As I was reading over Leanne's latest contribution to PINNLAND EMPIRE, I came to the realization that both of these films, along with the man responsible making them, are a little special to me - Early on in our relationship, I took my now fiancée; Sharon, to see Pina, while Wings Of Desire was the last film Claire Denis worked on before stepping out on her own to make her feature film debut (Wings Of Desire Co-Star Solveig Dommartin actually starred in Denis' sophomore feature as well).
So take some time outta your day to read the first guest writing of the year while I try to restore/rewrite some lost content and decide if I wanna write something on Philip Seymour Hoffman or not.
Also be sure to check out Leanne's film blog; LMK Film Pics...
Enjoy...
PINA
This documentary has a deceiving title; if you are expecting to learn about choreographer Pina Bausch and her dance methods, this is not the film for you. The quote included on the promotional poster, ‘Dance, Dance, Otherwise We Are Lost’ would have been an excellent title because this is a documentary primarily about image and not factual information. Who is Pina Baush? Where was she born, how did she develop her style, when was her dance company established, etc.? Well, I wouldn’t know unless I read about her after the fact, as none of this is covered in the film. Originally projected in 3D (I viewed it in standard 2D), Wenders cuts major works by Bausch with dances staged in nature, on public transportation and on busy roadways to showcase the striking beauty and emotional theatricality of her art and her troop of dancers.
When I stated that there is little to no biographical information presented in this documentary about the eponymous woman, there is also hardly any information about the dancers or the pieces either. Early on female dancers are shown laying on a stage filled with soil and then a familiar bassoon solo is heard. I thought, “Ah, The Rite of Spring, excellent! Wait, this is not the correct choreography. What?” Luckily, I am a Stravinsky fan or I would have been completely lost. There is no title to identify this as "The Rite of Spring" and no explanation of the divergence from the original ballet choreography. Baush’s piece is primal, grimy and terrifying but also very confusing. I want to know how this version was conceived and the intended meaning. Was the reception as negative as with Nijinsky’s choreography? No answers are provided and only certain sections of Baush’s piece are shown. It is visually arresting but frustrating; if the entire piece was shown it would be a performance film and no answers would be expected, but this is a documentary and there are cuts within the piece, which is a very disorienting stylistic choice on Wender’s part. The camera captures the sinuous dancers in an intimate fashion which brings you onto the stage with them. The pity is that the pieces are cut randomly and give little context for what the dances represent.
Almodovar’s Talk to Her showcases Baush’s piece "Café Muller" in a more understandable fashion, to my estimation. That film overtly implied the dance’s meaning by having Marco and Benigno seated together at the recital. They were going to try, maybe fail, at saving the women they love. That brief scene was more instructive on the theme of the piece than the footage in this documentary. Two dancers discuss the work and examine a scale set of the area strewn with chairs, but a good deal more commentary could have been added to lend some comprehension to the proceedings.
Talk To Her
Talk To Her
Having a terse sentence: “You just have to get crazier” be the explanation of Pina’s choreography advice is frustrating. I’m genuinely curious why one piece has a dancer declare, “This is veal!”, has her insert veal into her shoes and proceeds to dance en pointe outside of a factory. The audience is given this incredibly weird and off-putting image and it is quickly cut to reveal another snippet of a greater piece. The dancers receive my deepest admiration and Baush as well, but this documentary should have stayed with the pieces a while longer. Take time to breathe with the dances instead of cutting through as many as possible without examination. The documentary suffers from a lack of focus which could be attributed to the fact of Baush dying only a few days after she had revealed to her loved ones that she had cancer. A shock like that would throw the center off assuredly, but due to this being a documentary, maybe sharing that information would have helped.
Wings of Desire (1987)
Wenders produced a masterpiece with this story of angels in Berlin watching over humans. He infused beauty, humor and love, without pretention, into a setting that includes a circus with an introspective trapeze artist, angels outfitted in trench coats trading the details of human activities, Peter Falk playing himself and unexpectedly, Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds for good measure. To be so personally affected by a film that I literally cry throughout the whole picture while also laughing is a gift. In other hands and with other players this film would have been trite; the magic Wenders worked cannot be understated.
I have never before and will probably never again view such a life affirming film. It’s absurd in a way that a story taking place in a dingy, ripped-apart city with the most fraught past could exude such wonderment. Starting the film with an old man singing and writing on paper, “Als das Kind Kind war…” “When the child was a child…” is the main point of the entire story. Live with childlike wonder and openness, live “Now, now, NOW!” as Damiel the angel (Bruno Ganz) says.
Wenders’ use of black and white interspersed with the most blinding, enrapturing color is dazzling. A bold instance of color finds Marion (Solveig Dommartin) sitting on her bed after flying on the trapeze, musing about life. Her inner thoughts are philosophical, dark and confused. “Emptiness. Fear. Fear. Fear.” Troubling thoughts perhaps but laced with “the desire to love.” Marion broods yet moves on, accepts her sadness, works with it and hopes for better things. The beauty of human vulnerability and the ability to imagine better days is highlighted by the bursts of color throughout the film.
When Damiel first experiences blood he happily licks it and smiles, “It has a taste!” To find delight in such a thing is childlike but also needed. To examine and experience the happiness of surprise is an act we do not engage in enough. Damiel does not always live in the moment, as when he sits in the empty field where the Alekan Circus had been parked. He yearns for Marion feeling the sadness of being just a little bit too late. Cassiel the angel (Otto Sander) looks over him with compassion, knowing that he will return to the present moment to soldier forth. Longing is the reason why Damiel became human in the first place, so his frustration is poignant and well placed.
Special note must be made about Peter Falk’s participation as himself. This is not stunt casting; his performance is sweet sincere perfection. His interactions as a famous man acting graciously with movie extras, “extra people” as his inner-voice calls them, are wonderful. He asks an older woman permission to sketch her picture. He does a nice job yet inside he thinks to himself, “Someday you’ll make a good drawing. I hope, I hope, I hope…” His doubt in his artistic abilities is very reassuring. Even Peter Falk doubts himself, one of the great actors! Falk’s normalizing part is played with humbleness and abundant glee. When Damiel exclaims, “I want to know everything!” Peter replies with a crinkly smile, “That you have to find out yourself. That’s the fun of it.”
Writing about this film can veer into sentimental territory; to watch it and realize the splendor and sorrow of life is sublime. I find the image of a woman sitting alone in a laundromat supremely moving. The orange machines stretch out before her as she sits. This is life and it is gorgeous. So mundane, so lonely, but to be alive, to see orange washings machines! Ah, it is fantastic!
Nothing says true friendship like John Cassavetes' masterpiece; Husbands - a dramedy about three best friends who mourn the sudden loss of their friend in an unconventional yet manly way. At this point in my life I feel it's in John Cassavetes' all-time top three (along with Faces & A Woman Under The Influence). And nothing says chemistry like the performances of real life friends; Cassavetes, Peter Faulk & Ben Gazzara - a genuine rat pack in every sense of the term that could probably out drink and out party Sinatra, Martin & Sammy any day of the week. Husbands transcends age, era, race, upbringing, etc. Although Husbands centers around three forty-something year old upper-middle class family men, I still relate to so many things in the film. When I use to watch Husbands at the age of 21 & 22 I enjoyed it very much but I was still watching it at a distance. I couldn't fully relate to it at that point in my life. I had no responsibilities, bills, a family, nothing. It was like watching my father and his friends on film. But a decade later in my 30's (still maintaining the same group of close friends) I see elements of myself and my buddies in the characters in Husbands more & more (the same can be said for a film like Old Joy as well, which may be written about sometime early next year). Anyone who has that regular group of best friends that you've; gotten drunk with, laughed with, gotten in to trouble with, kicked out of a bar together, argued with then made up without talking an hour later can all relate to Gus (John Cassavetes), Archie (Peter Falk) & Harry (Ben Gazzara). My favorite aspect about Husbands is that it deals with grown men temporarily abandoning their responsibilities (jobs, family, money, etc) and going on an international bender for a few days to deal with the unexpected loss of their friend and fourth member of their group. This is a fantasy most adults would love to experience (minus the dead friend part) yet reality sets in and you realize you can’t just exactly up and run away to have a good time. But Cassavetes makes that fantasy of running off and saying; "fuck the world" for a few days a reality. And what makes Husbands such a reality is the very ending where we see his character (Gus) coming home from his multi-day drunken party where he's met by his (real life) son in the driveway saying; "DAD! oh boy. you're in trouble!" as if to imply no matter how long you take a break from reality to have a good time, you still have to come home and face your responsibilities at some point. Husbands is very much a "guys movie" - the three lead characters are loud & rambunctious, when you watch the film you can almost smell the beer, cigarettes & sweat and it's the one prominent Cassavetes film without a strong female presence. This isn't to say that women can't enjoy husbands (although I imagine most women who watch this will be laughing, rolling their eyes & shaking their heads at the same time as it will remind them of all the embarrassing & annoying things their boyfriends, husbands, fathers, brothers and other male loved ones do), but it's still very much a guys movie in the same sense that Steel Magnolias or even Morvern Callar (one of my favorite films actually) is very much a female film. Forget Spike TV or a Vin Diesel action movie - Husbands is a real mans film. Now…the one prominent female presence in the film DOES leave a lasting impression (with the exception of the three women Gus, Archie & Harry pick up in the last half of the film). In one of the film's most famous scenes, Gus' wife stand up to him (with a knife) to the point where she exposes him and he runs away from her like a scared child after trying to be a tough alpha-male.
Husbands has so many real, genuine & funny moments that sometimes you'll think you're watching B-role footage or bloopers (I mean that in a good way). Its difficult to pick a favorite scene...
Up 'til Husbands (excluding Too Late Blues & A Child is Waiting) Cassavetes was more accepted by Europeans than Americans. What's funny is that Cassavetes was never really a fan of the French art-house scene that accepted him. He genuinely thought Americans would embrace his films in the same way they would accept other American filmmakers like Robert Altman (who had minor "beef" with Cassavetes back in the day), Hal Ashby, Nicholas Ray, Sam Fuller, Coppola & even Kubrick! This is the kinda delusional thinking that you have to love. Anyone who knows anything about cinema knows Cassavetes’ style was progressive, ahead of its time and would be more accepted by Europeans (some Americans appreciated him, but still…). But you have to love & respect Cassavetes for giving American audiences credit and assuming they wanted to see something new & different (only in the last decade have Americans REALLY embraced his work thanks to the Criterion box set of his five critical works). Husbands wasn't Cassavetes' biggest "crossover" or "successful" film (both; Faces & A Woman Under The Influence were nominated for multiple academy awards) but it was still nominated for a golden globe (best screenplay), Cassavetes and his crew landed on the cover of Life magazine...
John Cassavetes was also able to get some decent national promotion, most notably on the Dick Cavett show, where the drunken, immature, childish tone of Husbands spilled over in to real life making for one of the most memorable talk show appearances of all time. I don't know if their behavior was staged or not but this was brilliant and really conveyed what Husbands was all about (notice how annoyed Cavett gets as the show goes on)...
With a few exceptions, I doubt a progressive film like this would get the same kind of national exposure today. Husbands isn't exactly "counterculture" but it still came out around the same 1969/1970 game changing era as other important (mostly counter culture) films like; Easy Rider, IF..., Two Lane Blacktop, Z, MASH and The Conformist (which is overrated to me, but still...). We all know the 70's were the greatest years of cinema and it makes sense that the decade started off with these important works.
European cinephiles (who were/are mostly leftists) in the early 70's felt a little betrayed by Husbands as it focused on everything they kinda despised at the time - the upper-middle class, loud ignorant drunken Americans, etc. This was probably Cassavetes' most "American" film. Whenever you read about Husbands on the festival circuit before it was released in theaters (especially in Ray Carney's “Cassavetes on Cassavetes”) you'll more than likely read stories of Cassavetes, Falk & Gazzara arguing with angry European audiences at Q&A’s who felt Cassavetes "sold out". The film wasn’t in black & white and there was no jazzy soundtrack (minus the opening credits). European's love of John Cassavetes always made me scratch my head because as a person he was pretty much the epitome of what Europeans typically dislike about Americans (loud, at times obnoxious, drunk, etc). Maybe that's part of the reason he made Husbands - to distance himself from a scene he disliked. What many Europeans (still to this day) don't realize is that Cassavetes thought stuff like Godard & Bergman (which he took a quick jab at in Faces) was "faggy" or "artsy crap". But to this day he’s STILL loved in Europe (on my first quick trip to Paris his name came up quite a few times when I was nerding out with a bunch of my Parisian cinephile buddies). Husbands is a pretty realistic portrayal of how men can handle the loss of someone they love. We all know those traditional expectations that are put on males since birth - don't cry, "be a man", "be tough", etc. And this film shows that (what's funny is that something tells me that wasn't even what Cassavetes was trying to do and even if he was it wasn't his main goal). It's clear these are the things Gus, Archie & Harry were told when they were kids and it stayed with them in to adulthood. Instead of crying or mourning at their friends funeral they turn in to irresponsible children, suddenly decide they wanna go to London where they drink gamble & hook up with random women because they don't really know how to mourn, express sorrow or deal with non-traditional manly emotions. All three actors have their moments to shine, but in my opinion Ben Gazzara gives the standout, award worthy, performance - he's the loudest of the bunch (how could he NOT be with a voice like his) and we get more in to his personal life than any of the other three characters. Anyone who reads anything about John Cassavetes should know he had a habit for editing & RE-editing his films to the point where he had two, three, sometimes four versions of the same film (this was the case with Killing Of A Chinese Bookie, Faces & Love Streams). Husbands was no exception. According to Cassavetes he made three different versions of the film in which each of the three actors comes off as the lead. Apparently Cassavetes went with the Gazzara version. There's very few films that remind me about the importance of true friendship. And what's funny is that the few films that DO aren't even masterpieces. Say what you want about Shane Meadows but A Room For Romeo Brass is one, Wes Anderson's debut; Bottle Rocket is another as well My Bodyguard (the one film in the bunch that I WOULD actually consider somewhat of a masterpiece). These are films that show the joy, hilarity, trials & tribulations of having real best friends (even if they aren't exactly the most realistic at times). But in my opinion Husbands is probably the greatest film about friendship (especially among men).
The beautiful thing about Husbands is that it's the perfect introduction film for someone looking to get in to his work (in my opinion).
Peter Falk, an icon of both Television and Film, has passed away today. May he rest in piece. Now, instead of flooding facebook with a bunch of youtube clips one after another like I usually do when someone I admire dies, I figured I'd put them all in this one blog entry and not annoy my facebook friends who don't share the same feelings I do for Mr. Falk.
Surprisingly enough, almost all of my favorite movie clips of his are on youtube (but the clips from 'Wing Of Desire' are pretty slim). And I didn't really watch 'Columbo' (although i do obviously realize that's what he'll always be known for), so I'd feel like a fraud posting a bunch of clips from a TV show that I didn't really know.
And I realize that we've lost a lot of important actors & artists in 2011 so far (most notably Elizabeth Taylor) and I haven't made a blog entry about them, but due to Peter Falk's life-long connection to John Cassavetes (one of my all time favorite directors who I constantly mention on this blog) this passing holds a little more importance to me.
