Archive for May, 2011
David Thomson Sez You’re Wrong, It’s Dismal, And Asks, Wasn’t Midnight In Paris Better In 1988, When It Was Called The Moderns?
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Crashing Back To ’86, When Hal Ashby Added One More To 8 Million Ways To Die
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011On The Boards With Kristin Scott Thomas
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Odds and Ends
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Hey, ho, happy day after Memorial Day weekend! Who didn’t
want to go back to work/school today? Yeah, me either.
Here’s something I think you’ll enjoy if you haven’t checked it out already: Matt Zoller Seitz’s very excellent video essay series on the films of Terrence Malick. Seitz’s commentary is smart and insightful; his knowledge of Malick’s body of work is quite academic, but conveyed in a way that makes his thoughts easy to digest. Part One of the series, on Malick’s first film, Badlands (1973) , is above.
Further video essays explore Days of Heaven (1978), The Thin Red Line (1998), and The New World (2005).
_______________________________________
I was enoying reading Andrew O’Hehir’s excellent Salon piece on recent films about ’70s radical terrorism today. Go read it, it’s good stuff. One of my favorite movie-related articles this year. Here’s a nibble:
Uli Edel and Bernd Eichinger’s Oscar-nominated “Baader Meinhof Complex” set West Germany’s legendary student radicals against the vivid social context of a repressive American client state still suffering from Nazi hangover, where fervid Trotskyist rhetoric seemed to spread like herpes (and often via the same vectors).
I love the mental picture that sentence evokes.
And lastly, YouTube suggested I might like this guy, based on the fact that I watched the Yatta Yatta video a while back.
Guy’s got a lot of videos, and he’s pretty funny. I kinda like him.
Wilmington on DVDs: Pick of the Week, New. Biutiful
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011PICK OF THE WEEK: NEW
Biutiful (Also Blu-ray) (Four Stars)
Spain: Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu, 2011 (Roadside Attractions)
In Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu’s sad and moving film Biutiful, Javier Bardem gives an extraordinary performance as a dying man named Uxbal: a small time Barcelona hustler working a variety of scams and shady deals to support his two young children. Uxbal is a man living on the dark side who suddenly discovers that he‘s dying of prostate cancer.
Playing this role, so full of fallibility and pathos, Bardem at times to be carrying us to some bottomless psychic well of pain and sorrow. Yet Bardem’s character in Biutiful (the title comes from his young daughter Ana‘s s misspelling of “Beautiful” ) is no saint. He‘s a petty crook who cons the bereaved by pretending to communicate with their dead, and, in his main job, helps exploit poor Asia and African immigrants, who work under miserable conditions in a secret factory building.
Uxbal is a family man, and there too he falls short. He tries to care for his two young children, Ana (Hanaa Bouchaib) and Matteo (Guillermo Estrella), while being separated from their hot, high-stepping mother, Marambra (Maricel Alvarez). But he has a temper and gets easily distracted. Through all this, he is so overworked and pressed that at first it seems a cruel joke when he learns he is dying. (Maybe he’s better off sick, better off dead.)
Uxbal is not a good man; he’s a petty crook, working for bigger crooks. But the revelation by the doctors of his mortality and inevitable death makes him somehow want to be good, maybe to bring their mother back into the children’s lives, make sure they’re provided for, be better to the hapless Asians whom his employers so viciously exploit — like the mother and her little girl whom he often worries will catch cold at night. (Uxbal gets a cheap space heater to try to keep them warm.). He wants to be a good man. But the irony is that he can’t.
Marambra, the mother of Uxbal‘s children, a good-natured bipolar floozy, can barely take care of herself, let alone Uxbal and the kids (though she wants to). Uxbal‘s sleazy bosses Hai (Cheng Tai Sheng) and Li Wei (Luojin) are irresponsible sweatshop operators, and also lovers. And Uxbal’s genial brother Tito (Eduardo Fernandez) who hires Uxbal‘s illegal workers, is a bit of a crook himself, and also has the hots for Marambra.
This is a morally dark, sordid world, with barely a model example of a good person anywhere to be seen. Maybe one. There’s Ige (Dairyatou Daff), the Senegalese immigrant wife and mother who cares for Ana and Mateo when Uxbal can’t. But, in a way, she‘s out for herself too. (Who can blame her?) In the movie, once Uxbal learns of his cancer, almost nothing goes right for him, or for anyone else, and it’s clear that it’s largely his own fault. This is the way he has lived his life. This is the way he will die.
Unlike the dying old civil servant played by Takashi Shimura in Kurosawa’s Ikiru, a quiet kind old man who has lived a modest life and now just wants to leave behind a playground for the neighborhood, Uxbal seems to have lived a largely bad, self-indulgent life, ameliorated somewhat by his late attempts to be a good father. But now he can’t even provide for hs children and leave behind his money properly — and in fact, though unintentionally, he causes a great deal more suffering in this story himself.
Uxbal is not a good man, not a good father — though he tries. He’s simply a small-time hustler and a very good looking man with huge beautiful soulful eyes, who is being plunged further and further into darkness and misery as we watch. Partly, it is Bardem’s unusual handsomeness that we respond to. If he were a ratlike, cocky little man, an obvious con artist like Ricardo Darin in Nine Queens, it might be harder to feel for him. But we do feel for him somehow — partly because he’s a dying father with kids, but maybe also because the movies (and TV) have all but indoctrinated us in false hierarchies of beauty — the persistent idea that the best looking people have moral worth too.
Should we weep for Uxbal: this mediocre father, this swindler, this cheat? Yet we can, we do — and in recognizing the humanity and part of a good heart beneath this petty crook‘s corruption and awful missteps, we are paying tribute to the soul that dwells within the meanest breast, and within the dying Uxbal’s too. What did my preacher say to us almost every Sunday? “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Of course! And that’s why Bardem as Uxbal is as saturated with goodness, pain and masochism as the killer Sugar (also played by Bardem) in No Country for Old Men was saturated with badness, sadism and evil.
It’s a great performance and a great film. Inarritu takes us into the seedy side of Barcelona — Uxbal’s crowded apartment, the shabby basement, full of illegal Asian immigrants, streets full of Senegalese immigrant peddlers subject to police raids (by police whom Uxbal tries to keep bribed, but can’t). And Inarritu shows us these mean streets, and the mean lives lived by Uxbal and his little daughter and his son Mateo, and all the others, with a stunning visual/dramatic style that suggests both the feverishly colored ferocity of a Scorsese and the compassion, high stagecraft and high humanism of a De Sica. The cinematographer is Rodrigo Prieto (Inarritu’s usual camera partner) and Prieto bathes the streets in fierce light, even as he picks out Uxbal and his children in their room, in shadows, as death draws nearer.
Bardem doesn’t overplay the role. He portrays this sensitive but crooked man — separated from the kids’ mother — gently, with compassion and with astonishing truthfulness. The misery is real, and Bardem and Inarritu make us feel it.
SPOILER ALERT
Uxbal’s eyes are as sad as a pool in which a child has drowned. Behind that holy handsomeness, his face is melancholy and supremely vulnerable, and he seems to be carrying us into a tragedy without tragic stature: the death of a small-time crook, whose power stems not from heroism fallen, but from hopeless misery and blasted intentions — and the heart of a child in a dark room, watching her daddy die.
END OF SPOILER
Inarritu — in Amores Perros, in 21 Grams and here, has become a poet of contemporary pain and violence and sorrow. He is himself a man who smiles and laughs a lot, a one-time star disc jockey in Mexico City, but we haven’t seen that side so much yet in his films. We may eventually. His sense of humor, buried a bit here, is an underlying part of the pity and terror and beauty he achieves in those other ensemble films, and in Babel too.
In the end, Bardem’s Uxbal is not quite beautiful, because we see him too clearly. But he is “biutiful,” because that’s what the little girl Ana sees. Dying, her father becomes transfigured, and, so, for a moment, does she. And that feeling of forgiveness is what makes “Biutiful” a great movie, Bardem‘s Uxbal a great performance. The God who may welcome his spirit in the movie’s last hallucinatory scene, must surely feel something for this sad, tormented man and for the last, harrowing act of his life, and for his final dream. And so do we.
Andrew Sarris’ 5 Essential Film Books
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Apple To Introduce iCloud, Located At A Billion-Dollar Data Center In North Carolina
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011“Gone With The Wind” Is 75
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Cloud Atlas Is “really exciting because all the actors will be playing more than one role,” Weaving says. “I actually have six characters in the same film and they are all different people in six different stories.”
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011SPC’s Michael Barker On Norman Jewison
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Waxman Points/Dr. La Finke Counterpoints Relativity
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Variety Writer Gets The Burps After Sunday LAT Piece On Movie Men With Muskles
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Filmmaker And Bard Prof Adolfas Mekas Was 85
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011On The “Groovy” Set Design For X-Men: First Class
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011CINEMA GUILD ACQUIRES BÉLA TARR’S “THE TURIN HORSE”
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011Winner of the Jury Grand Prix – Silver Bear at the 2011 Berlin Film Festival, “The Turin Horse” may be Béla Tarr’s Last Film
New York, NY, May 31, 2011 — The Cinema Guild announced today the acquisition of U.S. distribution rights to Béla Tarr’s apocalyptic masterpiece “The Turin Horse.” The deal was negotiated by Ryan Krivoshey of The Cinema Guild with Jean-Christophe Simon of Films Boutique. The film will be released theatrically this winter.
On January 3, 1889 in Turin, Italy, Friedrich Nietzsche steps out of the doorway of number six, Via Carlo Albert. Not far from him, the driver of a hansom cab is having trouble with a stubborn horse. Despite all his urging, the horse refuses to move, whereupon the driver loses his patience and takes his whip to it. Nietzsche comes up to the throng and puts an end to the brutal scene, throwing his arms around the horse’s neck, sobbing. His landlord takes him home, where he lies motionless and silent for two days on a divan until he mutters the obligatory last words, and lives for another ten years, silent and demented, cared for by his mother and sisters. Somewhere in the countryside, the driver of the hansom cab lives with his daughter and the horse. Outside, a windstorm rages.
Widely considered one of the most important filmmakers in world cinema, Béla Tarr’s films include “Almanac of the Fall” (1985), “Damnation” (1988), “Sátántangó” (1994), “Werckmeister Harmonies” (2000) and “The Man from London” (2007). He has said “The Turin Horse” (2011) will be his last film.
“Easily one of the most mesmerizing and singular visions ever put on film, ‘The Turin Horse’ is unlike anything else in theaters,” commented Ryan Krivoshey. “We’re honored to be working with Béla Tarr, especially on what will be the release of his last film.”
The Cinema Guild is a distributor of independent, foreign and documentary films. Upcoming releases include Steve James and Alex Kotlowitz’s “The Interrupters,” Cristi Puiu’s “Aurora” and Vadim Jendreyko’s “The Woman with the Five Elephants.”
# # #
Shouldn’t An Average Of A $500m Gross Per Movie Be Enough For Wall Street?
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011I continue to be astonished by the Wall Street analysts becoming Twittiots.
Today, the issue is DreamWorks Animation, one of the few public companies that is solely dependent on the revenues of their movies (including licensing) to remain in business and attractive to stock speculators.
I have zero problem with analysts or anyone else questioning whether DWA is a growth business or if it will be stagnant at best and sliding at worst. There are all kinds of opinions and my opinion of them is not the point of this entry.
The Hollywood Reporter did this story.
When you have the Peter Travers of Stock Analysts, Rich Greenfield, pushing his Agenda Of The Week and you get, ““The key drivers of DWA’s troubles are that its movies have not lived up to expectations and the global DVD market is in free fall as consumers continue to shift from buying to renting,” in response to the biggest Memorial Day opening of an animated film in history, you have to wonder why this one movie changed any of that. (To be as fair as possible to Greenfield, who seems to be perpetually auditioning for a CNBC or Fox Business daily show, he was a “sell” on DWA before the release of the film.)
When you have Janney Montgomery Scott analyst Tony Wible talking about how KFP2 didn’t meet HIS expectations of opening because its PROJECTED domestic gross is $20 million than his guess, which translates to about $9 million in net revenue to DWA (after exhibitors and Paramount take their cuts), you scratch your head an wonder… really? Less than $10 million off of his GUESS and so the company needs a kick in the balls?
Doug Creutz, analyst at Cowen & Co. seems to be the only non-jackass in the game, keeping his DWA position at “neutral,” taking international grosses seriously, and fairly considering whether a company with 2 films a year and no ongoing blockbuster franchises is in very good shape. He’s not rooting for them, but he is thinking about all the factors and not smelling his own farts.
You want my personal take? DWA is a little overvalued, but is a very solid business and should probably be taken private again.
There have been 22 DreamWorks Animation films in 14 years. Only 3 of the brands, representing 7 titles (projecting KFP2 into this group) that have cracked $500 million worldwide; Shrek, Madagascar, and Panda. The last DWA movie to do under $200 million worldwide was the first film with Paramount, Flushed Away, in 2006. There are 6 of those titles. And there is the middle class of this business, 9 films, grossing $200m – $500m, with 3D or without.
So excluding The Big Three brands, DWA’s last three films for Paramount grossed $382m, $495m, and $322m worldwide… all three in the Top 20 of worldwide grossers for 2010 and 2009. The weakest grosser for the company in the last 5 years grossed $288 million worldwide, #18 in the world that year.
So tell me… does that business suck? Is there a problem?
Well, the problem is that Wall Street is interested in growth and quarterlies and two film products a year is not enough to sustain either on a consistent basis. In a now aggressively competitive marketplace for animation, sustaining is hard enough, but growing in the way Wall Street wants growth is pretty much impossible. Getting lucky with a particular film is not really a sustainable stock market model.
But it was NEVER a sustainable stock market model.
If you can’t make a go of it with movies that gross $300 million or more every time out of the gate, you have a problem.
If The Market thinks $300 million every time out, with an average gross for your last five releases of just over $500 million worldwide, The Market has a problem… OR you don’t belong in The Market.
And I don’t just blame the analysts. It is the whole overhyped mentality about opening weekend. A little bit of information is a profoundly dangerous thing.












