry style (or so it seems to me) and suppose that Remarque himself must have contributed quite a bit to the making of the film considering that he acts in it.

In my opinion, Lilo Pulver was wasted on Fräulein Ingeborg in „One, Two, Three“. Billy Wilder is the type of director who can make everybody, including Marilyn Monroe, act suitable for its role. But with La Pulver, I have the impression that she can do so much more, it’s just that she never had the opportunity to. At least I do think that her role as Elisabeth already feels much more stronger than the one of Ingeborg.

This is the first film I decided to buy because it was simply not available on the internet, but luckily, I did not regret this purchase. Perhaps it’s actually not worth 8 euro to me, but at that moment, I totally wanted to see this film, and I’m glad to have seen it.

Je rentre à la maison

Prog’s „favorite films of the decade“ prompted me to watch this film. With so incredibly many movies from this – our – decade, I wanted to know why he would pick precisely those ones. I, for instance, would have chosen a completely different set of films for my own decade list, which makes this particular list even more fascinating. In many ways I think that „Je rentre à la maison“ is a weird choice.

At the Berlinale this year, Oliveira showed a 60 minute long film and this short running time looked incredibly intriguing to me. „Je rentre à la maison“ is quite a bit longer, but it feels like the whole story could have been told just as well in 60 minutes: Nothing really happens, and long takes are really long here. I thought the movie would be about grandfather and grandson growing close to each other, but you barely even saw them interact. In fact, the movie solely focuses on its main character, and that is where its strength lies.

I think that the cinematography of the film is what makes it the most interesting; I especially loved those shots where people were talking but you didn’t actually see them speak. In the café scene, there was a focus on the main character’s shoes; during rehearsal for the TV show, you only saw John Malkovich. Just thinking of that scene makes me want to laugh. Oh, Malkovich is such a genius for being able to pull that scene off. XD

And the biggest surprise of the whole movie was that Catherine Deneuve had no significant role in the whole movie whatsoever. She did nothing but play in the play at the very beginning and look shocked at the end of her appearance in the film. That’s it?

Finally, I think it was Malkovich’s role and the absolutely brilliant end that made me feel like there is something more profound to this film that it looks like on the surface. For some reason, I kept thinking that the main character would simply go home and die at the end. But it didn’t happen, it was left ambiguous and now that I think about it, it’s a brilliant idea. I wonder if, one day when I am old, I am going to just want to go home too.

L’Atalante

„L’Atalante“ is the type of movie that I have only seen on some critics’ favorites list so far, but nowhere else. It seems to be quite an unknown classic, but hey, I have never heard of „Les Valseuses“ anywhere at all. At least L’Atalante is famous among film makers and film buffs. And what a classic it is, according to its Wikipedia article.

Jules, the first mate is my favorite character of the movie: He looks like Popeye so much, his scenes are the funniest and his tattooes are atrocious. XXXD I really think that his and Juliette have the best chemistry together, especially in that scene in which they are both in his room and have fun.

I was so shocked when I recognized the Canal St. Martin. They say that the cinematography and directing of the film is poetic, and the way the Canal St. Martin was shown in the film, even though it was for a few minutes, definitely is. Apart from that, I am not a big fan of poetry, and I wouldn’t actually call the film poetic myself. It’s a movie I don’t really know what it is or how it can be described. Perhaps this is because I have not seen enough movies from that epoch, perhaps it is because „L’Atalante“ truly is an outstanding movie. It makes me think of „The Catcher in the Rye“ a little bit, just like Salinger, Vigo only made one or two movies, and those few catapulted him into the list of the most acclaimed directors, and if it’s only because Truffaut loved his work.

The uniqueness of the film is also reflected in its second main character, played by Dita Parlo. Somehow she looks so entirely different from all other women from that time; she’s so unique I can’t quite judge whether she is a good actress or not. Something about her leaves me speechless. There are erotic pictures of her on the internet, and there must be something about her that inspired Madonna and Dita von Teese although she barely shows any flesh in the movie.

In some ways, the movie makes me think of „Stranger than Paradise“. Juliette is a stranger in Paris and on the Atalante, and the film moves on from one interesting detail to another. Even the soundtrack is lovely, there is one main theme that makes you want to sing along with it, and it even has a few musical elements with people singing. (Of course this is quite unlike „Stranger than Paradise“.) I have even dreamed of the main tune of the film a few times. Furthermore, „L’Atalante“ is so surreal at times that it also reminded me of „Le Chien Andalou“.

Finally, I think it is difficult for me to judge this crème de la crème of the 30’s, except that I actually enjoyed watching this road boat trip movie. I suspect that this is the type of movie that actually becomes better and more enjoyable the more often you see it. And reading some good articles about it seems to help quite a bit too.

La Règle du Jeu

And yet again we have one of those ‚most acclaimed‘ movies ever. The more I watch these movies, the more I get the impression that I will never understand what makes these kind of movies stand above all others. What makes „Citizen Kane“ so great that everybody and their mother loves the movie so much? I have wondered the same about „Vertigo“ recently, and now I am wondering the same about „La Règle du Jeu“.

Apart from that, „La Règle du Jeu“ is surprisingly fun for such an old movie. The best scene is the one in which wife and mistress become friends after laughing about the husband together. The next highlight was the chaotic scene during the stage performance. As the marvelous French Wikipedia article on the movie says, Renoir used a theatre stage technique in which many different characters interact with each other on different levels, creating a comical and chaotic scene in which everyone is in an uproar. This is precisely what I love about comedies so much, and it is executed brilliantly in „La Règle du Jeu“. I also thoroughly liked the performance of the actors, and it seems Renoir also has influenced it a lot by letting them improvise and asking them to play ‚comeddia dell’arte‘-style.

Speaking of characters, who do you think would be my favorite character? ;) Hint: It’s a woman, amazingly enough. She is the best actress and lightened up the beginning of the movie with her playful way of acting, I loved it. Apart from her, I didn’t care much for any of those other characters, although every single one of them contributed to the hilarity of the story. It especially becomes clear at the very end when Robert asks Octave „Ah, so you love her too?“ with this non-chalant voice of his. Ahaha.

It is mostly in little details about the mise en scène that „La Règle du Jeu“ is great, not so much the storyline or even the characters who are all pretty stereotypical. Perhaps this focus on a beautifully crafted mise en scène is what these movies so highly acclaimed, and why I personally tend to prefer the more story- and character-focused „Gosford Park“ over „La Règle du Jeu“.

All in all, if it were me, I’d say that I prefer „La Règle du Jeu“ over „Vertigo“, and I like „Vertigo“ more than „Citizen Kane“. Oh, and I like „2001“ more than all of them.

V for Vendetta

From the very beginning, I liked this movie. I mean, what is there not to like: It met every single of my expectations of a better Hollywood movie. The main characters were engaging, it was very easy to follow the story quickly and swiftly and most of all, it was an engaging yet relaxing thing to do on my trip to university. That was all that I wanted, and I found myself very interested in what is going to happen next by 1/3 of the movie, the time when I arrived at university.

I am done with the film by now and have never seen a movie that started so high and fell so low in my esteem. (In fact, it didn’t reach the very bottom: If “JSA” is a 10 and “A Good Lawyer’s Wife” is a 1, then “V for Vendetta” is still a 7 on that scale.)
While it started off in quite a stylish and sophisticated fashion, with V quoting some good books and giving off the air of perfectly knowing what he does, the film showed more and more of its silliness through its course. This all cumulated in this incredibly silly last scene in which those soldiers didn’t even shoot – aaahhhh! It’s probably the point when I realized that the whole film is a little too unrealistic for its own good, and it’s the only mass demonstration scene I have seen in my life that did not move me in any way.

So, this horrible scene aside, I see that the film has its merits. I think that it had a good story to tell, and if it inspired young people to delve deeper into the subject and, say, read “1984” because of that – great. Apart from that, I have found the film to be at least equally gripping as “The Dark Knight” was, and I am glad that it was more about content, dialogue and storytelling than action scenes in which it is actually only important who dies. Would I recommend this movie then? Oh yes I would. It’s extremely stylish, a whole lot of fun to watch as long as you don’t take it for serious and it stars La Loliportman in a nice role.