Posts Tagged ‘biography’

All That Jazz

All That Jazz

Sunday, February 17th, 2008

I was sure I already had a review of this so this might end up a little on the short side. I’m pretty sure I’ve said something about Erzsebet Foldi before, that’s why I thought I’d reviewed it already … ‘cos what I thought I’d written was, how is this movie the only thing she was ever in?! An amazing dancer, beautiful to behold, so natural before the camera, and perfectly cast as Scheider’s loving, precious, brotherless, generous (“underlined 3 times” lol) daughter … yet this is her only film credit, it’s incredible.

Anyway, clearly the reason I watched this this weekend is due to the sad passing of Roy Scheider this past week. Of course, at 76, he had a great innings – certainly better than Bob Fosse, who he basically portrays here – but it still saddened me to hear of it. This movie already had resonance outside of its surface appearance due to just how much Fosse put himself into it. Now – at least, this week, I find it serves as a perfect farewell to Scheider. It struck me during the last scene how it might strike some as a tad tasteless to watch it at such a time, ‘cos I know there are a lot of people who prefer death be confined to grave grief, black suits, hearses and mourning; but I think it’s perfect in its attitude to death … that celebration scene of “Bye Bye Life” countered so slapfaced by the snapback to “the only reality” at the end, the body bag being zipped up.

You can see Scheider’s Gideon so many ways – ego is always mentioned in reviews of the movie; it’s easy to sense he has no self-awareness, doesn’t know what he’s doing or who he’s hurting etc. I think he has total self-awareness; he just doesn’t care. And to me the film’s biggest comment is: why should he, when death is so inevitable? It’s a kind of Fight Club / American Beauty type message, as dangerous as it is profound. I still don’t know what to make of these movies entirely, some days I love them and some days I realise what an ass I am to love them so; I know that when I’m watching they are fun though; that Scheider’s performance is incredible; that the song and dance numbers start brilliant and only get better as the movie goes on; that we’re lucky to even have one movie featuring Erzsebet Foldi; and that anything that can make me get in such a twist reviewing is pretty much always worthy of 5 hearts.



Control [2007]

Control [2007]

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Little to add to the first review here but on BAFTA night to single out Sam Riley. I was shocked by his exclusion from most of the awards, let alone the whole movie in other categories, when nominations were first announced; after watching his performance a second time, my mind simply boggles. I honestly think this whole movie belongs up there with the likes of There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men this year, and his performance up with Day Lewis and Depp, not to mention the cinematography … it of course baffles me even more that it’s excluded from so many categories at the BAFTAs, and I hope it wins all that it’s up for.

November 27th, 2007:

I really didn’t know how I’d fare with this one, not really being a huge fan of Joy Division nor really even knowing much of their story or music except for what was touched on by the brilliant 24 hour Party People … to illustrate how little, I didn’t know anything about Ian Curtis’ epilepsy. And I’ll admit, in light of 24 hour Party People, I did find myself wondering about the need for this movie.

It didn’t take long for me to realise this was one of the best movies of the year, though. I can be pretty picky about movies like this if they don’t feel like they gel as a whole from the start – the ensemble, the design, the authenticity, especially these days when it’s so much more possible, everything has to be right about these movies – and if nothing else, this one is certainly the best “period” movie of the year technical-wise up with Zodiac and American Gangster. This one betters both those by far though with the other less technical stuff – the stuff that makes cinema get inside you. The performances are all perfect, believable – I think it says it all that even Craig Parkinson’s turn as Tony Wilson works following Steve Coogan’s, at the time, seemingly irrepeatable take on the guy.

The soundtrack, of course, is perfect. Mark Kermode has said all that needs to be said about how right the decision to have Sam Riley do his own singing was – the cool thing I think he didn’t mention though is how the band sounds too. Like I said, I’m not a Joy Division fan – I’m one of those people who know the songs but wouldn’t immediately name the artist … at best I’d be, like, “ummm … someone from the Manchester thing?” lol. But in addition to being a portrait of a doomed young artist to rank up there with The Doors, to a lesser extent Last Days, etc, this actually made me for the first time want to listen to the music too. The black and white photography is simply beautiful, it’s the kind of movie where almost every frame is an art print, and it’s far from being all misery like it could’ve been. It’s one of the best British films in ages, and I haven’t done my double bill recommendation thing in ages … even if it’s obvious, I can’t think of a better pair than this and the aforementioned Party People.



Scott Walker: 30 Century Man

Scott Walker: 30 Century Man

Thursday, January 17th, 2008

It’s the Kermode working again – I pretty much ran to hear all I could of Scott Walker after Mark Kermode’s review of this doc, astonished that I’d never heard of the man prior to it, even more astonished after I listened. I pretty much knew that I’d like Scott Walker the minute I heard about him, kinda like Nick Drake, Donovan, and others; and in the same way, having heard him, I kinda knew I’d like this documentary, since I even liked his latest work, “The Drift”. I think the BBC show “Imagine” broadcast a shortened version of this very film, too, ‘cos I recognised a lot of it from somewhere. So it could’ve been a dual influence that brought me to fandom.

On one level I guess this is a very flat telling of Walker’s story – an artist who worked in the confines of pop just so he could write, who finally broke free, who reached a pinnacle only to be inexplicably tossed aside by the public, but who kept on working in exile to make some of the most extraordinary, difficult, unique music of the last 30 years. It’s at its best in the cool stretches where we see Walker fans simply listening to his and the “Brothers” records – their own arranger commenting on one, “I must listen to some of these … and you’re sure I did this one?” … everyone, even Bowie, still visibly overwhelmed by the sounds he brought into the world.

One issue I have, and it’s something I guess I’ve kind of been itching to talk about overall here or elsewhere so I might protest too strong here, but it’s the narration that speaks of the past in the present tense (”… they begin to record their last album ever …”) … I hate when historians do that more than anything in the world, and it’s even worse when it’s inter-cut with the onscreen interviewees who, naturally, speak of the past in the past tense. Just a silly grr, I guess most people are fine with this lol.

In any case, it’s a gorgeous documentary about a gorgeous artist. To go back to the Mark Kermode connection, I think this unlike Heart of Gold really could bring Walker new fans – you’ve only to hear a bar of his early work to fall in love, and even though there’s a part of me that’s naturally repelled by his more recent stuff including “The Drift”, it’s impossible to ignore and irresistible not to delve further. And if you’ve any artistic inclinations whatsoever, you’ll be inspired more than you thought possible.



I’m Not There

I’m Not There

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

“Never look at yourself.”

At first I thought this might just be like the cinematic equivalent of Tori Amos’ “American Doll Posse” – a great concept but, by its very nature, doomed to be scatterbrained. Either that or something as surprisingly coherent as Palindromes. Certainly this is yet another 2007 movie – like Zodiac, American Gangster, 3:10 to Yuma – whose technical perfection far outweighs any real level of connection, at least for most of its duration … and while some seem quite capable of excusing such an absence, it’s a huge problem in my eyes if a film that should get inside you fails completely to do so.

I was kind of “raised”, and I think with good reason, to believe that if the first thing you find yourself mentioning of a movie is how good it looks, then it’s really not a good movie (for the record, I’m sure I’m guilty elsewhere on this site of exceptions to that rule, but it’s still a good rule). I just don’t think I got anything out of this that I haven’t got already, and couldn’t get again more easily, out of the music itself, the poetry in “Tarantula”, the “Chronicles” book, the Scorsese doc … sure, they recreate the “Judas” moment and other stuff flawlessly … but is it essential as I find the other works? I’m not so sure.

There’s something about it that’s pretty much inherent in the title – it’s a portrait of an artist that, like that guy at the end of Citizen Kane, just about shrugs its shoulders and admits that it really can’t put a finger on him, that no man can be contained within a word, a soundbite, even a 2 hour ode such as this. I’ll admit that in the last 30 minutes I was completely captivated – in the end it does finally start to merge into something resembling a whole … so it’s also yet another movie for which a second viewing will be essential and could easily change everything I’ve written above. Cate Blanchett is as good as everybody is saying; I really liked Christian Bale’s portrayal, too; and the rest of the cast are about as appealing. Of course, the music rocks. But at this point, I’m almost afraid to say, it’s the visuals that stand out above all else.



Blow

Blow

Monday, August 29th, 2005

I loved this movie when I first saw it. I could see why people were criticising its similarity to movies like Goodfellas and Boogie Nights etc, but there were still plenty of moments where the movie came into its own. I still pretty much feel this way about it, it’s one of those movies that easily makes up for any failings it might have with a handful of simply beautiful scenes or sequences. I love how the look of the film, the colour and everything, develops over the course of the movie.

Johnny Depp is good … not one of his best performances but it’s a pretty difficult character – how likable can you make this guy? Penelope Cruz was more annoying to me on this viewing than I ever remembered. Ray Liotta and Rachel Griffiths are the standouts here. My first impression of Ray Liotta’s appearance in the movie when I first saw it was, “could they force comparisons to Goodfellas any more?” lol, but he’s really pretty fantastic, especially in the character’s later years. Griffiths is most amazing in the scene following Depp’s arrest in their home. Even though what she’s done is unbelievable, I can’t help feeling so sorry for her.

It’s the last half hour that wrecks me and brings the movie up a lot, as Jung goes past the point of no return and beyond. There’s so many images in this section of the movie that kill me – his daughter’s piercing, shaming gaze as he’s arrested once more; her sitting alone with her pink suitcase waiting to go to California; her line in the visiting room, “I thought you couldn’t live without your heart,”; and the final scene when she ‘visits’ him grown up, that reverse angle on their hug is so sad.

I just realised I could sit around quoting this movie forever. As I said, it has it’s little problems, but for me they’re far outweighed. It’s just a beautiful movie with an amazing philosophy in Jung’s voiceover narration – unbelievably sad, but with glimmers of joy. It’s sad that this turned out to be Ted Demme’s last movie, but it’s certainly his best.



Ed Wood

Ed Wood

Thursday, April 8th, 2004

I confess before I even try reviewing this beautiful movie: I’m a Johnny Depp fan, moreso with each movie I see; I’m a budding filmmaker with ideas that some might, and some have, call as bad as Edward D. Wood’s; and I have gender issues. Maybe this is why I like this film, but I would love to just say it’s because it is a great movie, and I think it is.

Performances all round are superb – Martin Landau is a revelation, I don’t think he’s ever played as far from himself as he does in this movie. This is the kind of transformation that today would warrant a leading Oscar. It’s great that he won for supporting. It’s a shame the movie didn’t win more than this and make-up (odd, is this the most Oscars a single character has ever won in a movie?) Johnny Depp is, of course, perfect. And Tim Burton made a great decision for once ditching Danny Elfman’s music in favour of Howard Shore’s. Shore’s opening theme sounds very like Elfman, but later in the movie when things get slightly heavy and poignant, Shore is much more able than Elfman in my opinion.

I really don’t know how to be objective about this movie – but if you ever thought you had a great idea but were afraid to let it out ‘cos you knew that really it was stupid, then this movie will make you want to let it out.