Friday, July 18, 2003
Alexander Nevsky
Directed by Sergei Eisenstein
Alexander Nevsky lacked the character and plot complexities of Ivan The Terrible which made the latter a masterpiece. It is however, on the outset a majestic war film, with an equally impressive score written by famed composer Sergei Prokofiev.
Alexander Nevsky (Nikolai Cherkassov) is an exiled prince who is asked to return to defend the last free Russian state, Novgorod while their invaders, the German Teutons, who have occupied nearing Pskov are moving closer.
Alexander Nevsky, rich in visual composition and motif, is complemented equally with Prokofiev’s film score. When the film begins, we see large expanse of open fields and sky symbolizing the natural beauty and tragedy that will befell the country . It will however jump into a shot of dead skulls and arrows telling us that Russia has just recovered from its war with the Mongolians; and also inherently implying that more deaths are to come.
Alexander Nevsky will continue to intrigue us with more outdoor sets - be that the bustling street where Vassily Buslai (Nikolai Okhlopkov) and Gavrilo Olexich (Alexander Abrikossov) teases the beautiful Olga (V.S. Ivasbeva) – which is a humorous introduction to two of our main actors and to bring in the love story; or the scene where the population of Novgorod debates about choosing a leader to confront the Teutons – showing us the city’s citizen’s split opinions on the issue.
Prokofiev score heightens the cinematic impact of the film especially in the battle scene. The shots which appears randomly pieced together, creates a euphoria anticipation. Long wide shots are complemented with closer more erratic fighting. Prokofiev’ score which seems to have a life of its own, creates a rousing mood that it takes over the visuals.
When the battle is finished, the dead bodies lying strewn across the vast expanse, reminds us of the introductory scene filled with peace and serenity. It almost feels as if the film should have ended there.
Nikolai Cherkassov does not have much acting space as Alexander (unlike his role on Ivan). He comes across more as an orator than a fleshly human prince. Nikolai Okhlopkov and Alexander Abrikossov, as the two friends fighting hand in hand during the battle, are closer to the audience with their emotions. V.S. Ivasbeva who is the beautiful and petite Olga contrast with the other female with equal beauty, a warrior, Vasilisa (Anna Danilova) who comes across as more worthy of love for Alexander Abrikossov who decides that he fancies her more.
The victory sojourn shows Prokofiev score in alarming versatility as it slips from sadness to anger to jubilation while the army returns showing the injured soldiers, captured enemy followed by the winning army.
Alexander Nevsky’s grandeur and remarkable film music makes it one of the all time best period war films ever made.
Directed by Sergei Eisenstein
Alexander Nevsky lacked the character and plot complexities of Ivan The Terrible which made the latter a masterpiece. It is however, on the outset a majestic war film, with an equally impressive score written by famed composer Sergei Prokofiev.
Alexander Nevsky (Nikolai Cherkassov) is an exiled prince who is asked to return to defend the last free Russian state, Novgorod while their invaders, the German Teutons, who have occupied nearing Pskov are moving closer.
Alexander Nevsky, rich in visual composition and motif, is complemented equally with Prokofiev’s film score. When the film begins, we see large expanse of open fields and sky symbolizing the natural beauty and tragedy that will befell the country . It will however jump into a shot of dead skulls and arrows telling us that Russia has just recovered from its war with the Mongolians; and also inherently implying that more deaths are to come.
Alexander Nevsky will continue to intrigue us with more outdoor sets - be that the bustling street where Vassily Buslai (Nikolai Okhlopkov) and Gavrilo Olexich (Alexander Abrikossov) teases the beautiful Olga (V.S. Ivasbeva) – which is a humorous introduction to two of our main actors and to bring in the love story; or the scene where the population of Novgorod debates about choosing a leader to confront the Teutons – showing us the city’s citizen’s split opinions on the issue.
Prokofiev score heightens the cinematic impact of the film especially in the battle scene. The shots which appears randomly pieced together, creates a euphoria anticipation. Long wide shots are complemented with closer more erratic fighting. Prokofiev’ score which seems to have a life of its own, creates a rousing mood that it takes over the visuals.
When the battle is finished, the dead bodies lying strewn across the vast expanse, reminds us of the introductory scene filled with peace and serenity. It almost feels as if the film should have ended there.
Nikolai Cherkassov does not have much acting space as Alexander (unlike his role on Ivan). He comes across more as an orator than a fleshly human prince. Nikolai Okhlopkov and Alexander Abrikossov, as the two friends fighting hand in hand during the battle, are closer to the audience with their emotions. V.S. Ivasbeva who is the beautiful and petite Olga contrast with the other female with equal beauty, a warrior, Vasilisa (Anna Danilova) who comes across as more worthy of love for Alexander Abrikossov who decides that he fancies her more.
The victory sojourn shows Prokofiev score in alarming versatility as it slips from sadness to anger to jubilation while the army returns showing the injured soldiers, captured enemy followed by the winning army.
Alexander Nevsky’s grandeur and remarkable film music makes it one of the all time best period war films ever made.
Wednesday, July 16, 2003
Woman Next Door, The (Femme d'à côté, La)
Directed by Francois Truffaut
The bondage of mad passionate love in Woman Next Door, The (Femme d'à côté, La) escapes reason and logic. It is a story about men and women who cannot escape from their destinies.
Gérard Depardieu is Bernard Coudray who lives in a homely house in a small town with his wife and two young kids, Thomas. Their new neighbours are a childless couple, the Bauchard; the wife is Mathilde (Fanny Ardant) who is Bernard’s ex beau. Unable to resist each other, they stumble into a spiral of wild lust and infatuation that will end with a tragedy.
Woman Next Door is ultimately, a meticulous study on the subject of love and lust. Bernard is unable to tear himself away from Mathilde when she decides that that they have to stop their illicit affairs. He goes mad in public when the Bauchard holds a party before going on a honeymoon. Mathilde who tries to resist her ex lover’s charm continues to see him despite attempts to stop her behaviour. It is their inability to tear themselves away from each other; at the same time, leaving their current spouses; that makes their bitter love for each other difficult, melodramatic and breathless.
Depardieu, as the cheating husband, plays it just well to convince us of his insecurities. He cajoles Mathilde, plays with his kids as per normal and assures his wife as if nothing is happening. Fanny appears stronger initially of the two when she decides to stop their affairs but breaks down showing her inner turmoil towards the later part.
The presence of Madame Jouve's (Véronique Silver) which acts as a third party, arbitrator, storyteller, also has her past to contend with, acting as a forebearer of things to come.
Woman Next Door is a simple story with characters that makes you believe in them.
Directed by Francois Truffaut
The bondage of mad passionate love in Woman Next Door, The (Femme d'à côté, La) escapes reason and logic. It is a story about men and women who cannot escape from their destinies.
Gérard Depardieu is Bernard Coudray who lives in a homely house in a small town with his wife and two young kids, Thomas. Their new neighbours are a childless couple, the Bauchard; the wife is Mathilde (Fanny Ardant) who is Bernard’s ex beau. Unable to resist each other, they stumble into a spiral of wild lust and infatuation that will end with a tragedy.
Woman Next Door is ultimately, a meticulous study on the subject of love and lust. Bernard is unable to tear himself away from Mathilde when she decides that that they have to stop their illicit affairs. He goes mad in public when the Bauchard holds a party before going on a honeymoon. Mathilde who tries to resist her ex lover’s charm continues to see him despite attempts to stop her behaviour. It is their inability to tear themselves away from each other; at the same time, leaving their current spouses; that makes their bitter love for each other difficult, melodramatic and breathless.
Depardieu, as the cheating husband, plays it just well to convince us of his insecurities. He cajoles Mathilde, plays with his kids as per normal and assures his wife as if nothing is happening. Fanny appears stronger initially of the two when she decides to stop their affairs but breaks down showing her inner turmoil towards the later part.
The presence of Madame Jouve's (Véronique Silver) which acts as a third party, arbitrator, storyteller, also has her past to contend with, acting as a forebearer of things to come.
Woman Next Door is a simple story with characters that makes you believe in them.
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Murder By Numbers
Directed by Barbet Schroeder
For once, I am impressed by this “Hollywood” production starring Richard (Ryan Gosling) and Justin (Michael Pitt) who are the parallels of the two male murderers in Hitchcock’s Rope.
Murder by Numbers, though, is more than just the homosexual overtones of the relationship between the two high school kids and how they commit the crime. It is more a psychology thriller where as the audience already knew who committed the crime and why they did it. The only drive to continue watching the movie is to decipher how they did it and how the police solves the case.
Cassie Mayweather (Sandra Bullock) as the detective who has an unpleasant past is plagued by her desire to find the real culprits even though the force is sloppy enough to believe that it was the school janitor. Sam Kennedy (Ben Chaplin) finds himself caught between fancying his partner, Cassie and trying to solve the case, in which he believes that she has gone overboard and taken it too personally.
Instead of “forcing things to happen” or having “happy endings” which is typical of many Hollywood, Murder by Numbers feels realistic. Sandra Bullock as Cassie is natural as the perceptive detective on her case; appears vulnerable when haunted by her past. Sam who is her partner and ends up sleeping with her, might be relegated to a secondary role but they complement each other without overdoing the chemistry. He portrays credibly the man who has to act professional even it is hard for him to do so.
Ryan as Richard is haughty, the “doer” compared to Michael as Justin, the “philosopher”. His impatience is offset by Michael who believes that their murder should be well-planned to the smallest details. Both of them fit into their roles and does not try to outdo each other in acting out their characters which can happen in similar situations.
The twist to the ending might not be come much of a surprise to some but it is the analogy and irony of the situation that makes Murder by Numbers realistic and a little disturbing.
Passion
Directed by Jean Luc Godard
I have to state before hand first that I watched this movie from a heavily censored video and hence, might not be able to make much out of it.
The story is supposedly about the Polish Jerzy (Jerzy Radziwilowicz) and Laszlo (Laszlo Szabo) making a movie but refusing to sell out. Meanwhile Jerzy carries out an affair with Isabelle (Isabelle Huppert), owner of a motel and a factory worker, Hanna (Hanna Schygulla).
Like most Godard movies, Passion has an unconventional structure which comes across as lousy work for other directors. While the actors are speaking in intellectual generalizations (as typical of many Godard’s character), Godard shows us the faces of others who are listening. The film also creates a sense of disillusion and displacement to experiment using tools such as lighting or the lack of; “still portraits” of Rembrandt, Goya, Delacroix characters; medieval stage sets; televisions in the background with characters talking in the foreground.
Like most Godard films, one needs to watch it either many times or read an interview of the filmmaking process to understand better what it is about. As I’ve said before, Godard movies are to be read; not watched. His movies are intellectual in the sense that they challenge what a typical viewer comes to the movies for. He poses questions that divides the bridges of opinion.
Directed by Barbet Schroeder
For once, I am impressed by this “Hollywood” production starring Richard (Ryan Gosling) and Justin (Michael Pitt) who are the parallels of the two male murderers in Hitchcock’s Rope.
Murder by Numbers, though, is more than just the homosexual overtones of the relationship between the two high school kids and how they commit the crime. It is more a psychology thriller where as the audience already knew who committed the crime and why they did it. The only drive to continue watching the movie is to decipher how they did it and how the police solves the case.
Cassie Mayweather (Sandra Bullock) as the detective who has an unpleasant past is plagued by her desire to find the real culprits even though the force is sloppy enough to believe that it was the school janitor. Sam Kennedy (Ben Chaplin) finds himself caught between fancying his partner, Cassie and trying to solve the case, in which he believes that she has gone overboard and taken it too personally.
Instead of “forcing things to happen” or having “happy endings” which is typical of many Hollywood, Murder by Numbers feels realistic. Sandra Bullock as Cassie is natural as the perceptive detective on her case; appears vulnerable when haunted by her past. Sam who is her partner and ends up sleeping with her, might be relegated to a secondary role but they complement each other without overdoing the chemistry. He portrays credibly the man who has to act professional even it is hard for him to do so.
Ryan as Richard is haughty, the “doer” compared to Michael as Justin, the “philosopher”. His impatience is offset by Michael who believes that their murder should be well-planned to the smallest details. Both of them fit into their roles and does not try to outdo each other in acting out their characters which can happen in similar situations.
The twist to the ending might not be come much of a surprise to some but it is the analogy and irony of the situation that makes Murder by Numbers realistic and a little disturbing.
Passion
Directed by Jean Luc Godard
I have to state before hand first that I watched this movie from a heavily censored video and hence, might not be able to make much out of it.
The story is supposedly about the Polish Jerzy (Jerzy Radziwilowicz) and Laszlo (Laszlo Szabo) making a movie but refusing to sell out. Meanwhile Jerzy carries out an affair with Isabelle (Isabelle Huppert), owner of a motel and a factory worker, Hanna (Hanna Schygulla).
Like most Godard movies, Passion has an unconventional structure which comes across as lousy work for other directors. While the actors are speaking in intellectual generalizations (as typical of many Godard’s character), Godard shows us the faces of others who are listening. The film also creates a sense of disillusion and displacement to experiment using tools such as lighting or the lack of; “still portraits” of Rembrandt, Goya, Delacroix characters; medieval stage sets; televisions in the background with characters talking in the foreground.
Like most Godard films, one needs to watch it either many times or read an interview of the filmmaking process to understand better what it is about. As I’ve said before, Godard movies are to be read; not watched. His movies are intellectual in the sense that they challenge what a typical viewer comes to the movies for. He poses questions that divides the bridges of opinion.
Diary of a Chambermaid (1964)
Directed by Luis Buñuel
The theme of upper class and social decadence in the Diary of a Chambermaid would be later epitomized in Buñuel’s more famous work, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, with the former acting as a natural progression towards the masterpiece.
Célestine (Jeanne Moreau) is a pretty Parisian maid who arrives at a small town, Normandy, for her latest assignment with the wealthy Monteil household. The family is governed by Madame Monteil (Francoise Lugagne); a hard looking lady who is strict on cleanliness. Her husband, Monsier (Michel Picoli) is a moustached; almost slimy looking but well-dressed and sexually repressed middle aged bum. The patriarch is Monsieur Rabour (Jean Ozenne) whom when we first see him, imposes his foot fetish on the newcomer.
Buñuel depicts the ugliness of upper class behaviour swiftly and impartially, with a distance. When Madame orientates Célestine, she goes through the details right down to the globe of a table lamp. When Célestine is picking up a bathrobe for Monsieur, she appears out of nowhere as if she was sneaking around. Monsieur Monteil, as the repressed husband because Madame dislikes sex, resorts to flirting with Célestine. He uses his authorial power of being the master of the house and even pitiful reasons to seduce Célestine; but to no avail. As a bum who is henpecked, does nothing but shoots wildlife, Monsieur represents the weak and impotent bully. Monsieur Rabour who has a shoe fetish, is implied to be impotent as well; for he seems to make no sexual advances. He indulges in fantasy; calls his maids, Marie; and makes them read for him; likely as an excuse to caress their feet.
Even though Buñuel shows the hideousness of the rich, the servants are not necessarily better. Joseph, (Georges Géret) the male servant, housekeeper is rough and supports fascism. He bullies the female servants and acts like their master. He has a chair of his own in their dining table and refuses to say sorry when he caused Célestine to broke the lamp. Even though he refuses to have sex with Célestine, it was not love that drove him to respect her; but rather, his stubbornness to Christian morality that such acts between man and woman, should be performed after their marriage. He mentioned that if they were just doing it for fun, he would have not minded. He views their marriage not in terms of love but simply a business plan.
The neighbour, an ex-war veteran who dislike the Monteils, are equally nasty. He threw rubbish and chops off protruding branches over to the Monteils and when Monsieur Monteil brings the case to the local police, the accused feigned ignorance.
The most sympathetic character in Diary of A Chambermaid are the women. Rose, who works for the ex-war veteran is dismissed despite working for the captain for years; and has a relationship with his master. The aging female servant in the Monteil who was later taken advantage of by Monsieur Monteil is so helpless that she weeps when the master makes a pass at her.
The young girl who collects snails in the village and was later raped and murdered symbolizes the onslaught of innocence. The fact that the murderer is left scot free ends the film in a pessimistic note.
Diary of a Chambermaid is a “moralistic” film without being didactic. It shows the repulsiveness of humanity subversively. Célestine, as the Parisian, the central of the story, comes across as scheming even though she was bullied by the men; tries to bring justice to the poor girl that was murdered. She chooses to lead a life of the Madame she used to serve by wedding a man who comes across as vile.
Directed by Luis Buñuel
The theme of upper class and social decadence in the Diary of a Chambermaid would be later epitomized in Buñuel’s more famous work, The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, with the former acting as a natural progression towards the masterpiece.
Célestine (Jeanne Moreau) is a pretty Parisian maid who arrives at a small town, Normandy, for her latest assignment with the wealthy Monteil household. The family is governed by Madame Monteil (Francoise Lugagne); a hard looking lady who is strict on cleanliness. Her husband, Monsier (Michel Picoli) is a moustached; almost slimy looking but well-dressed and sexually repressed middle aged bum. The patriarch is Monsieur Rabour (Jean Ozenne) whom when we first see him, imposes his foot fetish on the newcomer.
Buñuel depicts the ugliness of upper class behaviour swiftly and impartially, with a distance. When Madame orientates Célestine, she goes through the details right down to the globe of a table lamp. When Célestine is picking up a bathrobe for Monsieur, she appears out of nowhere as if she was sneaking around. Monsieur Monteil, as the repressed husband because Madame dislikes sex, resorts to flirting with Célestine. He uses his authorial power of being the master of the house and even pitiful reasons to seduce Célestine; but to no avail. As a bum who is henpecked, does nothing but shoots wildlife, Monsieur represents the weak and impotent bully. Monsieur Rabour who has a shoe fetish, is implied to be impotent as well; for he seems to make no sexual advances. He indulges in fantasy; calls his maids, Marie; and makes them read for him; likely as an excuse to caress their feet.
Even though Buñuel shows the hideousness of the rich, the servants are not necessarily better. Joseph, (Georges Géret) the male servant, housekeeper is rough and supports fascism. He bullies the female servants and acts like their master. He has a chair of his own in their dining table and refuses to say sorry when he caused Célestine to broke the lamp. Even though he refuses to have sex with Célestine, it was not love that drove him to respect her; but rather, his stubbornness to Christian morality that such acts between man and woman, should be performed after their marriage. He mentioned that if they were just doing it for fun, he would have not minded. He views their marriage not in terms of love but simply a business plan.
The neighbour, an ex-war veteran who dislike the Monteils, are equally nasty. He threw rubbish and chops off protruding branches over to the Monteils and when Monsieur Monteil brings the case to the local police, the accused feigned ignorance.
The most sympathetic character in Diary of A Chambermaid are the women. Rose, who works for the ex-war veteran is dismissed despite working for the captain for years; and has a relationship with his master. The aging female servant in the Monteil who was later taken advantage of by Monsieur Monteil is so helpless that she weeps when the master makes a pass at her.
The young girl who collects snails in the village and was later raped and murdered symbolizes the onslaught of innocence. The fact that the murderer is left scot free ends the film in a pessimistic note.
Diary of a Chambermaid is a “moralistic” film without being didactic. It shows the repulsiveness of humanity subversively. Célestine, as the Parisian, the central of the story, comes across as scheming even though she was bullied by the men; tries to bring justice to the poor girl that was murdered. She chooses to lead a life of the Madame she used to serve by wedding a man who comes across as vile.
