The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies
MCN Blogs

By DP30 david@thehotbuttonl.com

DP/30: Damsels in Distress, writer/director Whit Stillman

8 Responses to “DP/30: Damsels in Distress, writer/director Whit Stillman”

  1. sanj says:

    this seemed like a dp/60 … haven’t seen any of his films

    dude needs to make some action films or something if he wants to get noticed

  2. JKill says:

    DAMSELS IN DISTRESS is great. I saw it some weeks back at an early screening as part of a Stillman retrospective. It’s probably his silliest, most broad and stylized film, which is part of its many charms. Gerwig is terrific in it. It’s a really fun and original film. I basically smiled the whole way through.

  3. The Pope says:

    Sanj, are you using an irony so deeply embedded I am completely unaware of it?

  4. sanj says:

    nah – he’s only made like 4-5 movies .. still haven’t seen them.

    so give him a comic book movie then people will figure out who he is

  5. The Pope says:

    “so give him a comic book movie then people will figure out who he is”

    So, Steven Spielberg has only just come on your radar? In which case, you might want to check out these directors: James Cameron, Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood, Katheryn Bigelow, David Lynch, the Coen Brothers, Terence Mallick, Steven Soderbergh and Alexander Payne.

  6. Yancy Skancy says:

    I dig Stillman a lot, but in fairness to sanj (who I assume is a fairly young guy), this is his first film in 14 years, and his previous work hasn’t been canonized like that of, say, the similarly non-prolific Malick.

  7. The Pope says:

    Yancy Skancy,
    That’s fair enough. Although I’ve heard of these things called DVDs and they’re great because they allow me to watch films I missed in theaters.

  8. Brian Street says:

    Ha! Here he dances the Sambola lol

    http://vimeo.com/39214972

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Yes, good movies sprout up, inevitably, in the cracks and seams between the tectonic plates on which all of these franchises stay balanced, and we are reassured of their hardiness. But we don’t see what we don’t see; we don’t see the effort, or the cost of the effort, or the movies of which we’re deprived because of the cost of the effort. Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice may have come from a studio, but it still required a substantial chunk of outside financing, and at $35 million, it’s not even that expensive. No studio could find the $8.5 million it cost Dan Gilroy to make Nightcrawler. Birdman cost a mere $18 million and still had to scrape that together at the last minute. Imagine American movie culture for the last few years without Her or Foxcatcher or American Hustle or The Master or Zero Dark Thirty and it suddenly looks markedly more frail—and those movies exist only because of the fairy godmothership of independent producer Megan Ellison. The grace of billionaires is not a great business model on which to hang the hopes of an art form.”
~ Mark Harris On The State Of The Movies

How do you make a Top Ten list? For tax and organizational purposes, I keep a log of every movie I see (Title, year, director, exhibition format, and location the film was viewed in). Anything with an asterisk to the left of its title means it’s a 2014 release (or something I saw at a festival which is somehow in play for the year). If there’s a performance, or sequence, or line of dialogue, even, that strikes me in a certain way, I’ll make a note of it. So when year end consideration time (that is, the month and change out of the year where I feel valued) rolls around, it’s a little easier to go through and pull some contenders for categories. For 2014, I’m voting in three polls: Indiewire, SEFCA (my critics’ guild), and the Muriels. Since Indiewire was first, it required the most consternation. There were lots of films that I simply never had a chance to see, so I just went with my gut. SEFCA requires a lot of hemming and hawing and trying to be strategic, even though there’s none of the in-person skullduggery that I hear of from folk whose critics’ guild is all in the same city. The Muriels is the most fun to contribute to because it’s after the meat market phase of awards season. Also, because it’s at the beginning of next year, I’ll generally have been able to see everything I wanted to by then. I love making hierarchical lists, partially because they are so subjective and mercurial. Every critical proclamation is based on who you are at that moment and what experiences you’ve had up until that point. So they change, and that’s okay. It’s all a weird game of timing and emotional waveforms, and I’m sure a scientist could do an in-depth dissection of the process that leads to the discovery of shocking trends in collective evaluation. But I love the year end awards crush, because I feel somewhat respected and because I have a wild-and-wooly work schedule that has me bouncing around the city to screenings, or power viewing the screeners I get sent.
Jason Shawhan of Nashville Scene Answers CriticWire