georgiostoymaras-11305 Reviews

Killing Gaza (2018)

.. a shade of light in humanity's current desensitized, depraved, dehumanized state.

[19 February 2024]

For some, there is only the pragmatic 'truth' of series of happenings; the German 'Geschichte', the Germans' word for 'history' which translates into 'events', as opposed to the ancient Greeks' etymology for 'History', which is 'deep knowledge'. The 'Geschichte' says that Palestinians are suffering the insufferable, and logic dictates us to assume that this whole affair won't have a favorable conclusion on their behalf. Professor Chomsky describes that one moment during the warm Palestinian hospitality, in which the hosts are proudly revealing to the guests their 'keys of return' with hope in their eyes and hearts. His advice (a noble one) to the westerners in support of the Palestinians' just cause is to not add fuel to the fire by triumphantly repeating slogans of requests that are never (in his estimation) going to be fulfilled. But life is not 'Geschichte', is not merely series of facts and the Palestinian issue is far from solved yet. Suleiman Zghreiby says to Max Blumenthal: "Only when the entirety of Gaza turns into rubble and the last of the Palestinians is dead, only and only then can the israelis have this land!" The questions raised: 1) How can this determination lead to a rational, predictable outcome, given the monstrous nature of the occupier and its powerful allies? 2) Can the whole world stand by as raped, numb, mental relics and accept the annihilation, the genocide of the Palestinians without responding?.. Personally, I find the Palestinian cause as a shade of light in humanity's current desensitized, depraved, dehumanized state.

What I take away from Blumenthal's documentary, as heart-sinking as it gets at times, is Zghreiby's words of truth, the poetic image of a warm gathering of the displaced ones around the fire, the colorful paintings and sketches of the (then) 15-year-old artist Malak Mattar, reminding everyone that individuality and expression of one's self is what keeps us human and distinguishes our kind from animals, the open-air film projection; in short: The hope that a serious journalist felt obliged to deliver towards the end, in search of a deeper truth, overshadowing all technical issues and making it an essential work to be seen by everyone interested in one of the greatest injustices of all time.

Palestine Is Still the Issue (2002 TV Movie)

I only have the wishful thought that the monster will eventually lose...

[15 January 2024]

"This film is about a nation of people: The Palestinians; forced off their land and later subjected to a military occupation by Israel, which is backed by a very powerful friend: The United States; the Palestinians have fought back; stateless and humiliated for so long, they've risen up against Israel's huge military machine, although they themselves have no army; no tanks, no american planes and gunships or missiles... This film is about the oldest human struggle: To Be Free."

John Pilger said it all, while my imagination was drawing pleasant, nostalgic parallels between his introduction and the introduction of Asterix's narrator: "In the year 50 B. C., all Gaul was under Roman occupation... All?.. Well, not exactly! There was that small village in Armorica surrounded by the 'X' and 'X' Roman legions, still resisting to the conqueror.." etc. Etc. Much more comfortable for one to reflect on how this fairy-tale village's case would've affected the future of colonialism for the world than to think of how this pukish murder-plan by the monsters of the zionist state (: nowadays having even reached the hubris of the nazi-inspired "final solution"!) will turn out for the Palestinian people...

I might be wrong, but I only have the wishful thought that the monster will eventually lose if humanity is to survive at all the inevitable collapse of the world's latest Empire (: the 'friend' of the monster). Amen.

This documentary is as precise, articulate and brief as Pilger's intro and definitely reaches its goals, to either raise consciousness and make you more interested in the Palestinian issue, or, (at-least and if-anything) make you understand a thing or two about it. When people have a matter-of-life-and-death truth to convey, their bravery for choosing to do so will most certainly guide them to the right path.

Delta Space Mission (1984)

Romania's second feature-length animation.

[19 December 2023]

Heavily influenced and at the same time mixed-up by everything in the sci-fi genre and animation preceding it (Forbidden Planet, Star Trek, 2001 and '10: Space Odysseys, Solaris & Star Wars, and Walt Disney & Lev Atamanov), Romania's second feature-length animation (: with a whole decade's interval from the first one) is a light, pass-the-time watching; impressive at times, for the colorful and beautifully painted backgrounds and highly detailed spaceships and engines, but lacks both depth and entertainment; depth, for it was realized under a suffocatingly authoritarian government; entertainment, for its creators' failure of focusing more on their characters' development and plot instead. Since they weren't allowed to take the open to interpretations, existentialist, philosophical approach the genre is inspiring, they shouldn't have brought down their characters into boring stereotypes constantly exchanging cliché orders and/or instructions. As I said, a light watching, but the only two conversations you could open about it afterwards would be either on its technical aspect, or on its place in the history of Romanian cinema, so you'd have to be either an animator, or a hardcore cinephile to take an interest.

Straight to Hell (1987)

Waiting for Hopper and Jarmusch in "Straight to Hell"...

[17 December 2023]

There is no doubt that Alex Cox is smarter than his movie and he knew it very well. I don't want to deconstruct ideologies, ideals, philosophies; if anything, I want to be able to appreciate them, but Alex Cox was one of those filmmakers with perfect social conscience and a -deeper than basic-understanding of the establishment's crucial errors, seemingly in a well-studied way. In his own words: "We were waiting for a revolution, and our films were supposed to inspire one..."; so, instead of wasting his time with this nostalgic, incoherent, nouvelle-vague-ish homage to that super-bizarre and ultra-cheesy cinematic genre called the 'Spaghetti Western' (: great movies like the "Dollars Trilogy", "Once Upon a Time in The West", "Django" and "Il Grande Silenzio" don't belong to "genres"), he should stick to his original sociopolitical plan. If he had been as unwary-natured as R. Rodriguez in "El Mariachi" or "Desperado", having a linear structure and reasonable motifs behind his characters' actions, then it could've turned out a memorable cult classic. But cliché lines and unmotivated gunfights thrown here and there as a joke, eventually turn the whole project into a joke. The way I see it, there was a strong conflict in his head, between the mature intellectual and the now-gone, carefree adolescent... The most pathetic thing about nostalgia is that you can't turn back time, so why not be more practical, embrace your present self and move on?

Sapte arte (1958)

Hats off!

[17 December 2023]

«7 Arte" is presented in the most minimalistic possible way. It is an allegorical tale for almost everything concerning the human nature, spirit and soul. Art plays a major role in development, the abstract concepts of inspiration, imagination, fantasy, are the weapons of the "naked man", as was described by Plato's Protagoras. At the same time, it is a tale of the relationship between artist and audience/critics, demagogue and voters, or, could also be thought of more abstractly, as the individual and the others. There is a rather common interpretation of the individual being the man (: the evolved creature), and the others (: the lot) being the gigantic dinosaurs who would devour him the moment they see something they don't like, or are unable to understand and rush to judge it harshly.

When the echoes of a looming catastrophe burst, the audience disappears back to their holes, from giant dinosaurs turn to rodent; it's the time of the day when the artist harmonizes the seeming universal chaos; again, his only weapon: the mind.

What a playful mood, what a beautiful little creation, and yet, how hard it would be for those Romanian animators back in 1958 to put it together; not that you ever think of the production's difficulties; on the contrary, it appears so simple to the point it fools you that "you could do it too"!.. Especially if you are a little kid.. Hats off.

David Holzman's Diary (1967)

what Jim McBride then called a "diary" and thought of, probably, as a cinematic innovation, today is called a "vlog"

[15 December 2023]

The more I'm thinking about it the less I'm able to comment on anything regarding it, for I'm becoming as inarticulate and baffled as our young narrator and protagonist. Becoming him, is what all young men should avoid, yet can't escape in this asylum of a society they've found themselves in. The character David Holzman speaks, unfortunately, to almost everybody I personally know, and gives a sense that nothing has essentially changed in more than half of a century in the western world, except from a technological aspect; for instance, one could say that what Jim McBride then called a "diary" and thought of, probably, as a cinematic innovation, today is called a "vlog" and people completely unaware of the cinematic art are capable of capturing ten and a hundred times the material he was able to capture in 1967, and without the requirement of even the petty amount of 2,500 bucks! I don't know much of the course the life and career of McBride took after "David Holzman"; I know, from this "diary" that he's a fan of JLG (long live!) and that he went on remaking his icon's first feature, "Breathless" in the early 80s, with Richard Gere. I wouldn't call this piece a master's one, I definitely wouldn't call its maker an equal to James Joyce and Picasso, or even Art Spiegelman, as I'd call Godard. If I had to guess, I'd guess that cranky, political Godard would disapprove of such self-indulgent, experimental projects at the time of its release, but that's irrelevant to people who're striving to find ways to leave a mark with their own breakthrough. From the many movies I saw the past few weeks, "David Holzman" stayed with me the most, even though I wanted to turn my head away every time I saw him, choked-up, trying to spell out his feelings. There are, as in any experiment, certain ingenious and revelatory aspects, like the friend/jiminy-cricket, with his strict logic (the perfect opposite to Holzman) offering us some quotable lines and some of the best piece of advice I've ever heard a friend offering to a friend (especially a filmmaker friend), or the TV-montage, as nauseating and mesmerizing as, I figure, McBride intended it to be, but it's not for its gems, but instead, mostly for its flaws that it has resonated with me. It's obvious that a young man who didn't have much, gathered whatever he had, and did whatever he could, and after all... it is a breakthrough of a kind, and nowadays, at 27, I'm in the state of life where I should envy it.

The Day of the Jackal (1973)

"Jackal"-most likely-isn't going to change the course of history... but, only 'most likely' though!..

[14 December 2023]

In 1962, president Charles de Gaulle signed the independence of Algeria. Fascists from the French army, frustrated with their government's foreign policies, formed an organization with the major goal to assassinate their president... They hired the "Jackal" to do the job for them...

Brilliant filmmaking by Fred Zinnemann, to the degree you forget about it since your curiosity for the outcome of the story itches badly. We know the "Jackal"-most likely-isn't going to change the course of history... but, only 'most likely' though!.. The target remains unrevealed until the ending scene, for better, keeping you waiting, sort of promising a payoff; the target's guardian angels, put together, sleeplessly working, strong, jackals themselves, all versus the one. Edward Fox makes hard for you to imagine (even 'entertain the idea' of) anyone more fit to play the leading man; he has the appearance and physique of the perfect Kirby's-Ditko's young (or even adolescent!) hero, only here he's playing the comic-book-heroes' calm, psychopathic nemesis. You wish you knew more about his character, yet you know it's only a plus for the movie, credit to the writers that they chose to keep him a man of mystery. It works as another element in escalating the spectator's suspense. While "Jackal" is indeed the perfect villain, it's not surprising towards the end that the viewer wishes for his plan to go as planned! 2 hours and 10 minutes of preparation, patience, maneuvers, disguises, murdering of one-night-stand lovers of both sexes, his whole effort presented to us with luring specificity, highlighted by extreme close-ups to make us, open-mouthed, droolingly appreciate it, so... natural for one to have expectations... The plausibility of it all only gets lost once you consider the fact that no man would be able to communicate verbally with a French person in English. "Jackal" would've been a much more breathtaking experience had Zinnemann aimed on hardcore authenticity by making everybody speak in their own language.

Hennessy (1975)

doesn't overanalyze the so-called 'too-complicated-to-fix' problem of colonialism..

[14 December 2023]

"Hennessy" doesn't overanalyze the so-called 'too-complicated-to-fix' problem of colonialism, but asks you a simple question: what would you do had all the people who were giving you a reason to wake up every morning in this "horrific masquerade of a life we pretend we have"-as late Norm MacDonald would so eloquently put it-been killed by colonial arm-forces? Irishman Niall Hennessy (Rod Steiger) chooses to bring down the entire Royal Fam after his wife and little daughter are accidentally shot to death by an English cop. Is he gonna make it?.. Well, not for anyone who's watched "The Day of the Jackal" just a few days prior to "Hennessy", he is not going to. The movie does, so weakly, play like a British remake to "Day of the Jackal", but with a much more likeable and engaging protagonist, and a much inferior direction. The story is a perfect tragedy. Accident begets killing which begets desperation begetting more accidental killing and it gets so clear as the movie progresses where we're being led to, all the way accompanied by an elegiac soundtrack sort of conditioning us on how we're supposed to feel about the whole thing. Even though Hennessy has a much stronger motif to do what he's up to than a degenerate hired hand bastard like the Jackal in Zinnemann's movie, he's not presented to be as meticulous as Edward Foxe's character, his plan never fools you as likely to succeed. And as you root for him, you only get mad at the director and the screenwriter for choosing to make a sad-ending cheap action out of what should be a more contemplative inspection at such a terrible situation. There are many pluses; the action is played quite realistically, the man's plan, as far-fetched as it sounds when you spell it out, in practice appears pretty plausible, and the final scene with the 35mm footage of the queen Liza (R. I. H.) includes some brilliant editing (Eric Boyd Perkins) and cinematography (Ernest Stewart); in vain, for all that gets buried under the frustration the underwhelming windup causes you, which, no doubt, will also make you forget about it pretty soon.

Candyman (1992)

Candyman is an urban legend dating back to the late 19th century.

[14 December 2023]

Candyman is an urban legend dating back to the late 19th century. It is the story of a slave's son who got proper education and became an especially talented painter, famous for his rich employers' portraits. Once, he was hired by a landowner to.. "capture his daughter's virginal beauty", and Candyman, being a 7-feet-tall black dude an' everythin', not only took that virginal beauty away from her, but impregnated her on top of that! The raging white landowner then hired a bunch of hooligans to kill him; they first sawed his left hand off with a rusty blade, then covered him in honey for the bees of the nearby apiary to sting him to death, and at last burned his corpse and scattered his ashes in the air!.. Some hundred years later, his legend only survives in the ghetto area of Carbini Green (Chicago, Illinois), over where his ashes were scattered, but his murderous spirit comes whenever called five times! Helen, a blonde, white, beautiful and privileged modern-day scholar writing her thesis on folkloric tales, stumbles upon Candyman and as her research progresses, she gets more and more invested in his story. When she's first told at a crowded restaurant of Candyman's tragedy by an academic friend of her husband's, the photography of the scene suddenly changes; the light is focusing on her eyes and the rest of the space, along with the rest of her face, get darker, like you're watching a golden-age Hollywood drama; the voices faint, and only the professor's narration is audible, accompanied, somewhat inappropriately-in this particular instance-by the ominous soundtrack; an experienced viewer realizes that Helen is supernaturally connected to Candyman the way Mina (from the Coppola movie of the same year) was to Dracula. Although Gary Oldman wasn't as fit for his role the way Tony Todd is. Tony Todd is Candyman the iconic way Christopher Lee was Dracula, Boris Karloff, Frankenstein's Creature, and Lon Chaney Jr., the Wolfman. I can't possibly imagine any black star of the 90s portraying him. Inexplicably, when I first saw his face, in combination with his period costume, I somehow did get fooled that this person was coming from another era, in a way it would be impossible to feel with, say, Wesley Snipes, or Denzel Washington, or Laurence Fishburne, for obvious reasons.

This movie is successful on multiple levels. Before I proceed, I deny getting into the underlying, psychological and sociopolitical issues, generating hypotheses, for the reason it's still a very fresh experience. On the other hand, I have to mention that I am indeed interested (in a way I haven't been in a long time) in babbling internet theories and crazy interpretations about the movie's theme. So, on the surface, it establishes its myth during the opening 10-12 minutes, and, as any decent horror should, gets into action pretty quickly. The cinematography is crimey-cold, and when warm-you are in red, bloody, firey hell; it makes perfect sense for those familiar with Cronenberg's style, or cinematographer Anthony B. Richmond's other accomplishments, "Don't Look Now" (1973) and "Ravenous" (1999). The music by Philip Glass (Mishima (1985), Thin Blue Line (1988)) sets the tone accordingly, a lurking danger, a twisted lullaby that sticks to your head, even though I do know that several scenes would've worked significantly more effectively without it. I have nothing to complain regarding the acting, or the casting; Virginia Madsen, present in every scene, is quite the sight on her own, and does carry the movie much more competently, and interestingly than most leading actresses in similar roles. In conclusion, an explorable piece of work, yet I wouldn't want my curiosity to ruin this experience by seeking out any ensuing-undoubtedly mishandled-installments, at least for the moment. It made me imagine what could've been added, but it'd take a whole other movie to be acquainted with the real-life Candyman, and any flashback would ruin the whole.. unless it was handled in a lyrical, poetic way, like, supposedly, a short, now(-considered-)lost, silent movie-within-our-movie that some perverted, racist cameraman of the 1890s would've shot-supposedly, again-one of the first motion pictures ever, which.. now that I'm thinking of, would make for a pretty jaw-dropping (aside from outrageously controversial to the degree of prohibition) short horror film if done correctly!..

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

all I'll remember from "Killers of the Flower Moon" will be DiCaprio's and DeNiro's grimaces.

[13 December 2023]

Most Natives of the American continent died fighting, others surrendered to the enemy, Paleface, lost pride and dignity and with whiskey and candy bars, their reason, for refined sugar and alcohol corrupts the body and the spirit and turns a man into a weakling stooge. The Osage surrendered, then bought their land on-paper from the U. S. Government and were blessed and cursed to discover that petroleum was hiding under their feet; then powerful white folk conspired against them, to first kill them, and then get their bloody hands upon their behemothly abundant wealth. I already knew the story of the Osage murders and the origin of F. B. I. From having seen a couple of documentaries on the subject months ago, when the first teaser for the "New Movie By Martin Scorsese!!!" dropped. Did I educate myself a bit more from watching the "New Movie By Martin Scorsese???" No sir, very sadly so, but I must admit that I didn't have a great time sitting through it. Godard once criticized a Times magazine cover where Jane Fonda was depicted looking sad in Vietnam for the unfortunate casualties of war: "Press your eyebrows together a little more, Jane,.. give us this familiar, skeptical expression all the ancient Greek philosophers must've had in their faces; an expression we know from your father in "12 Angry Men", and we'll believe with all our hearts that you're devastated for the poor casualties' hardships!.." No matter how brutal, yet-true. I thought of his criticism while watching DiCaprio and DeNiro sharing a scene: "Press your lips together, extend your jaws-perfect! We believe everything you say now!" The problem: it's been done a thousand times before, we've seen them doing it a thousand times before, and we both (those up the screen and we, the mortals) are tired at last. I had the feeling I was watching "Goodfellas" for the 100th time; Scorsese is one of the two best directors of history. This is sober judgment, not taste. In his case, his neurotic quickness and strictly professional approach to his material has abstracted all the magic of the art; 'drama' has become chewing gum, like in the tongue of Oliver Stone. I'm a dramatist, I dramatize and now I'monna make a drama.. and another one.. and another one.. this next one's bigger.. more money.. more names.. now all big names put together.. now more names and more money.. Even though for a long time now I agreed with Werner Herzog's assessment on Martin Scorsese, I wouldn't dare, until this evening, say it out loud; "I find mr. Scorsese to be very cowardly when it comes to visual storytelling..." Also, there was too much talk circulating about how this isn't yet another "white savior" story, nevertheless, I dare ask, who would save poor Molly (Lily Gladstone) and who knows how many other Osage people, hadn't the Federal Bureau's investigator (Jesse Plemons) showed up?.. Anyway, all I'll remember from "Killers of the Flower Moon" will be DiCaprio's and DeNiro's grimaces.

Archangel (1990)

"The Balls!"..

[13 December 2023]

The idea that one made a silent-era looking feature in the early 90s didn't sound as compelling to me, on account that I hear all kinds of crazy ideas all the time and that I'm very familiar with the David Lynch universe; but the fact that the person who came up with the idea would also execute it with such authenticity (to the point that aliens knowing nothing of human chronology would list "Archangel" among Pudovkin's "Mother" and Dreyer's "Joan of Ark"!), makes it for one of the most hardcore comedies I've ever seen. Most people wouldn't laugh, this is an inside joke, for either comedians, or people with great sense of humor, or people of the film industry to pick up. After 15 minutes in, I stopped caring about the "idea" behind it, and a sentence kept coming inside my head every next scene, making me either smirk or laugh: "The Balls!.. The Balls!..", meaning: ".. the audacity to troll the world like that!"; the same kind of feeling I had while reading Joyce's "Ulysses"!.. I understood little of the plot, since, suffering from the critic's malady, as I've confessed before, I was, in vain, trying to draw parallels between the movie I was watching and movies from the silent era. I just got that there is an amnesiac soldier in post-great-war's Russia, obsessed with a girl who is in love with some other amnesiac soldier! At some point, an accident turns her into an amnesiac as well. Each technique helps us get into this confused trio's chaotic psychology; the highly saturated black&white photography (to the point there are no greys), the use of sound and silence, the abrupt transitions tactlessly switching the previous scene's tone (a cacophony very common in even the most masterfully edited classics of the silent era), the blurs in our frames' corners, as if caused by humidity, or, at times, as if some heavy snowflakes have landed over the lens; well, life is a confusing bitch for even the sanest among us, let alone for amnesiacs who have to battle against the Bolsheviks right after they battled against the Germans! Life is a confusing bitch, why would we demand from art to make sense?.. Fellini wondered once. What makes "Archangel" more than just a troll picture is the consistency of Maddin and his collaborators to accomplish this look, and create an experience that overstuffed viewers, like me, can say is unlike anything they've seen before.

Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge (1924)

Overall, for film-buffs,[...]a meaningful (true) discovery, the study of which would enrich their understanding of the artform...

[13 December 2023]

Does it "hold up"?, is the mainstream question, for like... new audiences(?); as if any silent movie, no matter how great, still "holds up" with today's audiences! Not even the "hottest" filmmakers of our days, nor critics, seem to be able to bare a sitting through even the most representational and influential films of that era!.. Which silent ones would I recommend had I been-seriously-asked that question? Undoubtedly the ones that pop first to mind aside from the great comedies of Chaplin and Keaton, are the films of F. W. Murnau. From all his contemporaries, Murnau seemed to be the one to grasp the artform better that anybody. He tried what anybody should have set as their major goal: get rid of the title cards!.. This is a visual artform, right? Get rid of the letters and let them be in their own playground-literature. Epics as Nibelungen are opera, thus it's up to you whether you can fathom its exaggerated nature or dismiss it as not your cup-of-tea.

Kriemhild, as any sequel or prequel should, plays as a totally different movie than the first one. Kriemhild proves to be a much more interesting character than her heroic late husband, for the pioneering maestro behind this epic seems to be much more invested in her story; much more interested in capturing the earthly, gorgeous, wildcat's eyes and pressed-together lips of Margarete Schön, than the otherworldly, firelike lionwig of a dull übermensch Paul Richter plays; more interested even than capturing the -still- astonishing set-pieces. No wonder, albeit shots and scenes do, in an operatic fashion, drag on as much as in the first part, one doesn't have as much of a problem to keep up with this story, for one longs to see both the revenge (what the title's promising us) and our anti-heroine's outcome.

Overall, for film-buffs, Die Nibelungen seems as a meaningful (true) discovery, the study of which would enrich their understanding of the artform, renew their appreciation for it, and baffle them on why there's not as much of discussion surrounding this movie, for it has obviously inspired the creation of every saga since.

Die Nibelungen: Siegfried (1924)

a true task of a film, undertaken and overcome by Volks of some nerves!..

[13 December 2023]

Whenever I see a movie consisted of a series of such spectacular shots as Lang's "Nibelungen", I think -unwillingly so- of Bresson's saying: "A whole consisted of only beautiful images, can end up being an ugly whole*", meaning of course the art of cinema. Again, for the student, it's not a matter of liking or dis-liking something, it's not up to their guts to figure out why they responded positively or negatively to something, but to examine it with critical thinking and understand it to a certain extend. That's the critics' job and it should be the artists' as well. Emotions and logic are to be combined for a work of importance to be produced, for a text of importance to be written.

The shots (no matter how photographically spectacular) drag on for too long, kind of extracting this way the magic they cast upon the viewers' eyes with the first sighting; whilst there's certainly a perfect movie somewhere in there, the showing-off of the production design is definitely taking it aback; its length only betrays that the filmmaker felt as though an epic made with the declaration: "Dedicated to the German Volk!", s h o u l d've taken two and a half hours to be sufficiently told, otherwise it would've been just... the usual stuff. Seemingly jealous of "The Birth of a Nation's" and "Intolerance's" proportions, the difference being that the D. W. Griffith epics also didn't concentrate on the adventures of a single character, but of either entire nations or.. "oceans of times", "Stories Of Love Throughout The Ages!".. Nevertheless, watching it alone in a small room, in a small screen, you can't resist of dreaming about what a wonderful experience this would've been, had it been an experience at all! To be properly watched, for the wondrous effort put behind the making of it be entirely appreciated, this spectacle does require a proper theatre, accompanied by live orchestra playing Wagner's score in the dark. It takes an experience neither laptop nor TV screens can offer you, for all of silent era's art is of another kind from the one the talkies' audience is used to. For sure, in Siegfried-The-Dragon-Slayer's case, and especially when The (1924's!) Dragon is slayed before your eyes, being probably the first monster to move, fight back, spew flames out of its mouth and blood out of its heart.. in movie history,.. well, in this case, one can overlook such sober-minded, laconic observations as Bresson's, and call it for what it is: a true task of a film, undertaken and overcome by Volks of some nerves!.. (*from Notes on the Cinematographer)

Loving Vincent (2017)

To pay respect to a larger-than-life personality like Van Gogh, I assume that your own honorary piece should aim on being equivalent to his.

[13 December 2023]

My problem with "Loving Vincent" is not a new one for me; it's one that's made me bored to sleep a thousand times before: there's no identity of an artist in the film itself, no matter how beautifully crafted by a 100 of them! Yes, kudos and hurrayhurrah for the innovative idea and all the artists who worked day and night to make their best to copy a legend's unique style (which, for him wasn't a style, but rather voice and soul); it's true that it itches while watching to learn the details of the production and all the hows, somewhat like a kid before a magician. But this is as far as one's curiosity reaches and further on there's nothing left to be discussed; only regarding the special effects used. Some weeks ago I was asked by a colleague of mine why wouldn't I go out to see the fireworks in the sky-"I've seen fireworks before... besides; I'm not a child!" He laughed and let it go. Such creations do work like fireworks, and never reach the heights they're aiming for. To pay respect to a larger-than-life personality like Van Gogh, I assume that your own honorary piece should aim on being equivalent to his. If it's not up to you to be as much of a genius as your icon, then let it be. I don't know of the hardships the filmmakers endured, I do know of the hardships Barbet Schroeder endured while making his Bukowski film, "Barfly" (1987), from having read Bukowski's "Hollywood" (1989); Bukowski's first-hand knowledge (which pretty much led to an admiration) of Schroeder's bravery, didn't prevent him from seeing the work itself for what it finally turned out to be and openly review it as: "an okay one; not one of the immortal ones.. but okay." This is exactly what I'd say of "Loving Vincent". Artists are to expose and be exposed in search for truth, and when hiding behind other artists, what is produced is at best uninteresting.

Hennessy (1975)

"Hennessy" doesn't overanalyze the so-called 'too-complicated-to-fix' problem of colonialism

[13 December 2023]

"Hennessy" doesn't overanalyze the so-called 'too-complicated-to-fix' problem of colonialism, but asks you a simple question: what would you do had all the people who were giving you a reason to wake up every morning in this "horrific masquerade of a life we pretend we have"-as late Norm MacDonald would so eloquently put it-been killed by colonial arm-forces? Irishman Niall Hennessy (Rod Steiger) chooses to bring down the entire Royal Fam after his wife and little daughter are accidentally shot to death by an English cop. Is he gonna make it?.. Well, not for anyone who's watched "The Day of the Jackal" just a few days prior to "Hennessy", he is not going to. The movie does, so weakly, play like a British remake to "Day of the Jackal", but with a much more likeable and engaging protagonist, and a much inferior direction. The story is a perfect tragedy. Accident begets killing which begets desperation begetting more accidental killing and it gets so clear as the movie progresses where we're being led to, all the way accompanied by an elegiac soundtrack sort of conditioning us on how we're supposed to feel about the whole thing. Even though Hennessy has a much stronger motif to do what he's up to than a degenerate hired hand bastard like the Jackal in Zinnemann's movie, he's not presented to be as meticulous as Edward Foxe's character, his plan never fools you as likely to succeed. And as you root for him, you only get mad at the director and the screenwriter for choosing to make a sad-ending cheap action out of what should be a more contemplative inspection at such a terrible situation. There are many pluses; the action is played quite realistically, the man's plan, as far-fetched as it sounds when you spell it out, in practice appears pretty plausible, and the final scene with the 35mm footage of the queen Liza (R. I. H.) includes some brilliant editing (Eric Boyd Perkins) and cinematography (Ernest Stewart); in vain, for all that gets buried under the frustration the underwhelming windup causes you, which, no doubt, will also make you forget about it pretty soon.