Humour is like violence. They both come to you unexpectedy, and the more unpredictabe they both are, the better it gets - Takeshi Kitano
It takes a special kind of talent to play the same character over & over again and at the same time not be redundant or have your fans get sick & tired of it. Takeshi Kitano has been doing this masterfully for DECADES. Beneath the random deadpan humor and moments of violence within his world is a unique, one of a kind brilliance that's tough to describe. Most modern Japanese filmmakers tend to draw inspiration from other older Japanese filmmakers (Kurosawa, Ozu, etc) or from influential American filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino who ironically gets a lot of his inspiration from modern Japanese filmmakers, causing a strange lil' paradox. But I feel like a lot of Takeshi Kitano's inspiration comes from Robert Bresson (the emotionless, deadpan performances) along with his own own personal life. Sure there's elements of vintage Scorsese in his work (the exploration in to the world of organized crime, corrupt police & gritty violence) and he's sited Kurosawa as a direct influence, but it’s mostly Bresson & personal stuff...
ART IMITATING LIFE
In Fireworks one of the characters takes up the hobby of drawing after he's been paralyzed and we see his skills develop as an artist as the film progresses. That artwork (Takeshi's own real art) is featured heavily throughout the film. Kitano's artwork is also featured in his romantic drama; Dolls. In Sonatine, the main character has constant visions of committing suicide. In real life Kitano was involved in a motorcycle accident that left half of his face paralyzed. He was quoted as saying the motorcycle accident was an "unconscious suicide attempt" as he was suffering from depression in the mid 90's. Both of these personal events (painting & the unconscious suicide attempt) go hand in hand; Kitano took up painting during the recovery from his motorcycle accident...
Sonatine
Fireworks
Fireworks
Fireworks
Dolls
Glory Of A Filmmaker
STARING DEATH IN THE FACE
I use to think the motivation behind Takeshi Kitano's performances in his Yakuza-related films was just apathy. To a certain degree that is the case but it goes a little deeper. Films like; Sonatine, Violent Cop, Boiling Point and recent stuff like; Outrage & Outrage Beyond feature emotionless main characters roaming through life with the occasional violent outburst. The only time they show emotion in these selected films is during an act of violence. Sure there may be occasional laughter but it’s usually at the expense of someone else as they're being beaten or killed. After watching Fireworks for the first time I realize that Kitano's characters are severely depressed which would explain their solemn/emotionless faces and violent outbursts. That apathy I mentioned earlier is brought on by depression. The characters Kitano plays are indifferent towards life. They really don’t care if they live or die. In just about every one of Kitano's prominent Yakuza/gangster/cop drama films is a scene of him with a gun pointed at his head and he either doesn't care or is daring the person pointing the gun to pull the trigger...
Violent Cop
Boiling Point
Fireworks
Outrage Beyond
Notice all the shootout scenes in Sonatine. Kitano stands completely uncovered among all the bullets whizzing by with no emotion on his face shooting back almost like he wants to get shot...
Sonatine
or notice the lack of emotion on his face whenever one of his characters is getting ready to kill someone...
Violent Cop
Violent Cop
Outrage
THERE WILL BE BLOOD...
Based on the previous category its a given that Kitano's films feature brutal deaths and plenty of blood. Just the titles of some of his films alone should give off that impression; Violent Cop, Boiling Point, Outrage, etc...
Zatoichi
Outrage
Violent Cop
Violent Cop
Sonatine
Sonatine
Fireworks
MAKING UNLIKEABLE CHARACTERS LIKEABLE
In the film world Takeshi Kitano is mostly known for playing one of two roles; He's either a corrupt & jaded police officer sick of chasing down criminals or he's a jaded Yakuza underling sick of killing people and taking orders. Both prototypes are in their late 40's through their early 60's and have come to the realization that there's nothing beyond the life they are use to so they accept it and mope through life occasionally killing or beating the hell out of someone to make themselves feel better when all it does is bring on more depression & sadness that I mentioned earlier. Kitano's films during the late 80's through the 90's shares a connection with Michael Haneke's Austrian films like The Seventh Continent & 71 Fragments... in showing how robotic & formulaic our lives can be and how we don’t question anything and just accept it. Both Kitano & Haneke essentially showed the pointlessness in some of the everyday things we do in life. What’s also interesting is that whether a cop or a yakuza - the characters Kitano plays are shitty, dislikeable people yet I still find myself caring about and emotionally invested in them. Not since Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant and Ray Liotta in Narc have I actually cared about a crooked, shady and/or volatile police officer character. But Kitano's quirky humor and deadpan delivery makes them either likable or at least intriguing and worth investing your time in.
Outrage
Brother
Sonatine
Fireworks
BRUSHES WITH AMERICAN MOVIE AUDIENCES & MY STRANGE FASCINATION WITH TAKESHI KITANO...
Part of my fascination with Takeshi Kitano as a person comes from the lack of complex Asian American characters with some kind of emotional depth in modern American films (or just the lack of Asian American characters in film all together). He just seems like a unique individual. Among American audiences Takeshi Kitano is mostly know for starring in the crossover cult film; Battle Royale and, if you'll all allow me to dust this one off, Johnny Mnemonic. He also collaborated with American actor Omar Epps in the gangster drama Brother. Given Battle Royale's crossover success (at least in the cult movie world) and Quentin Tarantino's hard-on for Kitano's films, I'm surprised his other work didn’t draw much attention in America. Not that he needs the validation of American movie audiences at all (he's practically a legend in Japan). It’s just that his work shows a more complex & unique type of Asian character that we (Americans) aren't really exposed too that often. Even as just an actor - Kitano's ability to play an antihero or a likeable villain could be utilized in American films today...
Johnny Mneumonic
Brother
Battle Royale
Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence
TAKESHI KITANO'S LIGHTER SIDE
There's more to Takeshi Kitano than shootouts, murder, corrupt police & yakuza. In Japan he's actually more known as a comedian (he hosts a weekly variety show). Although I may not be a fan of some of these films (Dolls & Getting Any to be specific) I still can't ignore his lighter side. Although problematic, a film like Dolls shows his melodramatic side whereas Getting Any & Takeshis' shows him tackling a different style of comedy (slapstick). Personally I don't think wacky slapstick humor works for him but he made an attempt at stepping outside of his comfort zone, while stuff like A scene at the sea & Kikujiro show his ability to work with children...
Getting Any?
Kikujiro
A Scene At The Sea
Takeshi's
Dolls
THE BEACH
Another thing Takeshi Kitano gets away with is the cliché use of the beach. Anyone who knows anything about art house cinema should know that the beach and/or the ocean has always played a major role (The Seventh Seal, Beau Travail, Tree Of Life, To The Wonder, etc). No matter how violent or intense some of Kitano's films may be, at some point we're gonna find ourselves on a beach usually coupled with a death or a suicide (Both Fireworks & Sonatine end with a suicide on a beach and Outrage ends with one of the main villains getting killed near the beach). Given all the violence in his films, a scene at the beach feels like a breath of fresh air after all the chaos we've witnessed...
Kikujiro
A Scene At The Sea
Fireworks
Takeshi's
Sonatine
The cinema of Takeshi Kitano is an acquired taste. His films are sometimes described as boring and I really can’t argue with that (with the exception of all the isolated moments of violence). There are moments in his work where the camera doesn’t cut when it typically should and things just get hypnotic for a brief moment (emulated today by filmmakers like Nicholas Winding Refn in Drive & Bronson). His type of dry, monotone, random humor isn’t for everyone and not all audiences have the patience to see the complexity of some of his characters that could easily be described as unintruiging. But for me his films (er...MOST of his films) work. If you're a fan of Bresson, old Scorsese, Jim Jarmusch and very dark humor then I highly suggest you explore the world of Takeshi Kitano.
Well it looks like this Hal Hartley retrospective is spilling over in to July which is perfectly fine with me. Not only are Hartley's films underrated, but most websites, word presses & blogspots don't really delve in to his work as deep as they should. This series partially serves as a lane where people can go to really learn about Hartley's films from people who "get" his style.
For this particular film, which is an American independent classic in my opinion, I tapped John Cribbs of The Pink Smoke for a couple of reasons - Not only is The Pink Smoke a Hal Hartley-friendly zone * (if you haven't read Chris' write-up on Surviving Desire or Ian's write-up on Henry Fool - please do so), but both Chris & John are SUNY Purchase alums. It wouldn't feel right to not include these guys in this series given that they were enrolled in the same program as him, probably walked the same halls and maybe even sat in the same classrooms/lecture halls as him.
Enjoy...
Martin Donovan as Matthew Slaughter in Trust
Here's something weird about Trust: on the back of the old VHS box,
Martin Donovan's character is specifically identified as being 18
years old.** Never mind that the actor was in his early 30's when the
film was made - what in the movie could possibly have led anyone to
believe that Matthew Slaughter is meant to be 18? He's never described
as being that young - if I had to guess, I'd say he's supposed to be
around the same age as Josh Hutton in Unbelievable Truth; in fact I'm
pretty sure the age difference between himself and Adrienne Shelly's
high school senior Maria is commented on at least once. He does live
with his dad, but it's made clear that this is an arrangement of
necessity - his inflexible principles make it impossible for him to
hold down a job. While I guess Matthew's general moodiness,
quick-triggered temper and propensity for sitting around stroking a
hand grenade to the strains of Symphony No. 5 in C Minor may suggest a
certain juvenile angst, most teens don't offer up the definition of
the word "empirical." Most teens haven't had the experience to KNOW
the word "empirical."
And there you have a central theme of Hal Hartley's films: his
characters finding conflict between knowledge and experience. They
think they have a handle on the events of their lives and consequences
of their actions, and it takes being shot in the face or thrown out a
window or inadvertently causing their father to fall down dead of a
heart attack to come to terms with how little their blithe existence
has prepared them for what they have yet to endure. For Maria - young,
defiant, pregnant - being accused of murder, rejected by her dumb
football jock lover and shunned by family and friends are enough to
demolish her confident exterior. It takes a sobering look at her belly
in the mirror of a department store's (literal and metaphoric)
changing room to bring about a new, near-monastic personality that's
as drastically meek and selfless as her previous attitude was
aggressive and self-absorbed. Whereas Matthew, hardened by years of
abuse at the hands of his father and constantly humiliated by the
unscrupulous superiors at his demeaning job, has built up a defense -
his life, however rebellious, has become a cyclical cage: the way he
cleans the bathroom the same way every time, the constant
quitting/getting fired from his job, even his intimidation of the
locals are mere routines that don't present any danger he's not
already prepared to deal with. The case could be made, although I'm
not going to make it, that the "flat" framing and candid manner of the
dialogue in Hartley's early films are themselves aesthetic reflections
of his characters' subconscious fear of failure; it's more comforting
for them to minimize their own responses in order to avoid the
emotional assaults of something as unpredictable and perilous as
active love. Although he's ready to marry Maria and help raise her
unborn child, Matthew preemptively rejects the concept of love,
explaining that "When people are in love they do all sorts of crazy
things. They get jealous, they lie, they cheat. They kill themselves.
They kill each other." But even though he lays it all out, that more
or less becomes the exact progression of his and Maria's relationship:
to know what's going to happen doesn't necessarily mean it won't.
Knowledge and experience are often confused with one another; to sort
them out Hartley's amateur philosophers are forced to rethink a few
empirical facts in light of some illuminatingly unbelievable truths.
Empirical fact: Matthew Slaughter is not 18 years old. Unbelievable
truth: Maria Coughlin is ashamed of being young and stupid. Empirical
fact: These computer boards failed inspection and shouldn't be put
back on the assembly line - I'm good at what I do. Unbelievable truth:
Your job is making you boring and mean. Empirical fact: People are
only as good as the deals they make and keep. Unbelievable truth: Love
without faith is infatuation. Empirical fact: Respect and admiration.
Unbelievable truth: Trust and love.
As Matthew, Martin Donovan is undeniably cool: indignantly throwing on
his coat after quitting his job predated Jack Foley's freeze-frame
tie-flinging in Out Of Sight, and Casino's Tony Spilotro would steal
Matthew's move of shoving toady supervisor Matt Malloy's head in a
vise. Whenever I tell someone to shut up, I always mimic Donovan's
puncturing inflection. I'm sure we all wish we could punch one-eyed
sex offenders in the gut and throttle insensitive abortion clinic
groupies without repercussion, but something that Donovan and Hartley
never let us forget is Matthew's almost psychotic sadness - that his
cool detachment is a symptom of cynicism and disappointment. He's an
electronics expert, yet like so many other Hartley heroes he has a
contentious relationship with technology: why use his careful knowledge
fixing televisions that will only serve to further suppress the basic
human need for knowledge? Ideological compromises make Matthew
volatile, his sincerity makes him dangerous - the everyday sacrifices
most people take for granted are unacceptable to someone with
principals to defend. It's only natural that such a man, who pits
himself against corporations, launches McLuhanisms against the media
and often feels "like smashing things up" would find himself at odds
with law and order; sure enough, Matthew ends up being carted off to
jail as a criminal and a terrorist.
Off-screen acts of violence and criminality in Hartley's films that
started with the implications of Josh Hutton's horrible murders in Unbelievable Truth and continued with talk of unseen terrorism in
Simple Men and Amateur's post-assault opening are interspersed
throughout Trust. Weirdly enough, the comically sudden death of
Maria's dad may be the most brutal on-screen image from the early
movies, the roots of which were still firmly planted in melodrama.
Although he'd model later films like Simple Men and Amateur on crime
thrillers, the transgressions here all stem directly from the heart.
While the characters aren't after money or floppy discs, their
motivations nevertheless reinforce Hartley's belief that, when we
desire something, the inevitable result is trouble. Case in point: a
woman who's pregnant and doesn't want a baby, sitting next to a woman
who can't have a baby and wants one. The solution should be obvious,
but each of them react irrationally - Maria sets off to get drunk and
somewhat knowingly puts herself in a dangerous situation, while the
woman hightails it with an infant left near the bench she's sitting
on. The baby kidnapping subplot, the resolution of which somewhat
recalls the end of Raising Arizona, directly links the criminal
impulse to familial obligation - as Matthew observes, "A family's like
a gun. You point it in the wrong direction, you're gonna kill
somebody." The unruly mess of family claims a casualty in Maria's
father; Maria's penance is enslavement within the unnaturally rigid
structure of mother Jean's re-ordered household. Jean claims this
cold, oppressive environment to be liberating, while for the woman who
steals the baby it's just this kind of existence - a life where
nothing "gets messed up" - she's trying to escape. The woman on the
bench WANTS a Maria who'll screw up her life, embarrass the family and
possibly accidentally murder the father. Her destructive behavior
comes from a rebellion against conformity just like machinist Matthew,
whose ideals dictate that some things aren't meant to be fixed - order
is the enemy. Jean's idea of revenge is to domesticate Maria into a
joyless life of doing laundry and Matthew's father Jim bullies his son
into repeatedly cleaning the bathroom; after Maria leaves it a mess,
the accidentally rebellious disorder drives him crazy. There's a real
difference between Matthew's comedic violence against Bill Sage and
Jim's scary violence against Matthew, although Hartley finds humor in
absurdity of the norm and both Merritt Nelson as Jean and John MacKay
as Jim give incredibly funny, terrifying performances.
In his exceptional breakdown of Flirt, Pinn mentioned the deals that
Hartley's characters find themselves bound to, and deals abound in
Trust: Maria obligates herself to become Jean's slave, Matthew agrees
to marry her if she'll break her deal with her mother, Maria will only
dismiss the original deal and agree to Matthew's deal if he quits his
job. "You can't get something for nothing" is the maxim of Merritt
Nelson's unnamed derelict (who's almost like an abandoned and deluded
version of Jean) in Surviving Desire, and the demand for sacrifice -
even one as mutually beneficial as a marriage proposal - are what keep
Hartley's restless heroes in a hopeless cycle. Matthew's choice to
accept Maria's ultimatum and quit his job isn't a revelation or change
of character - he's already quit the same job before. Ultimately
Maria, like Audry in Unbelievable Truth, calls off all the deals and
therefore becomes truly free. In the first shot of the film,
gum-smacking Maria hogs the entire frame, face stuck in a powder room
mirror, needing nothing yet demanding five dollars. The last shot is
of her from a distance, watching as another man is taken away from her
as the melancholy yet strangely rousing score swells: this time, she's
alone in the uncrowded frame, looking directly towards camera, silent
and thoughtful as the car with Matthew recedes into the distance.
She's wearing the glasses Matthew inspired her to wear along with her
ex-boyfriend's letterman jacket over Matthew's dead mother's dress:
the past, her experience and everything that's led her here. In
college*** I wrote a paper on Trust in which I argued about the
characters' motivations, specifically whether her mother's framing of
Matthew is what motivates Maria to go through with the abortion. She
goes to the clinic the next morning, suggesting that it was jealousy
over seeing Matthew in bed with her sister that prompted her to make
this decision (my professor was of that opinion). But whether or not
Maria is fooled by her mother's ploy, I think that she realizes what
she wanted at the beginning - flatly stated by her, to have a baby and
get married - is not what she wants now or who she is anymore. Maria
and Matthew's relationship, like Audry and Josh's in Unbelievable Truth, is chaste to the point of being almost conceptual. Forcing it
into a domestic situation susceptible to the same pits and falls that
made their parents the embittered parties they are today wouldn't only
ruin the mystery or romance, it would be putting knowledge over
experience. Just as Matthew isn't Donovan's best Hal Hartley character
(that'd be Jude in Surviving Desire), Maria isn't quite as memorable
an Adrienne Shelly creation as Audry Hugo, but learns more from her
quick transition into a world of which she's not the center, just
comfortable being someone who just happens to be here.
Just one thing...why is she wearing a pink bra on the VHS cover??
*In the smoke's 5th installment of "Five From The fire", Cribb's wife didn't save any of Hal Hartley's films ** I suppose you could just chock it up to distributors at the turn of
the decade still not quite knowing how to market these new, suddenly
hot indie/arthouse releases: Sex, Lies & Videotape isn't exactly a
"scorchingly erotic" film bristling with "smoldering sexuality" as the
back of the box claims and Jesus Of Montreal does not actually feature
a scene with a character ascending to heaven on an escalator. From the
picture on the VHS cover, you'd think Metropolitan takes place largely
during some kinda sexy co-ed pajama party. Also, I don't think Janet
Maslin's dvd cover blurb "A hilarious comedy!" really sets the tone
for what you're getting yourself into with Henry Fool.
*** Unlike my fellow 'smokester Chris Funderburg, Hal Hartley was not
the reason I applied to SUNY Purchase; in fact, I'd never even heard
of Hal Hartley until my freshman year. Or of Matt Malloy or Edie Falco
or Robert Burke for that matter. I knew Parker Posey from Dazed & Confused and Waiting For Guffman and Dwight Ewell because of Chasing Amy, yet despite my love of Clerks I had never noticed the end credits
dedication to Linklater, Jarmusch, Spike Lee and Hartley.
Cinema is in a pretty weird state at the moment - More prominent filmmakers are turning to television, Steven Soderbergh, whose latest and supposedly "last" film couldn’t even get a run in theaters, gave an interesting speech on the current state of cinema, producer Ted Hope is more vocal than ever on social media outletts about his views on the current state of independent film and millionaire actors are turning to kickstarter and other similar sites to get funding from people like you & me so they can direct movies of their own (personally I find that absolutely appalling. Ask your other millionaire actor buddies for money...OR USE YOUR OWN!).
This time of year is always pretty stale yet I'm still remaining optimistic because there's a ton of interesting stuff on the horizon that will hopefully get released in a timely fashion. I wasn’t actually at Cannes (and never have been) but judging from the lineup of filmmakers alone (The Coens, Claire Denis, Jim Jarmusch, Hal Hartley, Abdelatiff Kechiche, Polanski, Refn, etc) I'm not exactly sure why cinephiles & movie forum nerds were so unenthusiastic and disappointed about this year’s festival (at least that’s the vibe I got). And outside of Cannes, 2013 will also more than likely bring us new films from Lars Von Trier, Bruno Dumont & Steve McQueen. Thats enough for me to stay positive for the rest of this movie season...
For a "film critic" I haven’t seen too many new/important/"big" films this year (Ironman 3, Start Trek 2, Superman, The End, World War Z, etc). But getting engaged, exercising and finding a new apartment (along with maintaining consistent content for this site) take precedent over all that. And besides, when it comes to movies of that magnitude I doubt my opinion holds that much weight anyway. You'll all see them regardless.
As far as what I HAVE seen this year -three of my six favorite films of the year so far are technically from 2012 but they didn’t get a wide releases until this year and I missed the first 30-45 minutes of two of the other three films that I liked*. But still, for what it’s worth, here's my quick lil' rundown of 2013 so far...
Favorites/Stuff I Enjoyed...
Upstream Color
Much like Primer, Shane Caruth's first feature film that made a mini-dent on the indie scene 9 years ago, this will require multiple viewings on my part before I can even begin to speak intelligently about it. But what I DO know is that this is a beautiful piece of art with great cinematography, a touching/intimate/ambient score straight outta the school of Brian Eno and overall, this was an attempt at an original story that combined subtle science fiction, romance, hypnosis and the pointlessness of work with non-linear storytelling.
Frances Ha
Just off the strength that I didn’t hate this, which is made up of so many elements I'm not too crazy about (Noah Baumbch, Greta Gerwig, New York City, Upper Class elitism, etc) I have to include it on the list. I genuinely enjoyed this film which drew upon the cinema of old school Jim Jarmusch & Woody Allen. I still have a few lil' conflicting issues with this - I think Greta Gerwig plays up the "awkward girl" thing a little too much and as I stated on twitter; "Frances Ha made me like New York City again, and still dislike it at the same time", but this was still very fun and somewhat relatable on a few levels.
Stories We Tell
At the beginning of this documentary Sarah Polley's sister asks the question; "who the fuck wants to see a movie about our family?" That very same question was also kinda in the back of my mind in regards to Polley's personal documentsry about her family secrets, but she soon put my skepticism to rest. This is easily the best thing I've seen all year so far. Although I didn't really relate to much in this documentary or grow up in a big immediate family, I was still very touched by Sarah Polley's latest film where she dissects her families history and let's us in on some incredibly personal information about her existence.
The Place Beyond The Pines
Im gonna be honest - the more I think about this the more plot holes and flaws I start to discover. So before I come to the realization that this film was actually just "ok" I'm including it on this list before I change my mind.
Behind The Candelabra & The Central Park Five*
As I already stated - I missed the beginning of both of these films but I enjoyed what what I saw
Highly Anticipating...
Only God Forgives
So far Nicholas Winding Refn's latest has gotten mixed reviews at best but judging from the three clips I've seen I still can't wait. Refn seems to be combining the world of noir-ish art house cinema with the world of bad late night cable action movies, scored by a tangerine dream cover band and I think that's nothing short of brilliant. After Valhalla Rising & Drive I'll see anything this man puts out.
Les Salauds
New Claire Denis. Sold. Moving on...
Nymphomaniac
It appears that Lars Von Trier is Remaking Black Snake Moan with a much better cast? Something tells me this will be darker and even more provocative than Antichrist. Von Trier's exploration in to the dark side of sex has poked its little head out in the past (Breaking The Waves, Dogville, Antichrist) and he also hasn't been afraid to show unsimulated sex before either (The Idiots & Antichrist) so I think this will be his moment to really purge. Whether this turns out to be a disaster or a masterpiece it'll still be entertaining and get a rise outta someone.
Blue Is The Warmest Color
It broke my heart when Abdellatif Kechiche's misunderstood masterpiece; Black Venus (2010) got swept under the rug so I'm glad he got his redemption by winning best picture at Cannes last month for his adaptation of the cult french graphic novel about homosexuality and young love.
More radical/unexpected works have been winning the Palme D'or for the last couple of years and this film doesn’t look like any type of exception.
12 Years A Slave
Last year brought us Django and this year we get 12 Years A Slave. Not to put too much pressure on Steve McQueen but I have a feeling this will be his crowning achievement as a filmmaker (a crowning achievement in a short career so far, but still).
Only Lovers Left Alive
Much like Claire Denis' new film, you don’t have to sell me on this one either. This is directed by one of my all time favorite filmmakers (Jim Jarmusch) so I'm in. Even though I really didn’t like Limits Of Control and I am a tad bit weary of Jarmusch playing in to this recent Vampire craze, I'm still optimistic. Vampires are cool. Vampire movies should be cool. Who's cooler than Jim Jarmusch? This is a match made in heaven.
Not exactly anticipating, but I am curious...
Oldboy
Given Spike Lee's recent string of disappointing and/or bad films (especially Red Hook "Bummer") he already has the chips stacked against him. Oldboy is a beloved holy grail-esque film of comicon-type fanboys who don’t want their beloved Asian films remade so I'm sure people already dislike like this adaptation without even seeing it (have you seen the discussions on the IMDB boards?) This also may or may not continue Spike Lee & Quentin Tarantino's almost 20 year long feud as Tarantino is Oldboy/Park-Chan Wok fanboy #1. I imagine someone you have personal issues with (like Tarantino does with Lee) remaking one of your favorite films would really piss someone off. I'm also bracing myself for a possible (one-sided) beef between Spike Lee & Steve McQueen given that they both have films being released around the same time and Spike Lee is notorious for having that "only me" complex among other prominent black filmmakers over the years (Matty Rich, John Singleton, etc).
Nebraska
I've never been an Alexander Payne fan outside of maybe Election and Laura Dern's performance in Citizen Ruth but apparently Bruce Dern, Laura's dad, gave a career performance in Payne's latest film so that’s enough to spark my interest.
Prince Avalanche
David Gordon Green was officially dead to me the minute the credits rolled at the end of The Sitter but there's something about the trailer for his latest film that makes me think he's returning to his All The Real Girls-roots. I'm not expecting a game-changer but it does look like he's making a return to his old style that I'm a fan of.
On the other hand, this could very well be one of those post-2000 sundance comedies that's quirky for the sake of being quirky
On Another note - PINNLAND EMPIRE will be three years old soon! I'd like to thank you guys for reading and sharing.
Thanks to John Cribbs, Chris Funderberg, Doug Frye, Leanne Kubickz, Nathaniel Drake Carlson, Jason Hedrick, Jacob Sanders, Paul Cooney, Matt Reddick, Chris Robosch & Ian Loffill for contributing to the site.
Thanks to Claire Denis, Guy Maddin, Lodge Kerrigan, Marina De Van, Alice Houri, Beans Bertrand Bonello, John Carluccio, Djinn Carrenard & John Lurie for taking the time out to participate in the short interviews we've done in the past and an extra special thanks to Ted Hope, Toronto Film Review, The Pink Smoke, Flud Watches, Warren Wade Anderson & Monte Hellman for bringing traffic to the site over the years.
Is a person worthy of redemption no matter how bad of a sin they may have committed in the past? Can someone still be considered a good person even if they're indirectly responsible for the deaths of two people? These are the two main questions that The Unbelievable Truth, Hal Hartley's feature film debut, asks its audience. These certainly aren’t the only two things this lil’ gem makes us ponder. Through the course of the film Hartley makes us question the importance we place on money, going to college, having a generic career and whether or not a relationship can work between two people with so many differences and so many obstacles in their way. But in my opinion redemption is the main theme. I used the word sin earlier as opoosed to crime because this film has some serious religious undertones. Not to say that Hal Hartley is super religious and his films are some type of Christian propaganda (Hartley’s views towards religion seem a tad cynical at times actually) but Unbelievable Truth throws around terms like Priest, Jesus, God, Church and obvious forms of religious symbolism all throughout the story (see my review of Bruno Dumont's Hors Satan where I draw parallels between the two films).
In The Unbelievable Truth, Robert John Burke plays "Josh Hutton" – a young man whose just been released from prison after 16 years for murder. Given that he went to prison at the age of 18, he returns to the only place he knows – his hometown in Long Island where all sorts of crazy rumors and half truths have been created about him over the years. Half the town believes he’s a stone cold killer but in reality he accidentally pushed a guy down a flight of stairs while he was trying to defend himself (as the film progresses we learn its a little more complicated than that). The only thing Josh knows how to do is fix cars (a trade he picked up in prison that he's quite good at). He gets a job at an auto shop where a mutual attraction develops between him and his boss’ daughter "Audry" (Adrienne Shelly). Audry is a beautiful, detached, moody teenager less concerned with boys & clothes and more concerned with the end of the world. She’s convinced some kind of nuclear bomb will be dropped on earth one day putting an end to humanity so she doesn’t see a point in caring about the future. Her outlook on life quickly changes however when she meets Josh and falls madly in love with him. Naturally problems arise: Audry’s father doesn’t want her in a relationship with an ex-con, Josh is almost twice Audry’s age and Josh has a tough time being a living urban legend in a town where all eyes are constantly on him now that he's outta prison. Even though Josh is equally in love with Audry he turns down her advances (partially due to a deal he makes with her father) and Audry goes off to Europe to become a model. Josh soon realizes the mistake he made and now he has to try and win her back while uncovering a few things from his past that may clear his name.
Unlike other mysterious main characters that Hal Hartley has created over the years like the shady businessman & pimp; Thomas Ludens (Amateur) or the degenerate, foul mouthed, sex offender Henry Fool (Henry Fool), right from the start we get the vibe that Josh Hutton is a good person who just made a stupid mistake when he was a teenager. Unbelievable Truth is pretty unique in that way - The protagonist is responsible for the death of two people and we’re still supposed to like him (and not in an antihero kind of way either). From the very beginning Josh is pretty straightforward about his past with any & everyone he comes in contact with. When he gets picked up trying to hitchhike in to town he lets the family that picks him up know that he’s just been released from prison when he could have easily lied. When he applies for a job as an auto mechanic its clear no one is going to do any kind of a background check on him but he still lets his future boss know he did time in prison for murder.
Hal Hartley’s early films were important in creating a cinematic identity for Long Island during a time when indie film on the east coast was pretty much exclusively centered around New York City thanks to figures like Spike Lee & Jim Jarmusch (who Hartley was constantly compared too early on in his career). Long Island has always been considered the unofficial 6th borough of New York City and Hal Hartley plays on that connection. From the LIRR commuters in Trust to New York City’s connection to Long Island courtesy of Queens, NYC’s presence is always felt in his work (towards the end of Unbelievable Truth Audrey moves to Manhattan after becoming a successful model).
Hartley’s early work is very "Long Island" courtesy of all the supporting characters (specifically Audry's father who represents a huge chunk of people I see riding the LIRR), the accents and the film's suburban setting. From Grey Gardens to Sonny Corleone getting gunned down at the toll booth in The Godfather, Long Island had a history in film long before Hal Hartley came along, but his early films had an unspoken pride about Long Island I don't really see anywhere else.
Unbelievable Truth also hints at that paranoid feeling we see more of in later films like The Book Of Life, No Such Thing, The Girl From Monday & Fay Grim which all take place in New York City. Throughout Unbelievable Truth Audry swears that she hears bombs going off somewhere in the distance yet no one else seems to hear. Watching Hartley’s later work with more attention I go back to elements of his first film and look at Audry’s paranoia as a metaphor for a future attack on New York City which, as we all know, is right outside of Long Island. If you refer back to my write-up of No Such Thing you’ll get that Hartley’s films are sometimes a look in to the future. Was there a feeling that Hartley and all new yorkers had in their gut about some eventual threat to the city? Sure I’m reaching quite a bit but there’s still an eerie connection between Hartley’s work and the state of the real world we live in today.
Made on a shoestring budget of somewhere between $75,000-$90,000 (I get conflicting budget information on the internet), Unbelievable Truth was a small success financially and critically. It won the grand jury prize at Sundance and screened at Cannes as well. Right out the gate Hartley established himself alongside other previously established American indie heavyweights like The Coens, Jarmusch & Spike Lee, and was a varsity letterman in that new class of American indie filmmakers along with Steven Soderbergh, Todd Haynes & Wendall B. Harris. Between 1989-1991 I don't know if there's been a better period for indie film in America (Chameleon Street, Trust, Sex Lies & Videotape, Mystery Train, Night On Earth, Do The Right Thing, etc). Unbelievable Truth may not have had the same kind of impact as Do The Right Thing or Sex, Lies & Videotape but it still made a small dent. Even though I had to dig my DVD up to check certain scenes before writing this, I could have honestly done this write-up from memory if I had to. I feel like this movie didn't leave my DVD player for the entire summer of 2006.
A couple of years ago I moved to St. Albans Queens just outside of Long Island where I rode the LIRR for two years and I got in to another phase where this was once again on heavy rotation As I've already stated in previous write-ups, I have a thing about relating real life stuff to movie-related things (see my kidneys on film). Given that I'm such a cinephile, Hal Hartley is genuinely the first thing that comes to mind when I hear Long Island (well, him & De La Soul).
As cliché & obvious as it all may sound, this film represents the beginning in more ways than one. No matter how much Hal Hartley has branched out over the years or how much more experimental his work has become, you can still trace just about every common theme & exploration of his back to Unbelievable Truth - Redemption, dark humor, repetition, mysterious main characters with very little back story, our struggle with technology, relationships, heartbreak, etc. There’s a trail in Hartley’s work that leads all the way back to the final moments of Unbelievable Truth – Towards the end of the film Josh & Audry have a brief discussion on the issue of trust. Hartley’s next film (starring a large majority of the cast from Unbelievable Truth) is called Trust. Part of Trust has to do with one of the characters carrying a grenade around until he finally releases it in the end. Part of Simple Men, Hartley’s “third” feature if you consider Surviving Desire to be a “long short”, involves a grenade being set off by terrorists (Simple Men also features reused characters from Unbelievable Truth). Another aspect of Simple Men involves our main characters trying to uncover the truth about their father. In Amateur, Hartley’s next film, one of our main characters loses his memory and tries to piece back together the truth about who he really was. I could continue this all the way up to Meanwhile (2011) but I think you all get the idea. If you're a serious Hal Hartley fan then chances are Unbelievable Truth is your equivalent to Mean Streets (Scorsese/Deniro/Keitel), Stranger Than Paradise (Jarmusch/Lurie), Aguirre: The Wrath Of God (Herzog/Kinski) or any other great film that represents the beginning/early period of not just a filmmaker's career but a long standing working relationship between a filmmaker and a specific actor or group of actors. It goes without saying that Robert John Burke & Hal Hartley will always be associated with each other given that they've maintained a steady working relationship starting with this film in the late 80's going in to the early part of the last decade. But its Hartley & Adrienne Shelly's onscreen relationship that's always fascinated me. Putting aside the short film Shelly made with Hartley in the mid-90's, they only made two feature films together (Unbelievable Truth & Trust) yet their names were always synonymous with each other over the years even though they hadn't worked together in over 13 years (almost 20 years if you only count feature films) until Shelly's untimely death. This film was also the beginning for quite a few actors like Matt Malloy, Edie Falco & Bill Sage. Unbelievable Truth is strange in that it’s not the kind of film that changed the face of cinema as we know it, but at the same time it’s still perfect.
