Random Comments

Lately, I have been practicing my film commenting on Flixter - an awful resource that may just fall apart one day. As you could imagine, I am going to paste some of the comments I wrote - as though they were worth reading! Well, I am trying quite hard, or rather half-heartedly, to become better in writing about cinema.

Blissfully Yours: 8/10

Straight from the professional school of natural performances and static camera placements (hear that, Akerman and Oliveira?) There is definitely a lot going on in this film. Most notably, it features one of the best depictions of young, innocent love in recent cinema (but why, why, don't they get the same explicit sex we get to see in... uh, another couple?) Everyone acts so naturally, even though there's something intertexual going on. No one is obliged to affect a particular state of mind or personify some kind of societal sickness. Political commentary has never been merged so seamlessly with character insight - to the extent that the film works perfectly even without reading its subtle metaphors and allusions.

Peppermint Candy: 9/10

Perhaps the only film where its reverse chronology does not feel like a gimmick. As the film unfolds, it becomes clear that the choice of narrative arrangement is not only fitting, but absolutely essential. Twenty years of social and political development encapsulated in the personal struggle of one individual: this film is almost too rich in content. Lee Chang-Dong's unobtrusive visual style and seamless editing are already mature, but to experience them in full force, you ought to see Secret Sunshine.

Almanac of Fall: 3/10

An ugly, misogynistic bore. "Ugly" is really an inappropriate word here, but Bela Tarr's poorly written conversations make me cringe in disbelief and embarrassment. The show would be more convincing if everyone could shut up, and instead looked at each other tenderly (or menacingly). Unfortunately, the script turns everyone into a sledgehammer. Does subtlety even exist? Maybe towards the end, in the old woman's quiet monologue. If this is supposed to be social realism, then so be it. I'd rather go watch Woody Allen's September, or even Cries and Whispers. I am glad Tarr has found his style after this movie, namely, either writing nonsensical tirades of obscure allusions, or being at home with his masterful play of tracking and movement.

La vie de Jesus: 4/10

Attention to landscapes and elegant tracking shots provide mild visual interest to this typical drama about slackers. Only filmmakers can manage to get fascinated by despicable low-lives. Obviously, they have plenty of time to frame themselves against eloquent surroundings. What puzzles me is why Dumont needs to make stuff happen. Is it supposed to be exciting? What sort of ending is that? With such a title, this film is beyond horrid and offensive. Not even the endearing Kader can redeem the film. Still, Dumont's got talent. Do watch his other movies please.

A Summer's Tale: 9/10

By the end of the movie, I sensed a warm and wholesome feeling deep inside; it lingered for days. It didn't take long to identify the sensation: the happiness of being in love. Compared with Rohmer's other films, this one is a slow burn, yet extremely rewarding at the end. The duration means so much, because it takes so much time, so many ups and downs and so much looking around to recognize the important things in life, to realize that love is so close, yet so ephemeral and elusive.

Coeurs: 6/10

Infinitely more watchable than Resnais' other flirtations with farcical melodrama. Not every scene works, but the overall effect delivers. The one enduring quality is André Dussollier's endearing performance, which makes me wish that Rivette had directed the film. The problem originates from the feeble source material - full of platitudes and stock characters. The absurdity of Isabelle Carré's cafe-sitting loneliness is only matched by Sabine Azéma's stripteasing, sanctimonious clown. Do we need another loafing, jobless, and alcoholic boyfriend? How could such characters be written, and why would Resnais be drawn to this project? Nevertheless, his effort ought to be lauded - and several scenes are so great that one can almost forgive all the shortcomings. Take the opening sequence of apartment surveying and the charming encounter between Carré and Lambert Wilson; we know that we still have someone competent behind the camera, transforming trash into a modest work of art.

Sex is Comedy: 10/10

My favorite Breillat. Despite the lack of intimidating seriousness that characterizes her other films, Sex is Comedy quite successfully communicates her quintessential sense and sensibilities. The signature mood of doom and menace is replaced by a natural flow of tenderness. For a Breillat film, such a quality ought to be cherished - and it is by no means a compromise. Actually, the intimacy and sensuality in several scenes can be overwhelming. Rarely do we feel a vibe so titillating from a woman who merely sits and talks. Finally, there is an abundance of visual interest. As in Fat Girl and Anatomy of Hell - everything glows (even though the DP is different); every shot and its movements are staggeringly beautiful. Cinema is made for films like this.

Damnation: 10/10

The many slow tracking shots that accentuate physical details such as crumbling, water-logged walls reveal that Bela Tarr has indeed been unconsciously influenced by Tarkovsky. Staggeringly beautiful wastelands reflect the protagonist's inner landscape. Black and white chiaroscuro has never been so expressive. Yes, the monologues may reveal a mild dose of the misogynist in the filmmaker - but since when do we seek Tarr for advice regarding man-woman relationships?

Inland Empire: 7/10

Based on what Lynch wants to accomplish, the film deserves 5 stars. It is also his best film to date. Evidently, Lynch is most competent when he does not attempt to craft something coherent, since he is an artist of ideas, and they lose intensity with each attempt to make sense. Unfortunately, Lynch's filmmaking is campy, heavy-handed, and excruciatingly conventional. Inland Empire gets rid of a lot of the junk that plagues his other films, but we still cannot escape from his extremely shallow sense of excitement: gore, intestines, and naked women. Many scenes are weird for the sake of weirdness, shocking for the sole purpose of disturbing the audience. This is NOT a film for those who enjoy beauty, subtlety, and insight.