About Chocolate Parfaits

Shirin

The film’s biggest weakness is that it is virtually impossible to follow the story. The Wikipedia article tells the tale quite comprehensively it seems, and after seeing the film I realized that there were many holes which needed to be filled in. I kept wondering who Farhad was, or Maryam – none of these are really explained. This is a rather experimental film after all, and I should not have expected a cohesive story, but without the understanding of that story, “Shirin” gets reduced to a mere exercise de style. If you don’t really know what these women are reacting to, then all you see are pretty, overly emotional looking faces.

Speaking of pretty faces, I am surprised how esthetically pleasant this film was. Either the actresses in the film are all beautiful (and one must pass some standard of beauty to become an actress in Iran), or the way they are shot makes their faces so strangely attractive. It is probably the latter and due to Kiarostami’s talent to observe people.

I heard about the film for the first time when reading about “Vivre sa vie” and its iconic scene. The article referenced both “La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc” and “Shirin”, and it made me want to watch both. “Shirin” is pretty much exactly what I expected (except for the romance story, for which I developed a strange interest for over the course of the film), and I think the actresses are all doing a splendid job. All in all, however, this is one idea taken to the extreme and not much more than that, almost like a video installation in some modern art museum, it is hard to even compare it to anything else Kiarostami has done.

La moustache

Some French movies fall into this inexplicable category of intellectual French films where the intellectualism totally pisses me off. The main characters speak very correct French (so correct that I understand every single word) “La moustache” is very borderline on that.

The characters do not appear like they have high-paying jobs (you barely see them there at least), but for some reason they live in an exquisitely stylish apartment, the guy’s parents lives in the 16e arrondissement and they dine in very expensive-looking restaurants. I suppose that is a typically Parisian thing. For some reason, around 2pm, you can always see a bunch of people of all ages sit around in cafés and you wonder where they get the money AND the time to do so. Somehow that describes the entire film – it indulges itself in an unrealistic lifestyle, telling a surreal mystery story whose solution, as we all know, will not be uncovered. Similar to Antonioni films, the film is the embodiment of first world problems and I am absolutely okay with that.

Reviewers on Imdb (I am actually surprised there were so many reviews!) compare the film to “Lost Highway” and “Caché” – I disliked the first one and never saw the latter. I don’t mind unsolved mysteries à la “Copie conforme” and this mystery had a few amusing twists along the road. Especially for the first part of the film, I thought that suspense and drama were built up pretty well. Unfortunately, the last part in Hongkong proved to be unnecessarily dragging. I liked the direction and the cinematography, but looks are not all. The “exotic” Hongkong does not really contribute to the story and I wished they had cut that one a little shorter, or had set it somewhere else. This way, the Hongkong part is just pretentious, pseudo-colonial bullshit (especially with those china dresses these white women are wearing – ugh).

Not seeing this film would not make you miss anything, unless you are a huge fan of Philip Glass’ music (in which case you will get some of it). But if your date proposes to watch the movie and you are in no social position to say no, you’ll be alright.

The face you deserve

I appreciate MUBI and I am tempted to get their services for another month or so, but the truth is that I don’t think they can even remotely compare to Netflix. Now that I see the differences between Netflix, Hulu and MUBI, I come the following conclusion: a) I would pay for Netflix in a heartbeat because they have so many TV shows I like and actually make Arrested Development Season 4 become reality. I am also looking forward to House of Cards. b) I would never pay for Hulu because the fact that their films have commercial interruptions is horribly annoying. I’d be okay with a (longish) preview or some commercials at the beginning but I totally do not appreciate it when they ruin my viewing experience of the films. c) I strongly doubt I would pay for MUBI. Unless they come out with new and better films, I don’t think there will never be more than 5 or 6 films amongst the ones they are offering at any time, and from the library of about 900 films I ended up watching a few (except for “Killer Elite”, all the films from this year were from MUBI) and there are 28 films in my “to watch” list, a lot of which are either on Netflix or open source and therefore on Youtube. But that is not all. Their interface is stylish but does not work very well – you either have the choice between a small window and full screen, and even though there is supposed to be some sort of resume, it never works. The progress bar is laid over the (almost always ugly) subtitles and do not disappear reliably. On the technical level, MUBI is definitely the worst and I don’t understand.

The last technical problem was most annoying when I watched “The face you deserve”. My grasp of Portuguese is non-existent (in comparison, Italian or even Japanese are easier) and it was quite annoying to have to pause whenever that progress bar appeared again, for whatever reason. Well, it’s not like you really need the dialogue in the film. As for me, I have absolutely no idea what was going on. Words cannot describe my confusion about the film – I couldn’t even say what it was really about. Perhaps the storyline is just a little surreal and is not supposed to make any sense, or I was not concentrated enough to realize what was truly going on. I would be grateful for any explanation.

Strangely enough, however, I did not dislike the movie despite not understanding its content. This is not Antonioni or Tarkovsky, but there is something strangely beautiful about the film. Maybe it’s the vibrant colors, maybe it’s the carefully placed shots, maybe it’s the fantastic elements – something makes me want to look at what Miguel Gomes is doing. Even just watching the film as a succession of non-sensical scenes is strangely enjoyable because there are so many scenes I liked. For example, I enjoyed Marta’s song at the beginning, and all those childish elements in the dwarves’ story provoke delightfully nostalgic feelings in me. I am really curious about “Our beloved month of August” and “Tabu” now. I want Miguel Gomes to make something like “Copie conforme”, his strong imagination and vivid imagery seems perfect for a love story.

With that said, I realize that Oliveira is still alive! Impressive. If Woody Allen lives that long, I will never be able to see all of his films.

Alle anderen

I recently read Jonathan Rosenbaum’s article on “Dancer in the Dark”. Whenever he writes about movies he admires I am typically OK, but when he has a distaste for something (“Inglorious Basterds” for example), I come to realize how spiteful it all sounds. While admitting that he was moved by “Dancer in the Dark”, he literally hated all of it, mostly complaining about how anti-American it is, re-iterating the “Lars von Trier has never been to the US” argument.

I have a feeling that I will be equally spiteful when it comes to “Alle anderen”. Gorp really liked it because the film is not overly dramatic or emo and, I suspect, because Gorp actually loves hateful people in his films. I certainly agree with the first part – the little details in the film are their best point. I didn’t think it was too slow or too boring or anything like that. My problem really lies with the second aspect, the hateful characters – they are self-indulgent and stupid, and do not appear to make any attempt to actually want to improve themselves and their relationship. Personally I have a distaste for films about relationships in which all I see is hatred. (For a similar reason, I dislike “Still Walking” and French films in the veins of “Un conte de Noel”.) My personal stance on relationships and family is that genuine affection is possible and does not necessarily have to come with the baggage of hidden contempt and hatred. The characters in “Alle anderen” may be realistic, but to me, they are not really interesting.
Another aspect I disliked about the film was the ending. I thought the subtle depiction of the main characters’ relationship was well done up until the point where he throws her into the pool, and instead of fighting it out like normal people and trying to talk to each other (incidentally something they strangely tried to do for the rest of the film), they have sex and fight half-heartedly the next morning. Really? Childish much?

I can see where the good reviews for “Alle anderen” is coming from. But for me, listening to their lamenting voices and seeing their silly fights over pseudo-meaningful things is just painful. I think it’s been awhile since I have seen an actually good film on relationships.

Come and see

Number one on that list is currently held by “United Red Army”, number two is “Grave of the Fireflies”, number three is “Nordwand” and somewhere along the road, you’ll find “Apocalypse Now” and “Come and see”, both definitely in the top 10. Right after seeing the film, I think I cannot say whether I will have nightmares or not, that is how subtle the terror of this film is.

“Come and see” has a very extensive Wikipedia article and I am sure that a lot has been said about it. Most importantly I was intrigued by how critics call it both naturalistic and poetic, depending on who sees the film. On one hand it is certainly true that the film has elements of both, on the other hand there are no more different notions in this world than naturalistic and poetic. Naturalism has no place for ‘beauty’ yet the film has a lot of surreal, beautiful scenes. Maybe the reality is just that the real world is so unreal that it can only be understood through poetry.

When I started watching the film for the first time, I went through the first 45 minutes being utterly bored. Truth to be told, I am not very good with these films which are not obviously pleasant or entertaining, especially when it takes a long time for the storyline to build up. Without a doubt, the second part of the film has more, uh, action (if you can really call it that). As I have mentioned before, the terror in this film creeps up on you, slowly and somewhere on the line between consciousness and subconsciousness. It affects you with its deeper humanity and the knowledge that we are not seeing everything in this film, but in the facial expression of the protagonist you can indirectly feel how bad it is.

Speaking of that protagonist, there must be something about Russian films and their amazingly great child actors. “The Return” is another example of a film where the great acting of children strongly contributes to the film – in fact, neither “The Return” nor “Come and see” could live without the impressive acting of their protagonists. Besides Kravchenko’s Flyora, I think that Mironova’s Glasha is absolutely awesome. The scene in which she dances in the rain is both crazy and wonderful. It is too bad that she barely appears later on, but maybe that is also for the best.

I think a certain amount of idle time is necessary to watch a movie like “Come and see”. You kind of have to prepare yourself for it, and be willing to let the effects of the film linger afterwards. As for me, I will probably dowse my brain in a brainless, fun TV show now.

Killer Elite

Of course this film is not in the MUBI library. I recently received an e-mail from 314 with his recent ranking of films. Since I agree with most of the ones I have seen, I decided that anything he deems to be better than 6/10 is worth watching. “Killer Elite” got a 7 and since Pip was interested in it AND the film is available on Netflix, so we decided to spend the evening watching it.

This introduction is relevant because the film marvelously met my expectations to the T. It’s pure entertainment but no more and no less. The film is incredibly dense, and made me in awe of how much action you can pack into 120 minutes, with multiple chase scenes and exciting one-to-one confrontations. I don’t think it is possible to be bored with this film, unless you absolutely hate all kinds of action scenes. As for me, I have slowly come to like them when they are well done, and in “Killer Elite” they certainly are. However, there is nothing new about the film, nothing overly exciting, it is not even emotional in any sense. I wouldn’t say the film is empty, but everything is just so convenient in it. While the circumstances in some action movies can provide for the best emotional drama sometimes (I am thinking of “Leon” or “Infernal Affairs” here), “Killer Elite” is completely boring when it comes to that. There is not enough drama or tragedy going on, and the uplifting ending does not fit the overall mood of the film.

314 put “Killer Elite” onto the same level as “Drive”. While “Drive” is certainly the more stylish and beautiful film, “Killer Elite” has a much better story, even with a better female lead. Just don’t be surprised by them saying “prick” and “bollocks” all the time.

The Actor

One of my Iranian co-workers said that he disliked Kiarostami. Another one sent me a list of his movie rankings with almost 600 movies, of which “Taste of Cherry” is in the 100s, “Where is the friend’s home?” is in the 300s and “Homework” in the 500s. In comparison to that, two Makhmalbaf films he saw were both in the 400s, but then again I don’t know any of those movies anyways. I think that does not really bode well for Makhmalbaf whose films I am only interested in because of “Close-up”. It may also not be a great idea to just watch one of his films because it is conveniently available on MUBI, instead of making a more sophisticated choice. But then again, some directors have lots of famous stuff but the real gem is a film that people all overlook; I am especially thinking of Lars von Trier’s “The boss of it all” and Hitchcock’s “The trouble with Harry”. It might have been that “The Actor” is Makhmalbaf’s masterpiece precisely because it is not his most famous work. I wanted luck to be on my side.

Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn’t – I might never know because it’s unlikely I will see one of his films again. I realize that he is influential and a part of me was really afraid that all of his movies end up being brainy and overly artistic. Despite my love for “Close-up” I usually dread these overly thoughtful combinations of reality and fiction and that is apparently what Makhmalbaf is best in. I am also a little disturbed by how his wife and both daughters are artsy filmmakers too… I just think it’s strange? He seems to be the director who revels in his fame, and I was wondering if it would show in the movie.

It didn’t. For the most part, “The Actor” is a rather amusing comedy with an interesting premise and good actors. Many details about the film make it likable: the style of the protagonist’s house (how awesome is this stage-like apartment?), the random dream-like sequence with the wife in the middle of the film, the references to Charlie Chaplin and other old films. It is unfortunate that these pleasant elements are often overshadowed by less pleasant ones, especially the tendency of all characters to loudly complain and scream at each other. Why must they be like that? Most strangely, the story became confusing towards the second half. After the premise was set up nicely, all of a sudden I didn’t quite understand some of the scenes anymore. Around the middle of the film, it was established that the wife was pregnant and they want to get rid of the new wife, but then husband goes on this quasi-meaningful road trip with the new girl? What exactly is going on? It was only in the last 5 minutes that I felt like I knew what was happening again. The little twist at the end was a lot of fun and gave the film’s title a whole new meaning. I liked that she revealed herself, left and kept the money.

Not really recommended.

Il Grido

Whenever I used to read articles on “Le Amiche” people would mention how “Il Grido” is their favorite Antonioni film. It was only after I saw “Senso” recently and became a fan of Alida Valli’s acting that I finally got determined to see this film (prior to this, I actually intended to see “La Notte” and “Zabriskie Point” first). I am not actually into her face at all, just like I don’t quite like Greta Garbo’s face either. Unlike Monica Vitti, I am not mesmerized by her physical beauty but the way she acts. Besides being an incredibly gifted actress, her beauty comes from those intense expressions in her face and her deep eyes. I think there is no other actress quite like her, she has this severe yet emotional charm that makes her very special.

Just like they all say, “Il grido” is a perfect example of an Antonioni. When I saw a film of his for the first time (“Blow-up”) I thought that Antonioni was a master of style, perhaps even style over substance. That may still hold true, but it was only his trilogy of love that convinced me he was a master of emotions too. As mentioned before I am still missing “La Notte”, but both “L’Avventura” and “L’Eclisse” conveyed feelings so strong that I could not help but be drawn to the story. “Le Amiche” and “Red Desert” are similarly heart-wrenching so I expected the same from “Il Grido”. In some sense that turned out to be true – Aldo’s desperation is wonderfully supported by the bleak landscapes – but on the other hand, I found the character of Aldo lacking. He does not suffer from the cold alienation like Monica Vitti’s characters but he actually loves Irma as intensely as some of the “Le Amiche” characters do. However, he manages to treat every single woman in his environment badly, including the ones he clearly loves, Irma and his daughter, so it makes it hard for me to sympathize with him whatsoever.
Antonioni is better when it comes to the portrayal of women. Including Irma, all the female characters are interesting and have their own troubles. The desperation in their eyes seems much stronger to me than that of Aldo, and it makes it easy for the audience to view him as the culprit who drove almost all of them into despair.

Style-wise, “Il Grido” is certainly more ugly than all of his films, and probably purposefully so. Without the high-class elegance it looks even more openly bleak, not even the stylish wardrobe of the women can hide that. Most fans of “Il Grido” are probably into that, but for me, this movie was mostly another chance to see Alida Valli and to get a greater understanding of Antonioni’s film history.

Dersu Uzala

The Wikipedia article says that Jonathan Rosenbaum contributed to the list and I think it totally shows. The large quantity of Stroheim films, some of his more recent favorites – they are all in the list. I have no idea who put “Dersu Uzala” into the list, as JR is amongst the few film critics I actually know, but that person did well. It might not mean much to be in the same list as “Babe” or “Blair Witch Project”, but its appearance definitely made me more interested in the film.

As almost always these days, I had absolutely no idea what “Dersu Uzala” would be. I didn’t even know it was supposed to be a name – not every combination of two unintelligible words must be a name, right? If titles actually had to be representative of a film, the movie should rather have been called “My friendship with Dersu Uzala”, or if you want an even more comprehensive title: “My friendship with Dersu Uzala: Kurosawa’s vision of the beautiful landscapes of Siberia”. It sums up all you need to know about the film.
Yet at the same time, there is much more than that. I am fascinated by how Kurosawa is the director of this film, and how it was the first film he made after getting over his suicidal depression. “Dersu Uzala” is one of those slow-paced, beautiful films without all that much action (very much unlike what Kurosawa normally does) but a lot of life-affirming humanity. It delves in its cinematic beauty and tells a very simple story of friendship between two men whose backgrounds could not be any more different. Dersu does not only save their lives multiple times, even at the risk of his own life, but the film subtly transports a deep affection between the two characters which goes beyond simple gratitude. Most importantly, Dersu is not portrayed as some “wild person” like most of those civilized-protagonist-meets-native-person movies à la Pocahontas and almost everything playing in Africa do, instead the friendship between the main characters is inherently human and thusly immensely beautiful. It took me awhile into the arguably long film for the emotions to sink in, but by the time the captain meets Dersu for the second time, I was so into their relationship and cared for the characters so much that I felt a lot of suspense when they tried to save Dersu from drowning. (It is my favorite scene in the film!) Dersu is also a really cute person, I love the way he talks (especially when he calls the captain’s son “the Little Captain!”) and I am impressed by his incredible willingness to be a good person.

Recently, I have been reading “The Hobbit” – in fact, I still do – and we amused ourselves to make jokes about parallels between “Dersu Uzala” and the Hobbit book. Sometimes the Russian survey expedition group looks just like a bunch of dwarves, and Dersu is their hobbit. They are out walking through the woods, and in many cases the hobbit aka Dersu is the one saving the day. “Dersu Uzala” might not really work as an adventure film, but there definitely are some life-threatening situations scattered throughout it.

I don’t really care about whether the real Dersu Uzala was anything like the film. The film stands for itself, and it is wonderful execution of a simple but great story. Also, it was shot in 70mm so if you ever get a chance to see this in theaters, you must and then let me know how it was!

L’Age d’Or

I was never really able to get behind Bunuel’s movies. First I saw “Belle de Jour” which I thought was infuriating because the main character made no sense whatsoever, then I saw “Un chien andalou” but really the film is just as confusing as its most famous scene is shocking. I don’t really get Bunuel, but I’ve been telling myself to find out what is so immensely great about his films. He is amongst the most accomplished directors according to They Shoot Pictures and at least “Viridiana” and “The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie” sound intriguing.

My impression of the film can be summarized in one sentence: Thank goodness it is short. For most of the time, I was interested in what was going to happen next, only to realize that the happenings in the film don’t really connect well. Even as a surreal film there is a little bit too much suspension of disbelief. At the same time, some of those absurd scenes were precisely what actually made the film interesting. If you accept that the film seems nonsensical at times, it is those silly scenes which make the film strangely funny and enjoyable, like this guy randomly kicking a little dog (poor thing, but you can’t help but laugh!) or another guy destroying his violin on the streets, or that guy who threw out the bishop out the window! Without knowing anything about the film, it becomes quite obvious that the film criticizes Catholic morals (ugh, this Sade novel character who looks like Jesus?) and high-class bourgeois life, but if it doesn’t quite make sense, what else is there besides some provocative imagery?

Right after “L’Age d’Or” we watched this year’s Downton Abbey Christmas special. I am sorry, Bunuel, but that one was so much more memorable and interesting. It must be sad to lose against a lame soap opera. I am glad to have finally seen what this film is about, but it won’t really stick with me nor become a source of inspiration like some other Dali works have been.