A FEW WORDS ON THE TASTE OF CEMENT

The downside to writing about (excellent) films like The Taste Of Cement is most people reading this probably wont ever get the chance to see it outside of a special festival screening like I was fortunate enough to attend recently. Like...what's the point of even writing this? I mean, I enjoyed this movie very much but it almost teases the readers because they cant exactly go watch or stream this any time soon (I do imagine this will be available to stream at some point down the road but I highly doubt it will be advertised/pushed like other higher profile indie/arthouse films). What's even worse is that the only films I can compare this to, for reference purposes, are more films that most folks either wont get the chance to see or haven't seen due to limited availability like Krivina or Chantal Akerman's La Bas...

Like Krivina, The Taste Of Cement is an almost uncategorizeable film that's both cryptic & droning. And much like Akerman's under-seen La Bas, The Taste Of Cement mixes fiction, non-fiction and poetic voice-over that doesn't necessarily match with the imagery you see in front of you
(this is very much from the school of Chris Marker)

Krivina / The Taste Of Cement

And with the subtle electronic soundtrack and "cool" camera angels, The Taste Of Cement also has a lightweight science-fiction vibe that's reminiscent to Bladerunner & Solaris...

Bladerunner / The Taste Of Cement

Solaris / The Taste Of Cement

What sets The Taste Of Cement apart from all the aforementioned films is that there's a much deeper meaning. The 1/2 fiction 1/2 documentary chronicles construction workers in Syria rebuilding skyscrapers in post-war Bierut. And, like my feelings on writing this piece, it is an almost pointless gesture in that there is the strong possibility that the new buildings being constructed will be bombed down again due to the ongoing conflict in their country. While this film is excellent and probably one of the best movies I've seen so far this year, it is incredibly bleak & depressing (especially the last 10 minutes or so). Imagine a more playful & experimental Austrian-era Michael Haneke film...

The Taste Of Cement hit me on a personal level. As some of you may know, I studied & currently work in the field of Design & Architecture, which, as you can see from some of the above images, is a major proponent to the plot of The Taste Of Cement. A big part of my job has to do with putting in hours of work in order to win bids & contracts. And as you can imagine, we dont always win these bids. This obviously sucks because you put in hours of work to come up with drawings & proposals only to lose out to the competition. That sounds pretty frustrating, doesnt it? And thats just from a "first world" problem perspective.

Imagine putting in months of work (away from your home & family) to construct a building only for it to be shot down by a tank in a matter of seconds. Not only was all your back-breaking hard work put to waste, but, more importantly, hundreds of innocent people occupying that newly constructed building will more than likely be injured & killed when the structure is bombed down.

The Taste Of Cement is perfectly crafted but is very bleak and not for viewers with easily triggered depression. Fans of everything from Leviathan (2012) & Fata Morgana (is "acid documentary" a thing?) to the ambient music of Brian Eno will potentially enjoy The Taste Of Cement very much. I only hope this is available to stream before the year is over.

KINETTA

At first glance, one wouldn’t associate Kinetta with the rest of the films in Yorgos Lanthimos’ body of work. And that’s understandable. Not only was his feature film debut made almost five years before Dogtooth (a movie that is often times wrongly credited as Yorgos Lanthimos’ first feature film), but the camerawork in Kinetta is a lot more rough & “amateur-ish” in comparison to the polarizing/polished cinematography we saw in later works like The Lobster & Alps (a lot of the hotel scenes in The Lobster are reminiscent of the Overlook Hotel in The Shining). Kinetta almost looks like a dogma film (it should be noted that before The Lobster, the use of music in Lanthimos’ films stayed close to the dogma-esque rules concerning music in that whatever music is featured in a dogma film cannot be added in post production).

But if you’re willing to get past the look of Kinetta (which isn't even an issue as far as I'm concerned), you’ll see that it literally planted the seeds for all the recent stuff we love like Dogtooth, Alps & The Lobster. It is my opinion that Kinetta, Dogtooth, Alps & The Lobster all take place in the same universe. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the characters from Kinetta knew some of the characters from Alps. There’s a strong continuous thread that connects everything in the cinematic world of Yorgos Lanthimos. Kinetta has very little dialogue. For those of you who haven’t noticed (or are only familiar with The Lobster) minimal/spaced out dialogue is a common characteristic of Lanthimos’ pre-Lobster work. Both Dogtooth & Alps contain a lot of empty space as far as talking goes when compared to "conventional movies". Loneliness (The Lobster), identity (Alps & Dogtooth), awkward dryness (Lobster, Alps & Dogtooth) and deadpan expressionism (Lobster, Alps & Dogtooth) are embedded in to the fabric of Kinetta. Even the basic plot of Alps sounds like a light reworking of the plot to Kinetta...

The emphasis on music: Kinetta/The Lobster

In Kinetta we follow three residents of a resort town during the off season. To pass the time they reenact murders just like the characters in Alps who reenact scenes from people’s past in order to help them get some closure.
I immediately related to the ambiance of Kinetta having went to college near Virginia Beach. I’m not sure if you know this but during the late Fall & Winter seasons, Virginia Beach is a (sometimes) strange, empty, desolate place depending on where you are. And that isn’t an insult (I know it sounds a little harsh). It’s just strange seeing such a popular tourist spot so empty for an extended period of time (I'm really talking about the main strip in Virginia Beach to be quite honest). Actually, the vibe of Kinetta kind of feels like staying on a college campus during Christmas or summer. On one hand – it’s incredibly lonely & isolated. But on the other hand, depending on your personality, there’s something calm & soothing about isolation (and it goes without saying, but when you find yourself isolated & lonely you don’t say much, just like the characters in Kinetta).

Kinetta kind of comes off like Antonioni’s Red Desert except with a slight tinge of dark/dry humor that one would expect from Yorgos Lanthimos.

Loneliness: Kinetta/The Red Desert

Desolate landscapes: Kinetts/The Red Desert

I’m not quite sure if Yorgos Lanthimos is trying to show the dreariness of small town life in Greece, or if he’s trying to explore the pointlessness of our existence all together. I’m sure if you seek out enough reviews for Kinetta you’ll find cases for both scenarios (or perhaps you’ll find a completely different analysis all together). I find it interesting that the characters in all of Lanthimos’ pre-Lobster films are all servants and/or caregivers of some kind. The protagonists in Alps are EMTs & Medical assistants. The wife & children in Dogtooth are essentially homemakers, and the main characters in Kinetta all work in the service industry. The existence of a caregiver can be depressing. No wonder the large majority of Yorgos Lanthimos’ characters are always trying to be someone else and escape their own existence. The more I think about it, the more I think that maybe Lanthimos is trying to show outsiders with romantic views of Greece (and other "exotic" lands) that it isn’t always this beautiful getaway that some people make it out to be (just look at their ongoing financial problems).
But Yorgos Lanthimos is tough to read. He’s very much like his films in that he’s a little deadpan and sometimes expressionless. So who knows what he’s really trying to convey at the end of the day. All I know is that all his movies are great and they bring out some kind of emotion in me.

I’ve never been to Greece but I’m sure it’s beautiful. I’m sure some places are like paradise on earth based on some of the pictures I’ve seen. But (some) outsiders have this romanticized vision of Greece as if it’s one big vacation getaway (same with places like Nevada, Hawaii and even Florida to a smaller extent). I would love to see more films set in places like Vegas & Hawaii told from the perspective of folks who were born and raised there as opposed to outsiders.

Revisiting Kinetta also brought me to the realization that there’s an incredibly strong parallel between the works of Rick Alverson & Yorgos Lanthimos (two PINNLAND EMPIRE favorites). Both directors have four features under their belts with the same progression & growth from one movie to the next. Look at the bookends of their careers so far - Kinetta & The Builder (Alverson) are both raw, “natural-looking” films, while The Lobster & Entertainment (Alverson) are a lot more polished-looking and feature better known actors (John C Reilly appears in both the aforementioned movies). Lanthimos & Alverson also challenge the idea of “humor” in the same non-pretentious yet provocative way (when you watch movies directed by these two contemporaries you find yourself wondering if it’s OK to laugh or not).
If you’re a fan of Lanthimos it’s important that you seek out Kinetta. Not just to see where it all started, but because it’s a solid film. I understand that up until recently it was a tough film to come by (I was lucky enough to see a screening of it at The Museum Of The Moving Image a few years ago) but there’s finally a multi-region DVD available courtesy of Second Run DVD that I highly recommend seeking out.

MR. TURNER

I consider Mike Leigh to be one of the greatest active filmmakers working today (along with Michael Haneke, Claire Denis, Bruno Dumont, Olivier Assayas & Carlos Reygadas) so I had a feeling his latest film Mr. Turner - a bio on the romantic painter JMW Turner, would be great, but I honestly didn’t expect to enjoy it as much as I did. I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t really know much about classic art. I was worried I wouldn’t fully appreciate Leigh’s film due to my lack of knowledge on the subject.

I remember sitting in a sold out theater at the Film Forum a few years back watching Todd Haynes’ I’m Not There and feeling left out because I knew absolutely nothing about Bob Dylan (I didn't get the humor or any of the inside Dylan references) and I couldn’t fully appreciate a film that was directed by one of my favorite filmmakers (I consider Safe & Poison to be two of the greatest modern films ever made). This bugged me. I knew most of these Bob Dylan fans I was surrounded by weren’t familiar with Safe or Poison. They didn’t earn the right to enjoy Haynes’ work if I couldn’t. I know that sounds elitist & selfish, but that's how cinephiles get sometimes (I'm also an only child, so sharing doesn't always come easy to me).

Ever since Secrets & Lies, Leigh’s work has quietly “crossed over” into mainstream cinema without any compromise of style or subject matter. With the exception of All Or Nothing & Another Year, every post-Naked Mike Leigh film has been nominated for some kind of mainstream/”major” English-speaking movie award (Oscars, Golden Globes, etc). Movie awards mean very little but at the same time they do, to a certain extent, represent the fact that a film has kind of reached a wider audience. These days, by the time most great modern art-house filmmakers gain any kind of mild mainstream attention (Haneke/Amour, Lars Von Trier/Nymphomaniac, Todd Haynes/I’m Not There, Olivier Assayas/Carlos, Leigh/Vera Drake, etc) their earlier work (which is usually better) still goes unseen, which brings on a lot of resentment inside of me because I have to share one of my favorite filmmakers with a bunch of newcomers who not only suddenly think they know something about film simply because they’ve seen Vera Drake (Leigh), but put no effort into seeking out their earlier work.

I didn’t want a repeat of I’m Not There. I wanted to be prepared for Mr. Turner so much that prior to seeing it, courtesy of a sneak preview at The Museum Of The Moving Image, I looked past the simple Wikipedia bio and sought out a book on JMW Turner’s life ("JMW Turner: A Bio") months before seeing Leigh's film. I didn’t doubt that Mike Leigh would leave things out or misrepresent the life of JMW Turner - I just wanted to be a little more knowledgeable on the subject.
Now...did reading the JMW Turner biography enhance my viewing experience of Mr. Turner? Not really. I'm still not even that crazy about classic art (although I've always appreciated & respected the craft). But that's a good thing. It speaks volumes about a period film when you can truly enjoy it without having to know any kind of history or back story.

Like Bird, Ali, Che,& Camille Claudel 1915 (pictured clockwise above) and a small handful of other semi-recent biopics, Mr. Turner is successful because it doesn’t try to cram an entire lifetime into one film (Mr. Turner makes up for the mild disapointment that was Abel Ferrara's Pasolini, which did follow the same format as other good biopics but came out feeling a little flat & underwhelming). To this day, certain specifics are unknown about the early life of JMW Turner. There is no confirmed birthdate listed, his early paintings don't have any specific dates and certain facts about his family are a little cloudy. Delving in to this part of his life would only lead to speculation on Leigh's part. Instead, Leigh focuses on the latter part of Turner’s life where he deals with the death of his father (whom Turner was not only very close too, but also served as his studio assistant). We also see JMW Turner fall in love as well as battle depression and harsh critics of his art (Leigh leaves out his drug use, grazes over/lightly touches on the fact that he probably fathered two daughters that he clearly didn't care about, and does speculate/get liberal with a few small facts here & there).
Mr. Turner is also a success because it paints a complex portrait of the artist. Instead of making him out as this incredibly wonderful human being that's dedicated to his art, the film shows him as a frustrating and kinda grumpy person (Timothy Spall plays the title character with a distinctive grunt). But I think it's been documented at this point that a lot of talented/brilliant/geinous artists, from Miles Davis to John Cassavetes (and everyone in between), straddled the line between pleasant & unpleasant.

Leigh’s exploration of JMW Turner and his art reminded me of Peter Greenaway’s exploration of "the frustrated architect" in The Belly Of An Architect (complicated, angry, happy, sad, frustrated, etc).
And like Greenaway did with the architecture in his films, Leigh represents Turner's art in a respectful & organic way...

However, Mr. Turner is not a reflection of Leigh's own life in the way that The Belly Of An Architect kind of was/is for Greenaway (although there is a scene in Mr. Turner that, just like in Chef, is clearly a jab at critics that has to represent Leigh's own personal view of some critics).

And I know this sounds a little cliché but certain shots in the film (courtesy of Leigh cinematographer Dick Pope) look like the kind of landscape paintings that Turner would paint...

The cinematography in Mr. Turner (which is bound to be downplayed & overshadowed by the bells & whistles of the camerawork in Birdman & Interstellar) is probably my favorite thing about the film next to Spall’s lead performance (probably the best thing he’s done since All Or Nothing). Besides Vera Drake & Topsy-Turvy (which Mr. Turner is closest too in terms of tone), Leigh has never done a period movie. Mr. Turner is, in my opinion, the first Leigh film to be shot the way it was (rich colors, beautiful landscapes, etc). It’s pretty great to see a veteran like Mike Leigh step outside of his comfort zone and try something new (…and succeed at it).
The film is unique in that it's bound to attract post-Vera Drake Leigh fans (who for whatever reason feel as if they're aficionados of his work because they've seen that & Happy-Go Lucky), but it'll also please all the diehard fans as the film fits in perfectly with the rest of Leigh's work and features plenty of his regulars (in front of & behind the camera) like Timothy Spall, Shirley Manville, Ruth Sheen & Dick Pope.

THE ELEPHANT MAN: DAVID LYNCH'S TRANSITION FROM MIDNIGHT MADNESS TO MAINSTREAM SUCCESS

The Elephant Man is tough to place among the other movies in David Lynch's filmography because even though it’s really good, it doesn’t really feature his trademark quirky surreal/neo-noir style as prominently as his other work. Over the years there's been some odd choices in directors to make films outside of their comfort zone (most notably David Cronenberg's offer to direct Ferris Bueller's Day Off). This isn't the strangest example but at the time it was a bit strange for David Lynch to be making this. Before The Elephant Man went in to production, the higher-ups at Paramount must have been asking themselves what the hell they were doing putting out a biopic on John Merrick Directed by an experimental, up & coming director (Lynch) produced by (comedian) Mel Brooks. Say what you want about movie studios but this was actually a case of "mainstream cinema" taking a gamble on a young progressive director. You have to remember that in 1980 David Lynch wasn’t the Twin Peaks creating, pop culture oddity that we know now. At that point he was a new director responsible for a handful of experimental shorts and one feature-length film that was embraced more by the cultish midnight movie crowd. And Mel Brooks' career speaks for itself. Dramatic biopics weren't exactly his thing which is why he downplayed his involvement in the film until after it was complete.

I guess If you absolutely had to categorize David Lynch at that point in his career he'd be considered a horror director...? Obviously we aren’t talking about the traditional horror directors of the time like Carpenter or Hopper but Eraserhead (one of my favorite films) and The Grandmother (one of my favorite Lynch shorts) haunt my dreams more than Michael Meyers or Leatherface. I get the idea of hiring a “horror director” to do a movie like The Elephant Man as it involves startling scenes and extensive make-up that would transform someone in to an “oddity” but that’s a touchy subject because it poses the question: Is John Merrick a "oddity"? Of course he's not. To quote John Hurt in The Elephant Man: "He's a human being!” But when you associate him with the baby from Eraserhead and use the term; "horror" in the advertisements, you're not only asking for trouble but you're obviously giving off the wrong impression of what the movie is going to be. Every once in a while I come across reviews that make comparisons between Elephant Man & Todd Browning's Freaks and although there are a few legitimate comparisons between both films it still bothers me to associate the term "freak" with John Merrick...

David Lynch, 1980

At first glance one would think the only thing The Elephant Man has in common with Lynch's other work is the black & white cinematography and its use of make-up & prosthetics. But the more you watch the more you may come to realize that from the film's surreal opening sequence (which also has some seriously disturbing sexual undertones), to all the surreal "interlude" shots of factories, pipes & industrial noises (all key elements in the world of David Lynch), The Elephant Man is just as much a David Lynch film as Blue Velvet or Lost Highway. Actually, the dream sequences from The Elephant Man went on to influence parts of Blue Velvet (specifically Jeffery Beaumont's first dream after witnessing Frank Booth for the first time).

overlapping imagery & experimentation in The Elephant Man...

In The Elephant Man we follow the final days of John Merrick (John Hurt) through the eyes of Dr. Frederick Treves (Anthony Hopkins) form an abused circus sideshow freak to a medical anomaly. After seeing Merrick ("The Elephant Man") at a circus, Treves takes it upon himself to try and help Merrick by looking after and studying him. The film's most interesting angle is Dr. Treves' early treatment of John Merrick. Although his intentions are good, he's no different than Merrick's previous owner who paraded him around as a sideshow attraction. Only Instead of the circus, Treves parades him around and shows him off to the medical/scientific community almost as a found object instead of a person. After a reality check from one of his nurses, Treves’ treatment of Merrick changes.

The Elephant Man isn’t exactly a horror movie but it certainly has its share of startling and/or shocking moments. For the first quarter of the film Lynch intentionally keeps Hurt/Merrick under wraps or in the shadows. We only get quick glimpses of his deformities or see the terrified facial expressions of those who look at him for the first time...

The Elephant Man went on to compete against Raging Bull at the academy awards which is probably the only time two filmmakers like David Lynch & Martin Scorsese would draw so many parallels between one another. Obviously The Elephant Man & Raging Bull don't have the same spiritual connection as stuff like Blue Velvet & Something Wild or Lost Highway & Crash (1996) but both films are artistic, black & white biopics (both featuring crucial scenes shot similarly in slow motion) that represent high points in both filmmakers' careers released in the same year.

Lynch's history as an academy award nominated director is quite similar to Scorsese's. Prior to The Departed & Hugo, much fuss was made about the number of times Scorsese had been nominated yet never won but Lynch was only one winless nomination behind Scorsese for quite some time.

Raging Bull

I know this may seem like an odd choice for my first official Lynch review but this is one of those films that grew on me the older I got (it's also technically the first David Lynch movie I saw). The Elephant Man is proof that David Lynch can straight up direct a film without relying on his surreal quirkiness. And that’s not too say I don’t love Lynch's quirky style. Eraserhead & Blue Velvet are two of my all time favorite films, I think Mulholland Drive is one of the five best films of the last decade, and his last film inspired the name of this very site. But the surreal randomness in his work can sometimes work against him and distract viewers who may not necessarily like that kind stuff. No matter how great a film Mulholland Drive is, people get way too caught up in how weird and strangely humorous it can be at times to realize that not only is it a tragic story on multiple levels (broken dreams & a failed relationship) but its inspired by real events. Same goes for Twin Peaks - sure it’s odd and has humor (although the movie prequel is damn near completely the opposite of that) but it’s also a story about incest & sexual abuse. 

The Elephant Man isn’t a fluke/one-time occurrence either. The Straight Story, a film that even some Lynch fans forget exists, is another example of his ability to tell a straightforward story without imposing his style all over the film when it isn’t needed. The Straight Story wasn’t even stylized like The Elephant Man. With the exception of Harry Dean Stanton's presence and a re-occurring shot we commonly see in all of Lynch's work (a first person perspective shot of a road at night) you'd have no idea it was directed by Lynch. 

As a David Lynch fan who sees beyond all the dark quirkiness hes known for, I find myself openly praising his work less & less due to the large majority of so-called David Lynch fans who cant hold a conversation about his work beyond how "TOTALLY WEIRD" it is. I just don't wanna be grouped in with people like that. I'm not so pigheaded that I don't see his main appeal is how odd his films are, but he brings a little more to the table than dancing midgets and log ladies. I am more a fan of the Lost Highway/Mulholland Drive David Lynch but the over-analysis of those films by bloggers & critics has gotten to the point where I role my eyes at most new reviews & write-ups of those films.

The Elephant Man wouldn't be my #1 suggestion as an introduction to the world of David Lynch but it should be seen at some point on life.

GERRY: BORING MASTERPIECE

Gerry, Gus Van Sant's improvisational/non-scripted film about two friends named "Gerry" (played by Matt Damon & Casey Affleck) that get lost in the desert trying to find "the thing," was the starting point of his best period of work. Between 2002’s Gerry through 2007’s Paranoid Park, with two other great films in between (2003's Elephant and 2005's Last Days), Gus Van Sant wasn’t the Good Will Hunting/Finding Forester director people were starting to get use to. Film snobs like me are always quick to call an “indie” filmmaker a sellout at the first sign of them making a film that can be enjoyed by more than 10 people. When Van Sant took a break from his style seen in earlier films like Mala Noche, Drugstore Cowboy & My Own Private Idaho and made award winning/money making films like Good Will Hunting I imagine many people slapped him with the "sellout" label. Usually when filmmakers abandon their indie roots they rarely look back (David Gordon Green, Kevin Smith, John Singleton, etc). But to our surprise Van Sant did the reverse, tasted mainstream success (including a few Oscar & MTV movie award nominations) and went back to his low budget, indie roots. Like I already said before, Gerry was totally improvised, had long continuous uninterrupted shots and to this day is probably the most experimental thing he's done. Furthermore, it’s the most low-key and least preachy of the three films in the loose trilogy it belongs too (Elephant and Gerry being the other two in the trilogy). All three films; Gerry, Elephant & Last Days are based on real life deaths centered around young people. While Elephant was a loose retelling of the Columbine shootings and Last Days was a loose retelling on the final days of Kurt Cobain, Gerry is based on the real life story of two friends that went for a hike in the desert, got lost, almost starved and one of the friends ended up killing the other one. Compared to Columbine and Kurt Cobain's suicide, a random story about two guys who get lost in the desert seems like pretty small news (no offense). Ironically, Gerry kinda got the same treatment upon its release - while Elephant & Last Days were nominated for all kinds of awards (Elephant won best picture at Cannes), Gerry was kinda forgotten about pretty quickly. Maybe there shoulda been some kind of a transitional film between the more traditional Finding Forester and the experimental, Bela Tarr influenced Gerry. Perhaps some fans weren’t ready for such a radical change.

similar shots used in Van Sant's 'Gerry' (2002), 'Elephant' (2003) & 'Last Days' (2005)

I imagine some of you are asking what the “thing” is I mentioned at the beginning of this write-up that brings Damon & Affleck to the desert in the first place. In the first twenty minutes of Gerry, Affleck & Damon keep mentioning the “thing” (a clear example of the improvisation in the film). They never get specific but I imagine its some kind of national landmark, hot spring, totem or some kind of outdoorsy attraction for hikers.

If you're gonna do improvisational films (or a film with no script) sometimes the best thing to do is cast real life friends with genuine chemistry like Damon & Affleck (or at least actors who’ve worked with each other on a regular basis). All the dialogue spoken between Affleck & Damon in Gerry, which at times IS a bit too mumbly, familiar and inside jokey, still seems real & genuine. There's even a quick moment when Affleck is clearly holding in laughter yet Van Sant (Affleck's close friend and next door neighboor) keeps the scene in. But still, this isn’t a film about two friends dicking around in the desert. There's genuine moments all throughout Gerry where our two lost main characters express fear, despair, dementia and even hallucinations towards the end. The first third of Gerry is a little confusing because although Damon & Affleck are very lost without any water or food, it doesn’t seem to faze them whatsoever. But after a couple of days go by, reality sets in and they take things seriously until the final moments of the film when one of them dies. Although this is based a true story, a common analysis among fans of Gerry are that Damon & Affleck are the same person (ala Ed Norton & Brad Pitt in Fight Club). *SPOILER ALERT* In Gerry, Damon is pretty much the stronger one while Affleck is essentially the weaker one (there’s even a scene when Affleck starts to cry out of frustration and Damon gets upset and tells him to stop). In the end Damon survives while Affleck dies. It’s many people’s belief that when Damon strangles Affleck in the end, he’s killing his weaker side in order to survive. This scene rings familiar to the final moments in Van Sant's Last Days after Blake/Cobain commits suicide and his ghostly self rises up and leaves his dead human body behind.

To people with a better understanding of film, have a long attention span, don’t easily fall asleep or love The Brown Bunny (there’s many similarities between the two films), Gerry is an underrated masterpiece that needs a second chance. I'd raise my eyebrow if someone said this was one of the 50 best films of the decade or something like that, but it is on the short list. Although this film is kind of under the radar it’s pretty easy to come by. Maybe give it a chance after a few cups of coffee.

MOONRISE KINGDOM! (MUSEUM OF THE MOVING IMAGE EXCLUSIVE)

Who needs to go all the way to France to see Wes Anderson's new movie before it hit theaters when you can just get on the N train and go to Astoria?! Thanks to the Museum of the Moving Image I got a sneak peek at one of the most buzzworthy films to come out of the Cannes film festival so far. Before we go any further with this review I'll just get it outta the way and say that Wes Anderson's latest film is very good and worthy of all the early praise it’s been getting. It's a pretty typical thing to say in a movie review but this may be one of his best movies and we see a side of him as a director we haven't seen yet (Moonrise Kingdom has more special effects than any other Wes Anderson movie with more than one daring rescue attempt). Drawing inspiration from the beginning of Royal Tenenbaums where we see young Richie & Margot run away from home together, Moonrise Kingdom is also about two children in love who do the same (and the search party that's out to find them and bring 'em home). Our two main characters are "Sam" - a troubled orphan boy scout with no friends who's foster family doesn't want back, and "Suzy" - the daughter of two lawyers that barely speak to each other (and she kinda has a bit of a temper). The only problem with Sam & Suzy's plan to run away is that they can't get very far due to the fact that they live on a secluded New England island thats about to face it's biggest rain storm in history.
I was worried that The Fantastic Mr. Fox would be a fluke and Anderson would go back to his regular quirky B.S. that some of us have grown a little tired of. But this time around he doesn’t force his meticulously quirky 1960's "look" on a story that takes place in 2012 (we get it Wes, you like nostalgia, artifacts from back in the day, corduroy and British pop music, but after a while the world of Wes Anderson can start to get a little played out). Instead he finally just sets the story in the 1960's making his signature look, soundtrack and overall vibe of the film seem less forced. He gives his India fetish a rest, there’s no sign of a Wilson brother and along with his regular cast of actors like Bill Murray (Suzy's father) & Jason Schwartzman (a rival scout leader who helps Sam and Suzy escape on their second attempt), Anderson makes room for new faces like; Bruce Willis (the town sheriff in charge of finding Sam & Suzy), Ed Norton (Sam's scout leader), Frances Mccdormand (Suzy's cheating mother who communicates with her children through a megaphone), Tilda Swinton (a social worker, and the only character in the film that doesn't have an actual name) and Harvey Keitel (who's appearance is short but since he's my favorite actor and hasn’t been in anything good in quite some time, I'll take what I can get). Highlights from Moonrise Kingdom include Jason Schwartzman’s quick performance, Bob Balaban's narration and just overall presence (seriously, how has he never worked with Wes Anderson until now?), a boy scout getting stabbed in his kidney with scissors, Ed Norton rescuing Harvey Keitel, one of the main characters getting zapped by lightning, all the tracking shots, a funny Shawshank Redemption reference and pretty much the last 15-20 minutes of the movie. Animal lovers should be warned that there is a heartbreaking scene involoving the death of an animal. I also love Anderson's decision to cast two young unknowns as the main characters surrounded by a supporting cast of A-list veterans.
 Ever since the disappointing Darjeeling Limited and Life Aquatic (a film some people found to be a lil' problematic once the hype around it settled down), it seems like Anderson gave the quirky rich/upper-class family dramedy genre a rest and has been focusing more on making family oriented films. Naturally this will be loved & praised by the hardcore Wes Anderson fans that’re still in denial about how bad Darjeeling Limited really was, but it’s also a great movie for restoring faith in people that once loved Wes Anderson but have started to get a little sick of him.

WILL THESE MOVIES EVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY?: 10 RARITIES THAT NEED TO BE RELEASED ON DVD

'Joe's Bedstuy Barbershop: We Cut Heads' (Spike Lee)

Most of us are aware of popular cult films like Donnie Darko & Christmas On Mars or the DVD release of Alejnadro Jodorowsky's work that took forever to come out due to legal issues, being shelved, or sensitive subject matter. But at the end of the day...they finally got released no matter how long it took. There's still quite a few films out there from prominent directors that almost no one has seen (outside of festivals, special screening or bootlegs). And I'm not talking about unfinished movies in limbo, production hell or development hell. I'm talking about movies that have been shot, wrapped and edited yet haven't been released to the general public. With the growing popularity of region 2 DVD's, Eclipse box sets (the criterion collection's sub label that focuses on releasing rarely seen works from important contemporary & classic directors) and theaters like The Museum Of The Moving Image & Anthology Film Archives we're seeing more and more stuff that we thought we'd never see come out on the big screen and on DVD. But there's still plenty more movies that the public (especially dedicated movie nerds like myself) want to see.

'Fight Harm' (Harmony Korine)

So I've selected 10 movies (some of which I've actually had the pleasure of seeing...yes I'm bragging) and broken them up in to 3 categories:

"Who The F*ck Knows" - Movies that pretty much have a 50/50 chance of being released on DVD

"Possibly" - Realistic possibilities. I think the people at the criterion collection should pay close attention to these

"Probably Not" - These will more than likely either never see the light of day or be released on DVD










WHO THE F*CK KNOWS?:

-PROMISES WRITTEN IN WATER (Vincent Gallo)
After screening this at Toronto and Venice, Vincent Gallo suddenly released the following statement regarding his recent film about a man taking care of his terminally ill girlfriend in her final days:
I do not want my new works to be generated in a market or audience of any kind
I'm seriously hoping this is just another publicity stunt/desperate attempt to get attention from PINNLAND EMPIRE favorite-Vincent Gallo. Or maybe due to all the piling hate over the years that the last few movies he's been involved in has received ('The Brown Bunny', 'Tetro', 'Moscow Rising', etc), he's being serious and doesn't wanna deal with all the negativity and hate anymore.

-WANG DANG (Tom Noonan)
I put this in the "who the f*ck knows category" because on some level there has to be a demand for something to get released no matter how obscure or underground it is. Tom Noonan is one of the best characters actors around as well as an underrated director, but he's not exactly a household name. Outside of some film school students and Tom Noonan himself, I don't even think people know this movie exists. The plot sounds great though: A has-been movie director comes to a film school to speak to a class of film students and he eventually gets caught up in an adventure with two grad students.

-LANTON MILLS (Terrence Malick)
Apparently the only way you can view this movie is to schedule an appointment at the A.F.I., who own the only existing copy of Terrence Malick's first movie, for research purposes only. Seriously? Why should anyone have to go through all that just to watch a movie? With the recent popularity of 'Tree Of Life' and the anticipation of his next three movies (which he seems to be working on all at the same time), I'm hoping this will get some kind of attention.

-SCENES FROM FIGHT HARM (Harmony Korine)
You seriously mean to tell me Harmony Korine got the shit beat out of him for NOTHING? This documentary about Harmony Korine trying to provoke fights with random strangers on the street never got released because apparently the footage (shot by his friend David Blaine...yes THAT David Blaine) was unusable. I'm sorry but if I got two concussions and other various injuries for the sake of my film (no matter how stupid it may be) I'm showing it to people now matter how shitty the camerawork is.

'Fraulein: A German Melodrama' (Michael Haneke)

POSSIBLY:


-KEEP IT FOR YOURSELF (Claire Denis)

Here's another rare one starring Vincent Gallo directed by Claire Denis (who's no stranger to rare films herself with stuff like 'U.S. Go Home' and her early/rarely seen documentaries). Given Claire Denis' recent popularity in the indie/art house world these days you'd think this lil gem (which i keep reading about in all the literature i find on her) would make a great special feature on a DVD. And while we're at it, I'd like to see 'U.S. Go Home' & 'No Fear No Die' put out as well.

-JOE'S BEDSTUY BARBERSHOP: WE CUT HEADS (Spike Lee)
New York Directors like Scorsese and Jim Jarmusch have been getting their early/amateur/student works released in the last few years so I think its time for Spike Lee. This short is also a nice little artifact in that not only was it the starting point for Spike Lee, but Ang Lee as well (he was a production assistant on the movie).

-MICHAEL HANEKE'S MADE FOR T.V. MOVIES
Think how awesome this box set would be! Either criterion or kino (who's released a few of his films already) needs to get on this.


-THE EARLY SHORT FILMS OF HAL HARTLEY
Much like Spike Lee, here's another staple in the NYC indie film scene that needs to have his early work put out. To me, this is highly likely since there's already been two collections of shorts by Hal Hartley released already.

'Cremaster Cycle' (Matthew Barney)

PROBABLY NOT:


-A GAME IN THE SAND (Werner Herzog)
When asked if 'A Game In The Sand', an early short film about two little kids and a chicken in a sandbox directed by Werner Herzog that, according to him, Got Out Of Hand, would ever be shown in theaters or released on DVD he said; Not While I'm Alive. I guess that answers that. Moving on...

-THE FILMS OF MATTHEW BARNEY
These aren't the most rare movies in the world, but they still only pop up every once in a while at a theater like The IFC Center or The MOMA. Not everyone lives in New York City, San Francisco or Japan. There's people in this world with good taste who live in the middle of nowhere that cant make it out to a retrospective or a special screening at the MOMA for Matthew Barney's movies which he considers to be unique works of art (like his sculptures) and wont mass produce them on DVD because it cheapens their value. Listen DICK, just put the movies on DVD already!

KIDNEYS ON FILM PART TWO: SHIVERS (Zombies, Parasites, Softcore Porn, STD's & Kidney Failure)

You got men, you got parasites that live in, on, and around men. Now. Why not breed a parasite that does something useful? Eh? Why not breed a parasite capable of taking over the function of any one of a bunch of human organs? Why not, for example, a parasite living in the human abdominal cavity that plugs into the circulatory system and filters the blood like a kidney? If it takes a little blood for itself, so what? Be generous! You can afford it...You put the bug into the body of a man with a diseased kidney, the bug attacks the bad kidney, dissolves it, it's assimilated by the body, and now you got a perfectly good parasite where you used to have a rotten kidney. I know what you're gonna say. You're gonna say it's crazy.

That dialogue above is taken from a scene in David Cronenberg's feature film debut; 'Shivers': The story of an experiment involving parasites to be used for good that goes terribly wrong. I know this film doesn't just strictly focus on kidneys, or even organ transplants for that matter, but it still deserves a spot on the list of kidney-related films. A blog series involving human organs just doesn't seem right without a lil early David Cronenberg. From organs & parasites ('Shivers') and exploding heads ('Scanners') to the transformation of a human being into a giant fly ('The Fly') or a man transforming in to a woman ('M Butterfly'), the exploration of the human body (especially whats on the inside) is a common theme in his work Even his recent more "straight forward" films like 'A History Of Violence' and 'Eastern Promises' deal with the idea of "transformation". Had I followed David Cronenberg's career from the start with his early short films (which come off like really bad cliche student films) I woulda never guessed that he was capable of not only writing a script like 'Shivers' (which was ahead of its time for various reasons that we'll get in to), but going on to adapt the work of William S Burroughs & JG Ballard, or making a film like 'Dead Ringers', 'M Butterfly', or the 'World On A Wire'-influenced 'eXistenZ'.
'Shivers' is unique because it combines the campy & amateur elements of those early bad shorts (bad acting, cheap quality, low budget special effects, etc) with the more sophisticated techniques and story telling that Cronenberg still uses today. And as bad as those early short films may be, you could still tell that the person responsible for them was highly intelligent. 'Shivers', in my opinion, was Cronenberg's first true success as a filmmaker. Its basically 'Night Of The Living Dead' with a little bit of social commentary snuck in to the plot. The film centers around a secluded island community outside of Montreal that gets exposed to an epidemic which essentially turns people in to sex-crazed zombies. The epidemic/breakout is due to a science experiment that was supposed to be used for a groundbreaking organ transplant procedure where "good" parasites were to be placed in to the human body to essentially replace bad organs. The problem is that when the parasites are implanted into a human body (or "host body") they unleash a virus/aphrodisiac turning them in to sex crazed maniacs. The first person to be experimented on with this procedure is a promiscuous teenage girl who lives in the gated community that gave it up to just about everyone which causes this parasite sex virus to spread fast, slowly turning everyone in the island community in to a carrier of this new parasite sex disease.
What starts out as a movie about organ transplantation (with an emphasis on the kidneys) quickly turns in to an allegory/comment on the spreading of STD's (an element that could be found in future films like 'Poison', 'Trouble Every Day' or even 'Safe' to a certain extent). The idea of one person spreading this sexually transmitted virus/disease could be compared to the idea of the alleged "Patient Zero" for AIDS (which hadn't even come up at the time this film was made). And whats interesting about the real "Patient Zero" (Gaetan Dugas) that ties everything in this blog entry together is that not only was he french canadian (which is where 'Shivers' is set), but in real life he actually died of kidney failure. For a film like this in the mid 1970's, you have to admit that this is a pretty progressive story (even if it is essentially a low budget zombie movie). Neither Kidney disease or sexually transmitted diseases (especially HIV/AIDS) were addressed in film during the early/mid 1970's. Was David Cronenberg really that ahead of his time, or was the plot of 'Shivers' purely a coincidence. Just for the simple fact that David Cronenberg can make a film with an excessive amount of (obvious fake) blood, guts and bad acting but at the same time can get you to relate it to issues like sexually transmitted diseases makes this film unique. And not only does 'Shiver' deal with the spreading of STD's, but Cronenberg also explores things like incest (there's a scene involving an infected mother and daughter participating in an orgy together), pedophilia (a scene involving 2 young girls tied to a dog leash) and other various fetishes.
The film, which at times comes off like a softcore porn with a lot of blood, features more than a few obvious scenes of sexual innuendos (and the phallic shape of the actual parasites that spread from one host body to the next makes the symbolism even more obvious)

You can also trace certain aspects of 'Alien' back to Cronenberg's 'Shivers'. In fact, Cronenberg had this to say about 'Alien' and its screenwriter Dan O'bannon....

Ron Shusett, who’d had a lot of success with Alien, which, I have to say, took a lot of stuff from Shivers. There’s a parasite that lives inside you? Burns its way out? Jumps on your face and goes down your throat? I did all that before Alien and Dan O’Bannon (who wrote Alien) certainly knew my work.

Its always nice when directors aren't afraid to speak up and call someone out (although not to say that 'Alien' isn't a classic film). And on a side note, David Cronenberg is not only one of the most interesting directors to read about, but he never holds back his opinions on directors he doesn't like...

a parasite bursts through a host body's stomach in 'Shivers' (1975)

classic scene from 'Alien' (1979)

And on the flip side, certain scenes from 'Shivers' towards the end when things start to get more and more out of control (especially the sexual scenes involving young kids), reminded very much of Passolini's 'Salo...

'Shivers'

'Salo' (1975)

Given the release of recent popular "plague films" like 'Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes' and Soderbergh's 'Contagion', 'Shivers' is a film that some of you may wanna dust off the shelf and revisit. Like I said before, its quite campy and cheesy in some parts, but the ending of the film, which shows all the infected residents driving away from their gated community in to the city of Montreal (as if to insinuate the virus spreading all through Canada and eventually the rest of the world) is quite chilling and very mature for such a low budget film. I guess that's what makes watching 'Shivers' such a unique experience. Its both fun & entertaining (even kinda funny in parts where its clearly not supposed to be funny) but also ahead of its time and very progressive. Its watching the birth of Cronenberg and his foray in to the genre of "Body Horror" (a genre where he reigns supreme to this day).

ESSENTIAL KILLING: VINCENT GALLO GIVES THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS CAREER!

Its nice to know that the "indie" & arthouse crowds are accepting films outside of the norm more and more these days. While stuff that you would except to get a standing ovation like; 'Tree Of Life', 'Uncle Boonme Who Can Recall Our Past Lives' and 'Antichrist' end up getting mixed reviews at best from the Cannes audiences, genre films like 'Drive' (a car chase/heist movie that won best director at Cannes just recently) and 'Essential Killing' (a politically fueled action film that not only won best actor at the Venice film festival, but also got a special jury prize) are the talk of the arthouse/indie/film fest circuit. Everyone from Quentin Tarantino to Jack Nicholson is calling 'Essential Killing' their favorite film of 2010. And after seeing it tonight at the museum of moving image (a place i cant believe i hadn't been to until tonight), i have to agree that this film is surprisingly great. I mean, in the first 5 minutes, Vincent Gallo blows 3 guys up with a bazooka, then narrowly escapes being blown up by a missile. When a movie OPENS with that, you know you're in for a treat.
I imagine people who only know Vincent Gallo for 'Buffalo 66' and 'The Brown Bunny' were scratching their heads upon seeing the trailer for 'Essential Killing' which saw a bloody Gallo running through the mountains, dodging explosions and being shot at. But if you're a true fan of his work (like i am) and have followed his career, you'd know that this role isn't too far fetched. I mean after all, he's played everything from a scientist trapped on mars ('stranded') to a cross-dressing nut job ('freeway 2'). He's even dabbled in action before with 'Truth Or Consequences NM'. So when you think about it, why would it be out of character for Gallo to take a stab at an action film in the vein of 'Bourne Identity' or even the more recent 'Green Zone'? I will say that this had to be his most physically challenging role to date.
In 'Essential Killing', Vincent Gallo plays the lead character; "Mohammed": An alleged terrorist on the run from an unnamed branch of the U.S. military. At no point in the film do we get in to the details of Mohammed's apparent terrorist-doings because that's not what the film is about. 'Essential Killing' is about survival. Mohammed, who is use to the warm climate and the desert, is wounded and on the run in the snowy mountains which is an environment that's completely foreign to him. This forces Mohammed to go in to "survival mode", killing whoever he has to (including some innocent people and a dog) in order to live and cover his tracks. I'd even go so far as to compare 'Essential Killing' to not only the Bourne movies or 'The Green Zone', but 'Rambo: First Blood' as well. Just like Stallone did in the first 'Rambo' movie, when Mohammed's back is up against the wall and he's completely outnumbered, he does what he has to do in order to survive. The title of the film is pretty fitting. Director Jerzy Skolimowski makes us feel that each time Mohammed kills someone its because he has no choice. And for an action film, 'Essential Killing' is more hypnotic and atmospheric at times than it is an "edge of your seat thriller" (but trust me, there are still many suspenseful parts). The use of nature is really awesome in the film too. I'm not sure if many people realized this about the film, but even though it seems like mother nature isn't on Mohammed's side, other times mother nature IS on his side and helps him stay alive. In one scene, a group of wild animals cause the truck hes being transported in with other terrorist suspects to crash, which allows him to escape. In another scene, when a military helicopter pilot has Mohammed locked in his sight, all of a sudden a mean gust of wind causes the helicopter to lose control.
Whats so cool about Gallo's performance is that he's mute through the entire film (due to an explosion at the beginning which leaves him deaf). Because the main character has no lines, this obviously has a huge impact on the dialogue of the entire film. That may not mean much to some of you, but for an actor who's known to play a motormouth all the time, its pretty remarkable. I would say this is his best performance ever. I haven't been this impressed by a mute performance since Samantha Morton in Woody Allen's 'Sweet and Lowdown'. Gallo is VERY believable in this. When he accidentally steps on a bear trap and gets his foot caught, the entire audience goes; "OWWW!" (or something along those lines) because they believed in his acting.

The political nature of the film may not sit well with some people. But at the same time, it may challenge others to think a little. Its pretty ballsy for Jerzy Skolimowski to make an antihero Terrorist character in a post-9/11 world. AND have that role played a white actor. I mean lets face it, Vincent Gallo doesn't have any of those ambiguous Anthony Quinn/Victor Argo/Lou Diamond Phillips ethnic facial features. He's pretty white. But he somehow pulls it off. I'm pretty sure a lot of Americans will have a tough time stomaching this (even though "Mohammed" has nothing to do with 9/11 or anything anti-American that we know of). I think this was partially the reason that Skolimowski cast a white American like Gallo (who he worked with before in Maki Kaurismaki's 'L.A. Without A Map'). And speaking of Gallo, it must have been strange for such an outspoken conservative republican (like Vincent Gallo claims to be) to play a role like this. I cant remember the last time a right wing or republican felt any sympathy for a terrorist (or ALLEGED terrorist as far as this film is concerned). And on a side note, I always find it interesting that any film with a slight hint of "anti-American-ism" or is critical of America in some way shape or form always seems to draw praise and win awards at world film festivals. Gus Van Sant's 'Elephant' (a film about an American high school shooting), Michael Moore's 'Farenheit 9/11' (speaks for itself) and Von Trier's 'Dancer In The Dark' make up 3 of the last decades palm d'or winners.
Normally, i prefer that when people discover a director, they start at the beginning. But in the case of 'Essential Killing', I wouldn't mind if this was the entry point for people not too familiar with Jerzy Skolimowski. He's a great filmmaker who co-wrote Roman Polanski's first feature, was film school classmates with Milos Forman, and most recently played Naomi Watt's cranky uncle in Cronenberg's 'Eastern Promises'. Skolimowski pleases just about every possible movie-goer with 'Essential Killing'. There's action, suspense, sad moments, and there's even a few funny parts. Plus there's a nice short appearance from "Mrs. Polanski"; Emmanuelle Seigner. After '13 Assassins', this is the most entertaining movie I've seen so far this year. Apparently this is set to open in select theaters in August. Be sure to check it out if its playing near you.