ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE (THE PINK SMOKE)

When you have a moment, head on over to The Pink Smoke to read my review on Jim Jarmusch's latest; Only Lovers Left Alive, which is part of the seasonal themed series; Auteur Horror - When Renowned Filmmakers Turn To Horror.

Happy Halloween...

THE STRAIGHT STORY: NEBRASKA (Alexander Payne's Nebraska @ NYFF)

I don't think I’ve ever anticipated an Alexander Payne movie in my life. His stuff just really isn't my thing. He makes these slightly edgy, yet quirky, R-rated dramedies for a generation of people I don't really relate too. He's got that Coen brothers pass where he can kinda make any movie he wants and film society critics, young baby boomers & old gen x-ers will blindly praise it. Maybe when I'm in my mid-40's I'll get it, but for now - meh. The ultimate reason that I decided to see Nebraska is because I didn’t want to only see two movies at this years' New York Film Festival (Bastards & Only Lovers Left Alive) having missed a bunch of movies due to not being able to make Toronto this year.

Election and Laura Dern's performance in Citizen Ruth are the only things that Payne is associated with that I’ve ever really liked. I thought Sideways was overrated long before it was cool to think that, The Descendents was "ok" and I haven't seen About Schmidt since it first came out over a decade ago. But I’ve always had respect for Alexander Payne as a person thanks to his participation in the Z Channel documentary. It was in that film that I came to learn he was a true cinephile. It’s becoming rare these days to find cinephile filmmakers who aren't annoying & obnoxious like Quentin Tarantino or even Nicolas Winding Refn (someone I actually have love for). Its beyond frustrating to be at a Q&A with a director who clearly knows very little about the artform that they participate in. I understand how busy things must get once you become a filmmaker, leaving you with little personal time to catch up on movies, but didn't you at least watch a lot of movies BEFORE you started started making them? There's still a rare breed of filmmaker out there that knows more about film than Quentin Tarantino & Nicolas Winding Refn combined but you'd never know that (unless you read about them, actually listen to a director's commentary on a DVD or watch a film like Z Channel) because people like Richard Linklater, Steven Soderbergh, Alexander Payne, Jim Jarmusch and a few others don’t spend all their time making movie collages (as opposed to actual movies) to show off how much cinema knowledge they posses.

What sparked my interest in Nebraska was hearing about Bruce Dern's award winning performance at this years' Cannes film festival. Cannes always shows love to underrated performances, usually given by American actors, that don’t ever get recognition from the more popular award shows like the Oscars or Golden Globes. There's been a fairly eclectic mix of American award winners at Cannes over the years - Forest Whitaker (Bird), James Spader (Sex, Lies & Videotape), Samuel L. Jackson (Jungle Fever), Sean Penn (She's So Lovely), Benecio Del Toro (Che), Tommy Lee Jones (The Three Burials Of Melqiadas Estrada), etc. Now that I've actually seen Nebraska I can safely say that Dern deserves all the praise he gets along with co-star; June Squibb (she honestly steals the show in my opinion).
After doing a little more research I came to find out that not only is Payne's latest film shot beautifully in black & white but it also co-stars the always underrated Stacey Keach, Bob Odenkirk AND Will Forte, who is probably the funniest human being on the planet right now and he just so happened to have given one of the most slept-on comedic performances of 2012 in Tim & Eric's Billion Dollar Movie (just a heads up - Forte's character in Nebraska is a fairly straight forward/straight-laced guy which is pretty out of character for him). Actually, I was subconsciously reminded of Tim & Eric through the coarse of the film as both Odenkirk & Forte are regulars on that show.
I'm also a sucker for a good road movie. And a black & white road movie at that?! Forget about it. Has there ever actually been a "bad" modern black & white road movie? Nebraska falls in line with other great, eerie, modern road trip films like; Stranger Than Paradise, Kings Of The Road, Juha, Paper Moon, Alice In The Cities, etc.

Clockwise from Top Left: Alice In The Cities (Wim Wenders), Paper Moon (Peter Bogdonavich), Kings Of The Road (Wenders), Stranger Than Paradise (Jim Jarmusch)

Nebraska has a lot of good stuff going for it - road movie, good cast, a subconscious connection to one of my all-time favorite tv shows, beautiful cinematography, etc. The end result is a solid film that lies somewhere in the upper tier of Payne's filmography - In my opinion it's better than Sideways & The Descendents but not as good as Election or Citizen Ruth (remember, I think Payne's recent work is a bit overrated so take my ranking of Nebraska with a grain of salt). The performances are great and the vibe is comically eerie. Some scenes in the film felt like what America would look like from Bela Tarr's perspective, shot with the same camera that was used to make Werkmeister Harmonies.

It's evident that Payne set out to make a smaller, more personal film this time around by casting Bruce Dern in a film set in Nebraska (Payne's home state) which couldn't be any more opposite than his previous film which was set in Hawaii, starring George Clooney. So no matter where this may "rank", Nebraska is probably his most personal & mature work to date...

In Nebraska, Bruce Dern stars as "Woody Grant" - a grumpy retired old man, probably in the very early stages of dementia or alzheimer's, who suddenly receives a letter in the mail telling him he's won a million dollars (clearly this is a scam but Woody is too old to understand). In order to claim this so-called prize money he has to travel to the headquarters in Lincoln, Nebraska from his home in Montana. After multiple attempts to get there on his own (like Richard Farnsworth in The Straight Story, Woody can't drive), his son; "David" (Will Forte) offers to drive him. Part of me questioned David's motivation at first - If your aging father, whose clearly not all there, suddenly told you he won a million dollars in the mail would you seriously go along with it to the extent that David did by actually driving him from Montana to Nebraska just to entertain him? Perhaps David wanted to spend time with his father. Pretty early on in the film we know there's no damn prize money but we're just so happy to see our lonely old anti-hero, who might remind us all of a dad, grandfather or uncle, motivated to not just get up off the couch but to take a trip somewhere before its too late.

Or maybe like Michael Haneke did with the videotapes in Cache, perhaps its Alexander Payne himself who sent Woody the letter telling him he won a million dollars.

Once word gets out that Woody is a "millionaire", old friends & family members suddenly come out of the woodworks to reclaim money that they supposedly loaned him years ago.

Clockwise from top left: Paris Texas (Wenders), The Straight Story (David Lynch), Broken Flowers (Jarmusch), About Schmidt (Payne)

Nebraska has tons of humor but there's also quite a few moments of deep reflection and plenty of touching moments. This almost felt like Payne was taking another stab at making About Schmidt with a few variations. Both movies deal with retirement, loneliness, reflecting back on life in old age, etc. And like Nebraska, About Schmidt is also a road movie about a slightly unpleasant, although likable, anti-hero. 

What I liked most about Nebraska is that this was the first time Alexander Payne REALLY let his inner-movie nerd out by referencing and paying homage to so many movies (on purpose and by accident) while still making a film that's all his own. Bruce Dern's performance in Nebraska carried the spirit of quite a few past performances given by aging, iconic American actors on a road trip through Anywhere USA: Jack Nicholson (About Schmidt), Harry Dean Stanton (Paris Texas), Bill Murray (Broken Flowers) and of course Richard Farnsworth (The Straight Story). And likewise, June Squibb's performance in the film is reminiscent of Jim Jarmusch's aunt in Stranger Than Paradise or the grandmother in Raising Victor Vargas.

A movie snob like myself always seems to be drawn to films outside of America but Nebraska fills me with a little bit of pride (mixed with a little bit of embarrassment & cynicism) about my homeland. Nebraska has it's share of cliches & predictable moments but it was still an enjoyable film...

THE BASTARDS SLEEP WELL (Claire Denis' Bastards @ NYFF)

Its no mystery that PINNLAND EMPIRE is the kindest place on the web for all things Claire Denis-related. Part of me wishes that her latest film was bad so you all wouldn't think I was just blindly praising her work but Bastards was really good in my opinion. Denis' latest film is like one of those creepy dreams that stays with you for the entire day leaving you feeling slightly disoriented. It's not exactly a nightmare but nothing you wake up smiling about. And like any dream, there is no traditional beginning or end. We're just thrown right in to the story and we're not exactly sure how we got there.

Bastards is a neo-noir revenge story/family drama about a naval captain; "Marco" (Vincent Lindon) who returns home to help his sister; "Sandra" (Julie Bataille) whose fallen on some incredibly hard times. Sandra's husband (who was once Marco's friend) has just committed suicide and her daughter, Marco's niece, was brutally raped and the same man; "Edouard Laporte" (Michel Subor), is possibly responsible for both tragic events.
Although Claire Denis denied that Bastards has any underlying messages about capitalism or corporate greed, Edouard Laporte is a powerful businessman who triggers the suicide of a smaller/struggling businessman (Sandra's husband). One can't help but still think that on some level this film applies to issues like "The 99% vs. The 1%" or the unfair distribution and/or misuse of power in different parts of the world. These aren't the typical issues that Denis focuses on so that could just be me reaching.

This is another "family affair" with Denis regulars; Gregoire Colin, Michel Subor, Alex Descas, Florence Loire Caille, Agnes Goddard, Jean-Pol Fargeau & The Tindersticks all appearing in front of or behind the camera in some fashion. This also marks the second collaboration between Vincent Lindon & Denis since Friday Night (2002). 

There's even "extended family" in Bastards with the presence of Lola Creton whose relationship with Olivier Assayas, Denis' friend, probably had something to do with her being cast in this (Creton co-starred in Assayas' last film; Something In The Air and she also starred in Goodbye My First Love which was directed by Assayas' girlfriend Mia Hansen-Love). And I don't mean to downplay Creton's natural acting ability or screen presence by saying she was only cast due to some kind of "cinematic nepotism". It's the same thing with other actors. Bastards co-star; Alex Descas, who is Claire Denis' most frequent collaborator, is one of my favorite actors but I'm sure his relationship with Olivier Assayas is an extension of his relationship with Denis (Descas has co-starred in three of Assayas' films). Creton's performance is both haunting & heartbreaking at the same time...

The French love William Faulkner. And its no mystery that Claire Denis, who is obviously French, is heavily influenced by books & literature. Some of her best work is adapted from or inspired by books - Beau Travail (1999) is a loose adaptation of Billy Buddy and both; Friday Night (2002) & The Intruder (2004) are adapted from books/essays, so it doesn't come as too much of a surprise that elements of Bastards draws heavily from Faulkner's writing (specifically Sanctuary). In Bastards, one of the characters is violated sexually with a piece of corn and eventually tries to go back to the very same person who abused her. For those that aren't familiar with Faulkner's Sanctuary, one of the most alarming scenarios in the story involves one of the characters (Temple) getting raped & violated with a piece of corn which opens up her dark side and pulls her in to a world of sexual abuse & prostitution. Even the basic plot of Bastards; the lone male character going home to be with his sister who eventually gets caught up in a series of tragic events, is a play on Sanctuary. 

Based on this review so far one might think Claire Denis has gone back to that dark side we saw in films like I Can't Sleep (1994) and Trouble Everyday (2001). To a certain degree that's true. Bastards, which couldn't have a more appropriate title as almost every male character in the film is very much a bastard, has some of the same frightening sexual aggression found in Trouble Everyday along with the same dark/moody atmosphere (thanks in part to The Tindersticks' score). But Bastards also feels like a loose sequel to The Intruder with its somewhat dreamy/non-linear structure (it should be noted that both; Bastards & The Intruder were written by Jon-Pol Fargeau). 

As I've said on here before, its difficult to talk/write about one Denis film without mentioning two or three of her previous films in the process. Her filmography has this invisible continuous thread that ties all her work together. In Bastards, Michel Subor plays an evil businessman but he could very well be the same self centered, mildly unpleasant character that he played almost a decade ago in Denis' The Intruder (the same picture of Michel Subor as a young man that we see in Beau Travail is used again in Bastards). Vincent Lindon's quietly edgy character in Bastards could easily be the same mysterious guy he played years ago in Denis' Friday Night. Much like The Intruder, Bastards has a plot but its more about the feelings you get from the images & isolated scenes placed in front of you. I honestly feel like the plot isn't the most important element here. Denis kinda makes this clear in the way she structures the film - the story does intentionally jump out of order at times (although not in a chaotic way but rather in a more organic & seamless way), some of the dialogue between the characters is extremely familiar (at times it feels like we're thrown in to the middle of a conversation that we should already have the inside dirt on), the moody music is just as important to the film's atmosphere as the acting or cinematography (a completely separate write-up could be done on The Tindersticks' score as they've adopted a slightly new electronic/computerized sound this time around) and, in true Claire Denis fashion, a lot of important information in the film is conveyed through hints & implications rather than traditional straightforward dialogue (although quite a bit of important information is laid out for the audience pretty clearly in the film's 8mm-esque ending).

Faulkner's books & Denis' own previous works aren't the only influences found in Bastards. If you refer to the interview she gave here on PINNLAND EMPIRE earlier this year, Denis mentions Akira Kurosawa & Toshiro Mifune as an influence. Vincent Lindon's motivation for revenge is somewhat similar to Mifune's in Kurosawa's The Bad Sleep Well (seeking revenge on a corrupt businessman for the death of a family member). And apparently part of Bastards is based on a true story that Denis read about in the news involving a woman who was beaten, raped & left for dead on the side of the road by sex traffickers. In one scene Lola Creton is seen walking naked in the middle of the street at night with blood dripping between her legs which is very reminiscent of a scene in Elim Klimov's Come & See. Bastards is obviously not an autobiographical film but at the same time it feels like we're watching all the random thoughts and feelings that go on inside Claire Denis' head - newspaper articles, books, cinema, music, and unfinished ideas that still deserve to be shared with others. 

In my opinion, Bastards isn't as dark as some people were making it out to be but there are a few moments that may cause you to go; "oh shit." (honestly, if the implication of sodomy with a corn cob doesn't make you squirm in the least bit then something may be wrong with you).

If I had to quickly sum up the character of Marco I guess I'd call him an anti-hero. But if you wanted to go a little deeper I'd use the term, coined by Claire Denis collaborator Alice Houri; "Good Bastard". Yes, Marco is the protagonist of the story but he isn't the traditional good guy we unconditionally root for. His actions are sometimes questionable and his thoughts are dark. But if my brother-in law's suicide was triggered by the same person behind my niece's rape, I might go on a quest for revenge knowing the information that Marco knows. Marco is yet another imperfect character in a long line of Claire Denis characters that we either like or feel sorry for at first then eventually come to dislike or want no part of (like Richard Courcet in I Can't Sleep or Vincent Gallo in Trouble Everyday) or one of those characters we dislike at first but come to feel sorry for later on (like Alex Descas in No Fear No Die or Denis Lavant in Beau Travail). At the Q&A for Bastards Claire Denis compared Vincent Lindon's performance to James Caan in Thief but in my opinion I found Caan to be somewhat childish at times, bordering on being dumb & hot-headed in certain scenarios (when it came to criminal activity however, Caan was intelligent & badass). Marco/Lindon is a lot more methodical and cool-headed to be compared to Caan in Thief.
Michel Subor also gave a noteworthy performance as "the villain". His loyalty to Claire Denis is profound. He seems to only ever act in her movies these days. Subor has the same swagger as that of Takeshi Kitano in that he can play a good bad guy, a bad good guy or a bad bad guy (like in Bastards) with such ease. His ability to casually play such a quietly evil person in Bastards makes me want to see him collaborate with other European filmmakers like Michael Haneke, Catherine Breillat or even Gaspar Noe.

If you're a fan of Denis' darker side, the new french extremity, 8mm, or films that fall under that "Sketchbook Cinema" genre I've been writing about recently (Uncle Boonmee..., Post Tenebras Lux, etc) then this film is absolutely something you'll dig. If you're not a fan of moody non-linear cinema then maybe its best to stay away from Bastards and avoid yourself the frustration. This is some advice that critics failed to mention in their early reviews of the film after it played at Cannes in May. There's nothing more frustrating for me than reading a review of a Claire Denis film written by someone who clearly doesn't understand her work or is still expecting her to make another Beau Travail. Bastards got some early negative press because it was essentially reviewed against & compared to films it played alongside in this years' festival circuit like; Blue Is The Warmest Color & Twelve Years A Slave which couldn't be any more different from each other. If you're gonna put Bastards up against something at least compare it to the appropriate films (The Intruder, Trouble Everyday, Uncle Boonmee, etc).

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.

THE WHOLE HISTORY OF MY LIFE (The Pink Smoke) & PINNLAND EMPIRE RETURNS TO THE NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL...

Hello all!

When you have a chance, head over to The Pink Smoke to see my first installment in "The Whole History Of My Life" series. 

First up: The Belly Of An Architect

And in October I'll be covering new films from Claire Denis (Bastards), Jim Jarmusch (Only Lovers Left Alive) & Alexander Payne (Nebraska) at this years' New York Film Festival followed by another appearance on the Inside The Phoenix podcast to discuss what I saw...

(Top to Bottom: Bastards, Only Lovers Left Alive & Nebraska)

THE TORONTO VAULT VOL.3: THE SKIN I LIVE IN

I'm not a diehard Pedro Almodovar fan but I do recognize that he is an important figure in modern cinema and, like I mentioned in my recent write-up on The Paperboy, he has a pretty unique visual style and that counts for something (when I think of his work, the term; "NEON-noir" comes to mind). But my issue with Almodovar's work is that in the last ten years or so, his films have become SO formulaic that I can practically predict half of whats going to happen in the story along with half of the characters we're going to see - the overly feminine gay male caricature, the transgender character, the religious figure (nun or priest or both) and the ridiculously handsome straight male lead. And at some point in his films, someone will be raped, the music will be overly dramatic, the colors in his films will be extra bright (we get it, Pedro - you like pink, orange & red) and half of the story will be told out of chronological order. I'm not the only person whose called Almodovar out on his recent predictability. Ever since Bad Education through Broken Embraces, there's been endless reviews that have complained about the very same thing.

At first glance, one would think Almodovar took these criticisms in to consideration with The Skin I Live In - there are no transgender characters this time around (...or so we think), for the first time in a while we get a gay female character instead of strictly gay men and Almodovar went back to working with his old collaborator; Antonio Banderas, after over two decades.

But in reality, The Skin I Live In is a middle finger in disguise from Almodovar to people like me and others who've complained about him in recent years. 

He still recycles the same themes & elements but this time around he made it work and managed to make one of his best films since Talk To Her (almost 10 years ago). Not that The Skin I Live In is a game-changer (although it did make the top 10 in the honorable mention category of my 2011 wrap-up) but its still a major improvement from what he's been doing. 

I'm not even offended by the middle finger Pedro Almodovar gave to all the critics. Its reminiscent of his early work (which, on some level, were carbon copies of John Waters' early films, but still...). It's a cliche statement, and it almost makes me cringe writing this but, Almodovar's early work was very "punk rock" and anti-establishment when compared to other classic Spanish filmmakers from the late 70's/early 80's. Instead of dealing with the impact Franco had on Spain in the same poetic/artsy way as Carlos Suara (Cria Cuervos) & Victor Erice (The Spirit Of The Beehive & The South), Pedro Almodovar pretty much jumped on a chair, pulled his dick out and slapped it against the camera lens as if to say; "There's gay people in Spain, we listen to loud noisy music, we dye our hair green and have free will!" As far as Spanish cinema goes, I prefer the work of Erice & Suara over Almodovar but I still respect him for not trying to be another slow "artsy" Spanish filmmaker. The Skin I Live In is FAR more mature than Labrynth Of Passion (1982) or Pepi, Luci & Bom (1980) but his approach is still the same - "Fuck you. I'll make what I want." 

In The Skin I Live In, Antonio Banderas plays "Robert Ledgard" - a radical plastic surgeon whose invented a new type of artificial skin (imagine stockings for the whole body) specialized for burn victims. The inspiration for Ledgard's invention came from his wife who was badly burned in a car accident years ago leaving her almost unrecognizable (she eventually committed suicide after seeing her deformed face). In addition to his wife, Robert's teen daughter, who was mentally unstable, also killed herself after she was sexually assaulted. The death of Robert's wife & daughter, which both took place over the span of a few years, has caused him to go quietly insane. I say "quietly insane" because to the outside world he seems fine but behind closed doors he's losing his grip on reality and is working on a disturbing experiment that we slowly see unfold through the course of the film.

***SPOILER ALERT (skip ahead to the next paragraph if you haven't seen this and are planning too)*** 

As it turns out, Robert has been keeping a beautiful woman ("Vera") captive in his mansion and experimenting on her. But as the story unfolds we discover this woman was once a young man ("Vicente"). And not just any man. This was the same man who sexually assaulted his daughter which ultimately triggered her suicide. As a form of revenge Robert kidnapped and performed various surgeries on Vicente in an effort to transform him in to a woman (anatomy and all). However, during the transformation, Robert falls in love with his creation (he kinda made him/her look a little too beautiful) and forms a romantic relationship with the newly transformed Vera whose now suffering from a bit of Stockholm syndrome. 

Although two different actors play the part (Elena Anaya for Vera & Jan Cornet for Vicente) Almodovar cleverly cast Cornet for the part of Vicente because his body frame is a tad bit small for an average man which makes the male to female transformation angle more believable (midway in to the film I found myself noticing how tiny he is but when its revealed that he's to be transformed in to a woman, it all made sense). 

There's some underrated imagery in The Skin I Live In. Almodovar even throws in a Bergman/Persona reference...

I understand the revenge aspect of the story but once Almodovar throws in the love angel I get completely thrown off. One minute you want revenge on the person who raped your daughter and triggered her suicide then you end up falling in love with the very same person later on? I get that Vicente has been completely changed in to someone else but I thought this element of the story was a little strange.  

Upon my initial (and only) viewing of The Skin I Live In, I wasn't sure if I liked this or not. It felt like an odd mixture of The Bride Of Frankenstein & Oldboy with a touch of Hitchcock. But over time I grew to appreciate it very much. The Skin I Live In is surprisingly darker than I thought it would be and Antonio Banderas' over the top acting, which is sometimes difficult to take seriously, fits perfectly with the tone of the film. It's as if he drew upon Dr. Mabuse, Caligari & Nick Cavanaugh (Boxing Helana) for inspiration.

For something directed by such a big name, The Skin I Live In certainly came and went pretty quickly in the U.S. I wrote about this from memory (I saw it over two years ago) so I guess that says something about the small impact it had on me. Almodovar seems to be returning to form with his latest film (I'm So Excited) which makes The Skin I Live In stand out more among his recent body of work. I'm always hesitant to say this when it comes to recent work of important modern filmmakers but The Skin I Live In may be one of Almosovar's best.

"Oh, Her...Whatsername?": A BLOG ABOUT THE FEMALE CHARACTER ACTOR

Edie McClurg in Ferris Bueller's Day Off

I recently discovered the excellent podcast; Film Spotting, which dedicates quite a bit of its content/cinema talk to movie lists. On a recent film spotting episode co-hosts; Adam Kempenar & Josh Larsen got in to their lists on great character actors or actors with memorable faces but forgettable names (Steven Tobolowsky, James Cromwell, M Emmett Walsh, etc). To my surprise they DID mention one or two female character actors but I was still disappointed that they didn't mention any of the actresses I consider to be in that iconic/all-star line-up of modern female character actors. Names like; Graze Zabriskie (a regular of Gus Van Sant & David Lynch) & Frances Bay (another David Lynch regular or, for those who don't know Lynch's work that well, Adam Sandler's grandmother in Happy Gilmore) or even Loretta Divine & Lupe Ontiveros who could be considered more as type-cast actresses (I mean for christ's sake, the word "maid" automatically pops up next to Lupe Ontiveros' name when you google search it. No, seriously it does). But for all intents & purposes of this write-up I'll consider them straight-up character actresses.

Loretta Devine in Urban Legends: Final Cut

It's easy for supporting women to go unnoticed in cinema. It's a common thing in real life so why wouldn't it happen in the movies? Prominent film directors in popular cinema ARE mostly white males and unfortunately their Achilles heel comes in to play when its time to develop a character that isn't a white male. Furthermore, and I know this is gonna sound corny & cliche, but society still has a lot of complicated issues when it comes to how women are portrayed on film so unfortunately its easier to label a female actress as simply typecast instead of calling her a character actor. 

Adam & Josh's conversation on their podcast got me to think about all the  high profile female-less character actor lists on IMDB, rotten tomatoes, entertainment weekly, mubi.com, etc and I felt compelled to give my 2 cents on the lack of recognition for the female character actor. I also just recently watched Ferris Bueller's Day Off which features one of the true varsity letterwomen; Edie McClurg (Back To School, Planes Trains & Automobiles, She's Having A Baby).

Now, Edie McClurg, Lupe Ontiveros & Loretta Devine are kinda like; "female characters actors: 101". What about all the unsung/underrated ones out there? How is it that actors like Willem Dafoe & Philip Seymour Hoffman are wrongfully labeled as great character actors and always seem to find a spot on some reputable "greatest character actors" lists over the likes of O-Lan Jones (the odd receptionist from How I Got In To College & the flirty waitress at the beginning of Natural Born Killers) or Grace Zabriskie?

Grace Zabriskie in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me

Its no mystery that the world of the character actor is a male dominated field (honestly, if you asked me to do a top 25 list of great female character actors I'd be struggling after 10 or 15 names) and its heightened mostly because the greatest character actors are the likes of; JT Walsh, Ronny Cox, Michael Ironside, Warren Oates, William Forsythe, Ted Levine and other unique, often times menacing men who sometimes outshine and overshadow the leading men/A-list actors they share the screen with. Those men are downright intimidating. Imagine you're a woman in a room full of loud men shouting over each other trying to get a word in. Not to sound sexist but its not the easiest task for a woman to find her voice in that setting no matter how tough or resilient she may be. Instead, prominent character actresses have been subtly injected in to our psyche since childhood as "the mom", "the receptionist", "the seductress", etc. 

Whats so interesting is that film commentary, film criticism & movie list making is another male dominated field and a lot of these great character actresses have appeared in films geared towards mostly little boys & men, yet the very same men, who dominate film criticism to a certain extent, fail to ever mention the women they essentially grew up watching. Take Mary Ellen Trainor for example - she was the mother in two of the greatest "rag tag group of kids on a mission" movies of all time: The Goonies & Monster Squad. Do you realize what an honor that is? Stop and think about that for a second. Shes like the Dennis Rodman of female character actors (for those that don't get the comparison, Dennis Rodman was a staple in two of the most dominating modern basketball teams of all time; The Detroit Pistons & The Chicago Bulls). Lets also not forget her role as the stressed-out police psychiatrist in the Lethal Weapon movies. With all the male film critics and commentators out there who grew up watching Goonies, Monster Squad & Lethal Weapon its strange that this bug-eyed/worried mom prototype never gets a shout out on any of the greatest character actors lists (not to say females don't love Goonies & Monster Squad, but you get what I mean...)

Mary Ellen Trainor in Goonies

Speaking of female character actors in male dominated films, who could forget this mouth in The Warriors...

Lynne Thigpen's mouth in The Warriors

Like a lot of great character actors, Lynne Thigpen is another one of those; "Oh that actress...whats her name?" actors. She's usually cast as the bitchy/stern/annoying/condescending woman most famously portrayed in Lean On Me. I cant think of too many performances that made me HATE the character so much that I also hated the actor playing the role as well. Be honest - we all wanted this woman to die in Lean On Me, or at the very least severally hurt.

What makes these character actressss just as special as anyone else for me personally is that they followed me from childhood (The Wizard) in to my transitional period of film discovery (Donnie Darko) in to the big ambiguous world of cinema that I love today (Safe). Take Beth Grant for example - She's proven that no matter what the plot or setting, there's always room for the bible thumping, god fearing, extremely judgy, sometimes frantic, tight faced, preachy southern woman. Obviously, the reason she goes over so well as an actress is because, like most character actors, she's given to us in small doses throughout a film (like Donnie Darko) or just has one or two memorable scenes in an entire film (like her roles in Safe or No Country For Old Men). 

This is what made people like JT Walsh, the quintessential character actor, so great. Although he had heavy/prominent supporting roles in films like Red Rock West, Pleasantville & Needful Things, his best performances, in my opinion, were in films like House Of Games or The Grifters where he was only featured in one extended scene/sequence yet he left such a lasting impression.

(this clip below also features the great character actor; Charles Napier)

This is partially why I hesitate to include Loretta Devine among the list of great character actresses as shes featured a little too prominently in films. Shes the kind of actress who should be taken in small doses. But putting my personal opinions aside, like her ties with Tyler Perry, she's still one of the great modern character actresses and was just as much a part of my childhood cinema (Class Act) as any of the other actresses mentioned in this write-up.

Beth Grant in Donnie Darko

Actresses like Beth Grant & Grace Zabriskie also have the power to make awful movies watchable which is another common trait among great character actors. Would you have really sat through all of To Wong Tong Fu, Thanks For Everything; Julie Newmar had it not been for Beth Grant's presence? What about The Passion Of Darkly Noon? That's seriously one of the worst movies ever made yet I've seen it numerous times because of Grace Zabriskie. Naturally I'm a bit biased towards Grace given her connection to the world of David Lynch but all that aside she is quite an amazing actress. Part of me almost wants to call her a versatile/chameleon-like actress instead of just a character actor. Grace Zabriskie's existence is a little more important than most because unlike other prominent character actresses, she almost never plays "the secretary" or other typical roles like that. Instead she plays roles like the creepy hitwoman in Wild At Heart, the creepy next door neighbor in Inland Empire or the female "John" in My Own Private Idaho. And when she does take on roles like "the mom" (like on Twin Peaks or Drugstore Cowboy) she plays them so differently.

I witnessed her screen power first hand for nights in a row in 2006 at the New York Film Festival screening of Inland Empire. The moment her character was introduced, the audience was completely captivated by her for the next 7+ minutes (even when half the audience didn't even know what they were watching). Edginess is something almost exclusively associated with male actors yet Grace Zabriskie breaks that notion. You never know if she's gonna chase after you with a knife or have a nervous breakdown.

I'm aware this write-up isn't some revelation. I'm sure if you go to IMDB or do a google search you'll come across a decent greatest character actresses list or two but I'm sure those lists aren't very thorough. 

...

Ok, I just did a quick search myself and the first few lists I'm finding are listing Patrician Clarkson & Viola Davis as character actors so nevermind. Maybe there actually aren't any decent lists out there. 

Not to sound too arrogant but how many of you reading this (besides possibly John Cribbs & Chris Funderberg) looked at any of the actresses I've mentioned in this write-up as character actors? Names like Beth Grant, Grace Zabriskie and a few others should be mentioned alongside the likes of JT Walsh, Harry Dean Stanton & Ronny Cox.

BATTLE IN HEAVEN

Although Carlos Reygadas' sophomore feature fits in just fine with the rest of his filmography, it’s still probably the most brutal & explosive thing he's done minus the last 10 minutes of Post Tenebras Lux where we see a man rip his own head off, followed by a scene of blood falling from the sky. Battle In Heaven is an excellent mixture of beauty (the camera work and the lead actress) & grittiness (unsimulated sex & blowjobs involving traditionally unattractive people and a brutal murder involving a machete). This was also his least Tarkovsky-influenced work which proved he could make a film without having to emulate and/or tip his hat to his idol like he does so often. If anything, Battle In Heaven is more of an homage to Bresson - besides the monotone performances from the non-professional actors (a key element in Bresson's cinema) Reygadas makes a direct reference to Bressons' Une Femme Douche in one scene...

Sophomore features can be quite important for an emerging filmmaker in the position Carlos Reygadas was in after the release of his first film (Japon). There's this pressure to deliver an equally great work. Japon was somewhat of a success in the art house world and I imagine people were expecting something just as great with his next feature. Battle In Heaven was released in the intimidating year of 2005 where veterans like Michael Haneke (Cache), Terrence Malick (The New World), Gus Van Sant (Last Days) and Jim Jarmusch (Broken Flowers) all released some of their best work. 2005 also saw other important and/or modern day heavyweights like The Dardenne Brothers (The Child), David Cronenberg (A History Of Violence) and Lars Von Treir (Manderlay) release highly anticipated works that turned out to be just "ok", underwhelming or disappointing. 

Like any Reygadas film, Battle In Heaven divided audiences. It’s one of those films people either passionately love or violently hate (I personally know folks on both sides of the fence). Nevertheless, Battle In Heaven still ended up on plenty Top 10 lists at the end of 2005 and some even consider it to be one of the best films of the last decade. I give Carlos Reygadas a lot of respect because he didn’t play it safe with his second feature. It would have been a lot easier to follow up Japon with a film like Silent Light (his third feature), which is still radical in its own way but not in the same explosive & gritty way as Battle In Heaven. Reygadas took a lot of risks with this film. Somehow he manages to make the most tasteless sounding scenarios seem intriguing & watchable. Battle In Heaven is almost intentionally alienating & off-putting and I love that...

Its [Battle In Heaven] my problem child, and therefore the film of mine I love the most - Carlos Reygadas

In Battle In Heaven we follow "Marcos" - A personal driver for a rich diplomat's daughter ("Anna"). Even though she doesn't need to, Anna works on the side as a "madame" or prostitute (its unclear) in a somewhat upscale brothel. Besides his job as a driver, Marcos is involved in a few other side hustles like; selling novelty items on the subway, picking berries on a farm and...kidnapping. As it turns out, Marcos and his wife were involved in the kidnapping of a baby for a ransom. And to make things worse, the baby died while in their custody and they have to figure out what to do (none of this info is a spoiler. you learn this early on). When pressure starts to build up inside of Marcos he feels the need to get things off his chest and he confides in Anna (whom Marcos is also in love with). Although Anna doesn’t tell anyone, she still advises him that the right thing to do is to confess and turn himself in.

For the rest of the film Marcos struggles internally with what to do and looks to a higher power for some kind of an answer.

The relationship between the two main characters is complex. Marcos sees Anna as somewhat of an angel, while Anna kind of pities Marcos and looks down on him. Marcos is sexually attracted to Anna, while Anna is not attracted to Marcos at all (even though she does have sex with him at one point). Anna seems more curious & intrigued by Marcos. The care that they have for one another is a bit imbalanced but at the end of the day Anna does genuinely care for him.

If you’re familiar with Reygadas’ work then you know he has quite a bit of Mexican pride (the presence of the Mexican flag is pretty heavy throughout this film). However, Battle In Heaven is one of the few cases where he expresses some criticism towards his homeland (at least that's what I see). Class & money are an underlying issue in Battle In Heaven and quite a few questions arise from this film – Is Carlos Reygadas trying to show sympathy for Marcos? Is he trying to say that if the economic & social state in Mexico wasn’t as corrupt & imbalanced that Marcos wouldn’t have to work three jobs and eventually resort to kidnapping just to get money?

It’s clear Reygadas gets off on posing questions and developing scenarios that will have people talking, debating & arguing for a long time.

Besides Reygadas’ talent for making tasteless things look...tasteful, he also has a talent for throwing religion in to his work without shoving it down our throats like Abel Ferrara or Terrence Malick. Reygadas doesn’t even show religion in the most subtle way either. There are many religious elements in Battle In Heaven like crosses, churches and we see Marcos giving himself up to god in the end. The last half hour of Battle In Heaven is pretty much all about god, faith, evangelism & redemption. The religioun factor in Battle In Heaven brings up even more questions - when you confess/own up to a crime (no matter how awful it is) and give yourself to god (for those that believe in God) does that absolve you of your sins? Can anyone really be “saved”? Battle In Heaven fits right alongside the cinema of Hal Hartley (specifically Unbelievable Truth, Trust, Simple Men, Amateur & Henry Fool) as well as the cinema of Bruno Dumont (L’Humanite, Hors Satan & Hadweijch). All of these films deal with a lot of the same themes (redemption, forgiveness, religion, god, the struggle between what's right & wrong, etc) and the main characters in all of these films share the same qualities (mysterious loners with a spotty past who have all committed some kind of crime but are kind of likeable and have redeemable qualities) 

As much as I love Battle In Heaven there's a few parts that I haven’t fully worked out in my head - the opening & closing scenes where Anna is giving Marcos a blowjob (is that supposed to represent “Heaven” for Marcos?), the scene where Marcos is masturbating with no emotion on his face while watching a soccer game on TV (I don’t really understand that one). 

It’s obvious this film is told from Marcos' point of view but Carlos Reygadas takes it one step further in certain scenes by literally putting us inside Marcos' head and we see the world through his eyes like we did in Enter The Void or parts of Being John Malkovich. In one scene two girls walk up to the camera and speak directly to us/Marcos. In another scene we see Anna's true beauty through Marcos' eyes as she walks down the street in front of him and, just like the little girls in the previous scene, she address the camera directly as if she's talking to us/Marcos. These moments felt like a precursor to his latest film (Post Tenebras Lux) which is seen mostly through a distorted first person perspective. 

Reygadas’ body of work has a cohesiveness & connection unlike most filmmakers working today. Along with Lucrecia Martel (La Cienaga, The Headless Woman) he’s probably the most important figure in Latin-American cinema at the moment (even if there is a hint of upper-class elitism in his work from time to time).

A FEW WORDS ON FRUITVALE STATION...

In the mid/late 80's there was a string of films made about the atrocities that were going on in South Africa at the time (Cry Freedom, A Dry White Season, Mandela, etc) that my father would avoid because he couldn’t stomach all the scenes of Africans being beaten & murdered. At the time I use to think he was being dramatic when he'd leave the room whenever one of those movies would come on cable but now that I'm older I get where he was coming from with the release of Fruitvale Station. The silent generation had Rosewood (and countless other lynchings), Baby Boomers had Emmitt Till (and, like Rosewood, a ton of other cases just like it), Generation X had Rodney King and Generation Y, my generation, had Oscar Grant & Trayvon Martin. Given that the release of Fruitvale Station coincided with the Trayvon Martin aftermath, I wasn't in the right mindset to rush out and see this as there were some pretty fresh wounds that weren't healed yet with George Zimmerman being found not guilty. Say what you want about how you knew Zimmerman was gonna get off but I honestly thought SOME kind of justice would be served.

My initial reason for not wanting to see Fruitvale Station is because I already saw the real video from many different points of view on the internet. Why see a drawn out movie version of something when I already saw the real thing? All that's gonna do is piss me of again regardless if the film is good or not. Actually it would have pissed me off twice as much if Fruitvale Station was bad, which it isn’t. Fruitvale Station is hardly bad but it’s far from great. It’s certainly powerful but in an uneven kind of way. 

Even now I almost don’t wanna write about this film because I have a criticism of it (which I'll get in to shortly) and I honestly fear (some) people can’t disassociate Oscar Grant, the real person, from the movie and will think I'm criticizing him. 

Another reason I didn’t wanna write about this film has to do with my own insecurities partially due to the expectations some people may have on a guy like me (on three occasions, before I actually saw Fruitvale Station, I was asked what I thought about it instead of being asked if I'd seen it in the same way customers at the video store I use to work at would automatically ask me what I thought about the latest Tyler Perry release or whatever film that happened to be out at the time that co-starred Cedric The Entertainer and/or Anthony Anderson). It's in the same vein as that assumption, made equally by both black people & white people, that Spike Lee is automatically my favorite director because I'm black and he's black. I genuinely don’t wanna be the black guy who writes about "black movies". Why do you think I avoid writing about Spike Lee so much on here? Because in a way, it’s expected of me. 

But at the end of the day I can’t let that stuff stop me from watching & writing about a film that everyone is talking about on a site that a descent amount of people read...

I feared Fruitvale Station would fall victim to portraying the protagonist out to be some kind of realistic/believable saint out of fear of judgment from ignorant fox news watching, Rush Limbaugh listening, Ted Nugent loving conservatives who went out of their way to make Oscar Grant out to be a good for nothing thug (which is their way of saying he got what he deserved). As I assumed, the majority of Fruitvale Station fell in to that trap. Conservatives, racists and other Oscar Grant detractors aren't gonna be swayed by this film. All you needed to do was watch the coverage on Fox news leading up to the release of Fruitvale Station to see they already judged/hated it before they saw it so why indirectly cater to them and essentially try to prove something to that crowd? 

I'm not saying Director Ryan Coogler did this intentionally but its written all over the tone of the film.

In the first hour of Fruitvale Station Grant, played by Chronicle co-star Michael B. Jordan, helps a dog off the street that’s been hit by a car, gets his grandmother to give cooking lessons to woman over the phone, decides he's gonna stop selling drugs and dumps $1,000 dollars worth of weed in to the ocean to prove to himself he really means it. Coogler still makes it a point to show Grant's faults & short comings in life - he cheated on his girlfriend, he lies & has a temper but at the end of the day that stuff is overshadowed by all the good stuff he does in a matter of a few hours. I don’t know if those events happened or not because I wasn’t there but in all honesty, it didn’t really fascinate me. What fascinates me is how someone could be face down, handcuffed, surrounded by three cops and still get shot (only to have the cop who shot Grant get out of prison after 11 months). Apparently the BART cop who shot Oscar Grant mistook his real gun for his taser gun. It's scary to think that there's trusted officers of the law in existence who mistake a taser gun for a real gun (and I personally don’t care what kind of pressure he/she may be under. There's training for that as far as I'm concerned).

Understand that part of my criticism comes from personal preference. I understand the choice to focus on the last 24 hours of Grant's life. Generally speaking, we all fall in to that groove of a daily routine and usually take 24 hour periods for granted. The last thing we expect is to get murdered. So narrowing the subject's life down to his final day where he does a bunch of small yet meaningful acts makes sense when I take a step back and look at the film from a far.

But at the same time, Oscar Grant coulda laid around for the last 24 hours of his life and scratched his nuts for all I care. He was still executed (accidentally or not) and the whole world saw it on the Internet yet no real justice was served. Not to take anything from Jordan & Octavia Spencer, who were both great, and call me cliche, but Fruitvale Station would have possibly been a more effective documentary. 

Oscar Grant's murder may have been the first injustice of that magnitude to be "embraced" & spread through social media.

Ironically, the same people who screamed about justice for Oscar Grant on MySpace & Facebook could have cared less the day of his murderers sentencing as they were more enthralled by Lebron James' decision to go play for the Miami Heat which was happening at the exact same time...

But no matter how flawed I may think it is, Fruitvale Station is still getting tons of praise and positive feedback which is a great thing no matter what. The film's heart is in the right place (which is an understatement) and the last 30 minutes is very effective/powerful. The last third of the film is what really intrigued me. Had Fruitvale Station only been the last 30 minutes it would have been an almost flawless short. I appreciate that a film like Fruitvale Station is getting so much attention & praise (or was even given the green light to be made!) with a cast made up of unknowns, traditionally supporting players (Kevin Durand & Octavia Spencer) and young/up & coming actors like; Michael B. Jordan & Melanie Diaz (thankfully Anthony Mackie & Rosario Dawson, who are both great, are in their mid-30's now and couldn’t be predictably cast in this). 

I also find comfort in the fact that the director of this film is a young male of color around the same age that Oscar Grant would have been if he was alive today.