SICARIO

For the first 30 minutes of Sicario Director Denis Villaneuve keeps us in the dark just like our protagonist Kate Mercer (Emily Blunt). From a spectator’s perspective, I was little on edge during parts of the film. Early on I got the sense that at any moment bullets could start whizzing by out of nowhere or an IED could go off unexpectedly. Villeneuve definitely took his time setting the mood. It’s all a little disorienting. And the score, courtesy of Johann Johannsson just adds to the discomfort & uncertainty.
Kate, a special ops agent, isn't quite sure who she’s working for or with, and she doesn’t know what the goal is on the latest assignment that she reluctantly volunteered for. She’s also still a little shell-shocked from the events that happened during her previous assignment at the very beginning of the film. PTSD – which is something almost exclusively associated with the military & rape when it comes to cinema - is an unspoken element within Sicario. Not only is Kate possibly suffering from a mild case of it, but so is Benicio Del Toro’s “Alejando” – another special ops agent working with Kate. And I could be speculating but I get the sense that the various gunmen & assassins (all ex-military) that work alongside Kate & Alejandro wouldn’t really know how to function in every day society.

Sicario is an interesting case of style overshadowing the substance a little bit yet it doesn't really bother me. Michael Mann pretty much created the lane for films like Sicario to exist. What I mean by “these kinds of films” are droning ambient studio films that mix drama & semi-realistic action. When you take in all that is Michael Mann I think you see where I'm coming from. In every post-Heat Mann film he always makes it a point to throw in all those randomly “cool” shots that don't serve much of  a purpose (the wolf crossing the street in Collateral, Colin Farrell zoning out and looking off in to the water in Miami Vice, Chris Hemsworth looking off in to the distance after being released from prison in Blackhat, etc). Yet at the same time he’s incredibly fascinated by the technical aspects in front of & behind the camera. He was an early pusher of digital filmmaking and he makes it a point for all of his films to have realistic action & gunfire. Obviously Michael Mann has his own influences but he still managed to create a lane that quite a few filmmakers have followed. Sure that’s a bold statement and there’s probably someone reading this right now that has something that could potentially counter my claim, but the technical & atmospheric elements within Sicario are totally from the school of Michael Mann, specifically Public Enemies, Miami Vice & Collateral.
But I’m not so tunnel-visioned on Mann’s influence that I don’t see Soderbergh’s touch (besides the fact that both Sicario & Traffic co-star Benicio Del Toro in similarly gruff roles, both films are structured similarly). And the climactic action sequence at the end of Sicario definitely has shades of the Bin Laden takedown sequence in Zero Dark Thirty.

Zero Dark Thirty / Sicario

I hope you guys aren't sick of my obsessive fascination with connecting movies to each other but I honestly cant help it. And I’m not trying to discredit Denis Villaneuve by saying he just took things from other movies and came up with Sicario. Not at all. Taking away all the stylistic influences from Mann, Soderbergh & Bigelow, Sicario is it’s own politically driven film (in terms of gender and it’s stance on the war on drugs) about an FBI agent (Kate Macer) who’s called to work with the CIA (headed up by Josh Brolin’s “Matt Graver” & Benicio Del Toro’s Alejandro Gillick) to take down a drug kingpin.
Sicario makes up for films like The Counselor, Syriana, Body Of Lies, The Gunman and all those other semi-recent drug/CIA/governmental/terrorist-based movies I'm not too crazy about (actually, what kept me from seeing Sicario right away was because I thought it was going to be another one of those kinds of movies). Not to sound like a hack but I was honestly hooked from the first few moments (the score is commanding, there's not much dialogue, and you can cut the tension with a knife). I even remember letting out a “whoa” or a “oh wow” on more than one occasion while watching it. It’s a moody ambient film that gives the audience a little bit of credit from time to time by not laying everything out in a nice neat package.

Now…the politics in the film are incredibly confusing. I find the film confusing because it comes off like an anti-drug/pro-CIA/FBI film yet directed by a liberal/”progressive” thinking director. Once the smoke settled and the closing credits rolled I thought to myself “sooo…what exactly are you trying to say about the drug trade?” or “are you pro torture or anti-torture?” Sicario will also have you questioning if this was a comment about the war on drugs or, in the case of Benicio Del Toro’s character, a revenge tale hidden inside of a political drama. But the drug trade is a complicated issue so why should I expect anyone to have a hard stance on the subject matter? Drugs ruin lives in more ways than one. But the drug business is so deep at this point that a lot of crazy compromises and sacrifices have to be made (as conveyed by Josh Brolin at the end of the film).

On the slightly negative side of things, Sicario is yet another prominent film to portray Mexico as this savage land (a chunk of the story takes place in Jaurez). The portrayal of Mexicans (and Colombians) isn't exactly original. The minute we see our team cross the border in to Mexico in an effort to catch a mid-level crime boss, we see mutilated bodies hanging freely out in the open. I’m not so clueless to know that Jaurez was (is?) one of the most dangerous places on the planet (some statistics indicate that Juarez has become much safer), but Sicario still perpetuates certain stereotypes about Mexicans & Colombians on the big screen.

In terms of gender, Sicario wears its politics on its sleeve. A lot of what goes on in the film is no different from what went on in The Silence Of Lambs - a young dedicated female agent trapped inside of an all-boys club. Emily Blunt gives a great performance and I really appreciate how she’s being used in certain films these days (although I do think this film was supposed to be a platform to showcase her, Benicio Del Toro does kind of quietly steal the show). Anytime Emily Blunt’s Kate steps inside of a room (always filled with men), it reminded me of the scene in Silence when Jodie Foster tries to clear all the (male) officers out of the room so an autopsy can be done. The looks given to both Blunt & Foster in their respective films are identical. They’re looked at by their fellow officers as women first and not peers. In fact, the true reason that Emily’s character is used in Sicario is pretty fucked up (attn: indiewire – THIS is the type of film you spend your time talking about when it comes to gender, sexism, feminism, etc. NOT Mad Max Fury Road, Trainwreck or the latest Melissa McCarthy movie).
Gender also seems to come in to play with the violence in the film. Whenever Kate kills someone in the film there's a brief dramatic emotional pause. I don't know how I feel about this because rarely do we see male characters show any kind of emotion when they kill someone in an action film. But in the case of Sicario it's as if women cant kill without "feeling" or getting hormonal. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Taking a life is a big deal and it should fuck with you on some level. But how it's portrayed in Sicario is a little shaky in my opinion.

Sicario is still a success at the end of the day and one of the few films I've gone to the theater to see more than once. Even if you aren't into the subject matter within the film, the filmmaking is still both beautiful & gritty. At the end of the day no matter what problems I had with this movie (and there are a few), this is a case where style wins over everything else.

THE VISIT (*SPECIAL GUEST BLOGGER IAN LOFFILL*)

This Visit is one of the more peculiar films of 2015. While I'm not a fan of it, the film has gained quite a bit of critical praise. Actually, it seems like I'm in the minority with my views on Shayamalan's recent found footage horror tale.
PINNLAND EMPIRE contributor Ian Loffill is no stranger to misunderstood horror movies so it only makes sense that he shares his thoughts on this.

Enjoy...

I only recently became properly acquainted with the work of writer/director/producer M. Night Shyamalan but for years his filmography has had a major influence on my approach to writing about films. The Sixth Sense was one of the “must see” films of 1999 and I would have watched it during its initial release but a lot of the early hype surrounding the film was down to the twist ending that, apparently, few people saw coming. Unfortunately a poorly written review of the film I stumbled across at the time gave the ending away (without warning) in the first paragraph and so it seemed like the one major reason people were saying you should watch the film (“did you see the twist coming?”) was no longer valid. I still feel pretty strongly about the whole subject of spoilers. I’m the kind of person who never sees “the twist” coming. My mind just doesn’t work that way when absorbing a story so a film has to be extremely predictable for me to be able to see where it’s all going. To make matters worse, I inadvertently found out about the endings of two of his subsequent films (Signs and The Village) in everyday conversations with friends and co-workers who assumed I’d already seen them. Each of his subsequent efforts got progressively worse notices and it felt like I was destined to never be able to see the work of one of the most talked about names in modern American cinema without someone ruining the element of surprise. It’s for this reason (and other spoiler ridden reviews I’ve come across over the years) that, wherever possible, I try not to allude to plot details too much in my write-ups.

At the urging of a Shyamalan enthusiast/apologist I recently went to the see The Visit, knowing almost nothing about it, and also set about catching up on all of his prior work that I’d missed in the last 15 years or so. He’s had the sort of career arc that I’d imagine most filmmakers hope to avoid. In less than a decade he went from being an Oscar nominated critical darling with The Sixth Sense to being seen as a genre hack and laughing stock with The Happening in 2008. At a certain point (probably not long after 2004’s misleadingly promoted The Village) mainstream audiences began to resent Shyamalan for getting caught up in the hype of his increasingly ambitious and farfetched releases, none of which seemed to achieve the same payoff as The Sixth Sense or Signs. While not quite reaching Uwe Boll levels of hate, he remains an auteur in the most unfashionable sense of the term and it’s got to a stage where bad reviews for his work are almost redundant. He’s been on the ropes for a while now but it can sometimes take an awful lot to finish off the career of a well established director.

It’s possible Shyamalan saw a glimmer of hope with 2010’s relatively well received Horror/Mystery flick Devil – which he produced and got a story credit for, although his overall involvement in the film may have been somewhat exaggerated in its advertising. For Shyamalan the director The Visit could be seen as a humbling retreat to the genre that made his name and one last throw of the dice for a man who was once touted as a modern day Hitchcock. For Shyamalan the producer and bankable entity The Visit was a smart move. Working with Blumhouse productions, who specialise in low budget, gimmicky Horror films like Paranormal Activity, Insidious and Sinister, the gamble seems to have paid off. If marketed well and released at the right time of year films of this ilk are already hugely profitable before anyone notices whether or not they are any good. The box office figures for The Visit (made for roughly $5 million, to date it has grossed over $80 million) seem to have bought him a reprieve after a string of films that either flopped or underperformed dating back to Lady in the Water in 2006. This may be a means of pressing the reset button on his career, signalling a somewhat different approach and hoping to start all over again with a clean slate.

His declining fortunes with mainstream audiences can possibly be attributed to his inability to resolve dramatic and narrative issues in a satisfactory manner. His problems as a storyteller are how he often gets tangled up in his own plot devices and exposition. After the baffling pseudo-scientific explanations and mythological aspects in his work over the last 10 years the relatively simple and clear outline for The Visit was a way of making a more straightforward and accessible offering to audiences. To give a very basic summary of the plot: 2 children visit their grandparents at an isolated farmhouse for the first time and make a documentary about the experience over the course of a week while their mother holidays with her partner. Things get increasingly weird. Well, let’s just say I found it easier to follow than Lady in the Water or The Last Airbender.

If I had any scepticism going in to the film it’s because I generally dislike the found footage format. Even in films of that ilk that I have enjoyed, like Cloverfield, the whole framework seems unnecessary and forced. Few filmmakers have managed to employ it in a way that doesn’t’ feel horribly contrived. A lot of scenes require an explanation as to why the camera is switched on in the first place, especially at points where the characters are in such grave danger. More than anything else it has a distracting effect that makes the audience even more aware of the story’s inherent triteness and implausible details. If there are advantages to be found in this filmmaking style in The Visit it’s that it gives the rather pedestrian story a playful quality and eccentricity that it would have lacked if it had been done in a more conventional form.

Having read various responses to the film, there’s been a good deal of bemusement and debate over certain aspects of the film – whether the depictions of mental illness and the experiences of the elderly were in poor taste for instance. Did we really need so many scenes of Tyler demonstrating his rapping skills? Typically, some have asked if the film’s late “revelation” was even meant to be a surprise. Perhaps aware of the unintended laughs that some of his more recent work has provoked, Shyamalan wanted to keep audiences off balance on this one. The awkward mixture of solemn and silly is perhaps the best way to describe the mood of The Visit. In this context the one performance that feels perfectly judged is that of Deanna Dunagan as Nana, who creates the right amount of unease, malice, vulnerability and surface gentleness in her character while being fully attuned to the film’s black humour and cynicism. I feel like I got a reasonably satisfactory explanation for the film’s tone from Shyamalan himself when he stated in an interview that he actually shot 2 versions of the film. One was a serious, moody Horror film and the other was a broadly comic offering. The resulting film was apparently a mixture of the two versions that was put together in the editing room.

In its own peculiar way The Visit illustrates better than any other film I know the dilemmas facing 21st century Horror films. Now there is such a lucrative market in generating empty jump scares in formulaic offerings why bother trying something original or more substantial? Do you play it straight or tongue in cheek? This seems to try both ways at different points. How do you turn timeworn storylines and imagery in to something that is fresh and appeals to contemporary sensibilities? Modern technology and postmodern attitudes present enormous challenges to a genre with gothic roots and folklore origins. The Visit takes on certain knowingness in its allusions to fairy tales like Hansel and Gretel and Red Riding Hood. It makes time to detail the protagonists’ ability to phone for help or go online as well as letting us know how they are employing filmmaking techniques in Rebecca’s documentary. The film hasn’t done much to challenge my reservations about contemporary Horror films, many of which seems to aim low and succeed on their own very limited terms, but its confounding nature just about held my interest.

Within a mainstream context it’s refreshing to see a big release that was nothing like what I expected. There’s something reassuring in knowing that I wasn’t the only one who was perplexed by The Visit. Any originality it possesses comes largely as a result of the sometimes uncomfortable humour, which doesn’t quite enter spoof territory, and what I considered to be ill-judged moments. The Visit is one of the strangest and most unfathomable genre exercises I’ve encountered in a long time but, just to be clear on the matter, I won’t be making a case for it as a “misunderstood masterpiece” any time soon.

SILENT SCREAMS: THE ART OF TRAUMA OF HEART OF MIDNIGHT (*SPECIAL GUESTBLOGGER: NATHANIEL DRAKE CARLSON*)

I didn't have time to do a film for Halloween this year (I wrote something Halloween-themed for The Pink Smoke) so I reached out to a few contributors to take care of that for me. This year Nathaniel Drake Carlson tackles Matthew Chapman's Heart Of Midnight.
It's always a pleasure to have Mr. Carlson visit the empire (this is his third contribution this year). If you haven't read his thoughts on Blackhat & Some Call It Loving, do yourself a favor and give those a read after this.

Enjoy...

Much of the success of Matthew Chapman's Heart of Midnight lies in its aesthetic, hermetic self-enclosure, its building of a whole world for itself within those boundaries. This extends beyond the look and feel of the picture and into its thematic substance as well. A harbinger of what Lynch would do later with Twin Peaks, Heart of Midnight attempts a blend between a Grand Guignol operaticism of hyper heightened style and a brute psychological realism, suggesting that one extends from the other and that each is the other's appropriate complement. The psychological trauma goes very deep here and Chapman understands that the horror tropes are not a cheap trivialization of the subject matter at all but rather a fitting expression. Certainly it is often lurid in the extreme but that B-movie exploitation gloss is made suddenly substantive and relevant for us by association with the bracing content. We're challenged to take it seriously as the stuff of modern myths.

The film is really a showcase too for Jennifer Jason Leigh, whose performance as Carol is among the finest of the 80's and among her own personal best. It's a refined and carefully crafted performance, all the more remarkable in the midst of the hysterical excess surrounding it but inextricable from all that hysteria, shaped in response to it. What Leigh does so powerfully and with such understated resolve is to fashion a portrait of a frayed woman at the edge, trying to keep her psyche together but gradually falling apart in the face of traumas both inexplicable and all too clearly real. Leigh must then navigate this terrain with care and she does, her every reaction, even when in rooms alone (which is often), a mix of fragility and determination but also always indicative of a deeper and barely managed permanent state of distress. Her scenes with Peter Coyote's character are a welcome relief as the two of them have a comfortable rapport, at ease with one another even when they are suspicious or uncertain of each other's motives. Mention must also be made of Yanni's extraordinary musical score, a mix of the dissonant and the sweepingly romantic, matching the film's own distinctive range of expression.

Heart of Midnight recalls certain forerunners while foreshadowing others. While the thematic aspects remind me of Lynch, aesthetically the film bears a resemblance too, especially in terms of use of sound (the sound design during the sequence in which Carol examines the upstairs rooms in The Midnight is reminiscent of Jeffrey's initial inspection of the Deep River apartments in Blue Velvet--a deeply buried industrial ambiance suggestive of an unsettling unspecifiable form of life). There are also elements here which we get later in Egoyan's Exotica: the club as character unto itself, place as psychic space with all the implied labyrinthine passageways accompanying it, but also the unique conciliatory ending in which established opposing characters are brought together in an embrace which acknowledges the need for healing rather than rote confrontation or trite victory and infers in doing so what lay at the heart of the antagonism all along. And, of course, any "horror" picture of this sort will recall The Shining and Chapman indulges too in ghosts made real and a continuity of underlying perversity over time with all its effects made pronounced and undeniable. But I also especially like Chapman's final scene which mirrors the out-of-time final image in the Kubrick film but is more subtle as it only suggests its fantastical nature and the way that may guise a continued lingering trauma.

Heart of Midnight is also exceptionally well structured. The aforementioned tour through the upstairs rooms at the club builds slowly in unsettling detail with intimations of abuse never far away. This culminates in the scene of the assault upon Carol by intruders from outside, significantly outside forces. Once again the expressive style detailing one specific thing is paralleled with the separate incidents of a more prosaic and blunt reality. In this way Chapman makes his point about the confluence of the two. Also appreciated is the fact that the real arch-villain of the piece is displaced or removed from the start. There is in fact then no way to reach a satisfying kind of conventional resolution. All that can be done is deal with the results of his actions. In that way the movie is surprisingly moralistic but it works because it's not just some mere scold or hysterical reactionism (despite the pitch throughout) but builds instead a careful and convincing case.

One other thing worth noting. The UK DVD version of this film is significantly longer than the US cut (which is the sole cut available on the new Kino Blu). Not sure what to make of this as the longer cut has more sustained impact as it's built better, slower and steadier and is just generally richer. Maybe US distributors didn't like that pacing but cutting it down to get to the "horror" misses the point that the horror is suffused into the entire thing and an increased bluntness doesn't benefit or do justice to what Chapman is doing. Having said that there are some trims to the blatant horror stuff at the end too so who knows what the motivation was. Also, Brenda Vaccaro's part (as Jennifer Jason Leigh's mother) is reduced to almost nothing in the US cut which has makes Carol seem more isolated and disconnected. That eliminates much of the psychological realism complicated later by the sheer, almost surreal hysteria, but it also enhances that sense of desperate solitude and uncertainty so in those particular respects then I guess it is a more effective cut. Still, I wish the longer version would get a wider release and an eventual Blu treatment of its own.

ARMOR OF LIGHT (CutPrintFilm)

Here's my latest review for Cut print film. This time I tackle the documentary Armor Of Light.

Enjoy...
(click the image to go to the review) 

CAROL: RED IS THE WARMEST COLOR

One of my favorite movie moments of the last five years is in the first act of Blue Is The Warmest Color when Adele & Emma first cross paths. The way they locked eyes just stuck with me for some reason...

It almost feels like those few seconds are stretched out in to a feature length movie in the form of Carol - Todd Haynes' latest film about the love affair between a soon-to-be divorced housewife ("Carol"/Cate Blanchett) and a young aspiring photographer ("Therese"/Rooney Mara).
It just so happens that both Blue & Carol are adapted from books that focus on same-sex relationships between women. The dynamic between the characters in both films is also pretty similar. Both relationships have an imbalance made up of an older more experienced partner (Carol/Emma) and a younger slightly more insecure partner (Therese/Adele). 

I also sub-labeled this piece "Red Is The Warmest Color" because Todd Haynes uses red the same way Abdellatif Kechiche used the color blue in Blue Is The Warmest Color...

The difference here however is that the relationship between Carol & Therese is a bit more “taboo” and less (outwardly) intense than the relationship in Blue Is The Warmest Color.

Putting aside the subject matter, Carol can be enjoyed by anyone who has a genuine love for cinema. Todd Haynes is a cinephile so there are plenty of subtle movie references. Throughout his career Haynes has tipped his hat to everyone from Fassbinder & Kenneth Anger (Poison) to Antonioni (Safe) & Sirk (Far From Heaven). Carol is no different...

In The Mood For Love / Carol

Mulholland Drive / Carol

Persona / Carol

Not only is Carol a return to the Dottie Gets Spanked/Far From Heaven-era Todd Haynes that I love so much (there's a couple of quick semi-unconventionally edited montage moments here & there reminiscent of Dottie Gets Spanked), but it's also his first exploration into homosexuality with female characters. Some could make an abstracted case for Cate Blanchett’s cross-gendered performance as Bob Dylan in I’m Not There, but Therese & Carol are his first true lesbian characters (and some might feel that they aren't even lesbians but rather two women who happen to be attracted to each other). I’m making a slightly big deal out of this because I find it strange that a varsity letterman of the queer film movement (Haynes) took so long to explore gay female characters when Poison, Velvet Goldmine, Dottie Gets Spanked & Far From Heaven all focus on homosexuality amongst males (there's even a quick moment in Safe as well). 

I hope I'm not overstepping my bounds here (and I could be way off in what I'm about to say) but judging from the number of semi-recent films to explore same sex relationships, there's a serious imbalance between films that focus on gay men versus gay women. It's almost as if the movie industry is subconsciously implying that stories concerning gay women are less interesting (if that's true, Carol certainly puts that belief to rest). I don't mean to make this about gender or cause division but it seems like for every one Carol or Blue Is The Warmest Color, there's at least two films that focus on the same subject matter on the opposite end of the gender spectrum (Milk, Stranger By The Lake, Dallas Buyers Club, Weekend, A Single Man, Beginners, Brokeback Mountain, Love Is Strange, Behind The Candelabra, etc).

Perhaps I'm making a big deal about nothing. Carol is a love story more than anything else. I imagine Todd Haynes wouldn't want this film to be labeled as a "gay love story". Because this film is set in the late 1950's there are obviously elements of repression & secrecy. Haynes also makes it a point to sprinkle subtle elements throughout the film (there's a cleverly placed cameo from Carrie Brownstein and a quick moment where Therese makes eyes at two openly gay women at a record shop). But this isn't a politically driven film where our couple has to fight against intolerant right wing Christians. In fact, part of the reason their love has to be kept a secret is because Carol is still technically married (although the love is long gone). We get the sense that Carol may have been unfaithful to her husband in the past. And if not that, Carol and her husband "Harge" (Kyle Chandler) made each other miserable by staying in a loveless marriage. Nothing is straightforward and the characters aren't without fault. This aspect brought me back to Denis Quaid's "Frank" in Haynes' Far From Heaven. Do we feel sympathy for him because he has to repress the fact that he's gay, or do we judge him because he's cheating on his wife (and abusive) regardless of his sexual orientation? These are the kinds of questions you'll be mulling over after watching Carol.
In my opinion this is Todd Haynes' best film since Safe. And I know I always say stuff like this but to me, Dottie Gets Spanked, Far From Heaven & Carol all exist in the same universe. All three films are set in a time when homosexuality was a bit more taboo & shameful than it is today (I picture all three separate stories happening at the same time in different parts of the country). One could write a thesis paper about the similarities between Steven (Dottie Gets Spanked), Frank (Far From Heaven) & Therese (Carol), but that's a whole 'nother wrote-up (in the meantime check out the cinema of Todd Haynes told through images & stills).

INSIDE THE PHOENIX W/ ALLEN CORDELL

I had the pleasure of sitting in on another episode of Inside The Phoenix. This time the guest was my buddy & filmmaker Allen Cordell.

enjoy...

Also make sure to check out some of his excellent work over the years (Laundry Syntax is a personal favorite)...

STRETCH & BOBBITO: RADIO THAT CHANGED LIVES

At last. A hip-hop film that truly speaks to me (although not to discredit the Tribe Called Quest documentary as Phife Dawg’s battle with diabetes & kidney disease literally mirrored my own struggles with the same exact diseases a few years back). Just about every prominent hip-hop-based film to come out in the last few years is based around an artist with a fanbase that branches out beyond hip-hop culture to the casual fan (Dr. Dre, Ice Cube, Nas, A Tribe Called Quest, etc). But Stretch & Bobbito: Radio That Changed Lives speaks to a specific cult-ish hip-hop fanbase (a cult that I’m very much a part of) whose knowledge of hip-hop goes beyond a redundant Rolling Stone analysis of a Public Enemy album or a Michael Eric Dyson essay about a Tupac verse (that wasnt a diss to Public Enemy or Tupac).

This is a documentary for folks who stayed up late to tape a rare non-album version of a Mobb Deep song or capture a Pharoahe Monch freestyle that you couldn’t hear anywhere else. This is a documentary for people who were too busy nerding out to rap cadence and the intricacies of gritty beat production to be bothered with the half-knowledgeable pseudo-intellectualism that’s become just as much of a poison within hip-hop/rap as the ignorant/irresponsible music that gets played on the radio today.

This film couldn't have come at a better time given the current state of New York City ("urban") radio. The playlist that makes up the majority of rap music that gets played on popular stations like Hot 97 & Power 105 is hardly an accurate representation of the wide variety of talent that's out there in the world of hip-hop today (strangely enough, if you want to hear good old school hip-hop on the radio, you have to tune in to WBLS which was once a place that frowned at rap music). Tell me - how is it that hip-hop artists like Run The Jewels, Big KRIT, Action Bronson, Jean Grae, Roc Marciano & Danny Brown manage to sell records (in the MP3 era), maintain a steady fan base and sell out festivals all over the world, yet they still can't manage to get some kind of decent rotation on mainstream New York City radio? Clearly they have fans. So why can't their music get played at a decent time slot on a station that claims to be the home of hip-hop (technically the tagline for hot 97 is "where hip-hop lives" but it hasn't lived there for a while so it really doesn't matter if I got it wrong because it's an inaccurate statement either way). 

Even veterans/legends like Cormega, Pharoahe Monch, Ghostface Killah & Sean Price (RIP) continue to put out quality music but can't manage to get any rotation on the major radio stations that operate out of their own city (part of this has to do with the fact that rap music is quite possibly the only genre where veterans & legends are encouraged to fall back over time while older musicians in other music genres are encouraged to make new music and tour). New York has become one of the only major rap/hip-hop radio markets that doesn't promote its own talent. I went to Philadelphia earlier this year with my fiancé and when we turned on the radio we heard The Roots, Beenie Segel & Eve. Last year we spent some time in North Carolina and heard J. Cole on the local radio on more than one occasion. And with the success of Kendrick Lamar I can only imagine how much his music gets played out in California. So why don't major urban stations in New York City follow suit? I'm sure (former?) Hot 97 music programmer Ebro Darden will spin some well-spoken yet nonsensical explanation as to why that is but at the end of the day it's all bullshit. There is no legitimate explanation for the lack of variety on urban NYC radio.

For a more in-depth analysis on the current state of urban radio, listen to the Chuck-D episode of The Combat Jack Show after reading this...

I seriously feel old when I tell younger folks that Hot 97 was once a place where the likes of De La Soul, Wu-Tang, Sean Price, Masta Ace & Mos Def all got good radio play. Hot 97 was even a brief home for Stretch & Bobbito in the late 90's.
What set Stretch & Bob apart from so many other radio DJ's (past, present & future) is that they dared to play non-traditional (mostly New York City) rap music that you couldn't hear on other radio stations...

I know Stretch & Bob's radio show didn't reach the same amount of folks as Howard Stern or Tom Joyner but they still managed to make history with a shitty tri-state signal based out of a dingy college radio station.

I don't often like to compare hip-hop to other musical genres. It’s like seeking validation from sources that don't show the same amount of respect (rappers sometime attain a certain status and start drawing comparisons to legendary rock & roll artists when they should be compared to the legendary rappers that came before them). But there is a strong parallel between Stretch Armstrong & Bobbito Garcia and John Peel (legendary UK radio disc jockey known for pushing eclecticism during his run on BBC radio). Stretch & Bobbito: Radio That Changed Lives is currently playing at the Brooklyn Academy Of Music - which is great - but I worry some folks might not recognize their status in hip-hop. So in this case it helps to compare them to a possibly more recognizable figure like Jon Peel (I don’t mean to discredit anyone, but I don’t see the regular Brooklyn Academy Of Music attendee being too familiar with the brand of underground hip-hop that Stretch & Bob helped to cultivate).

Stretch & Bobitto's run at WKCR represented a time when (underground) radio was a kind place for a wide variety of aspiring rap artists. It used to be a badge of honor to be featured on their show. Before finding any kind of substantial success (or a cult following in certain cases) everyone from Jay-Z & Nas to Artifacts & Company Flow got some of their first major radio play on their show.

Stretch & Bobbito: Radio That Changed Lives chronicles the legendary radio show that brought shine to not only the artists mentioned in this write-up so far, but other folks like DMX, Big Pun, Wu-Tang, Mase, Cam'ron and many more. I didn't really learn anything new, but as someone who grew up taping & acquiring episodes of their show whenever I could, it was nice to revisit memories of the golden-era rap music that played a part in making me the person I am today (I grew up in Massachusetts but spent lots of time visiting family in New York City in my teens which is when I got familiar with the show). 

The artists featured in the film are mostly from NYC or New Jersey, but west coast veterans like Cypress Hill, Sway, Souls Of Mischief & Del get plenty of love as well. There's a whole 'nother sub-genre of artists loosely associated with the show that arent really mentioned in the film (Pumpkinhead, Necro, Juggaknots, Arsonists, Non Phixion and more) but I have to learn that's ok and this film wasnt made for just me. Interviewees include everyone from Rosie Perez & Redman to Jay-Z & Fat Joe (I was pleasantly surprised to see folks like O.C., Large Professor, Dante Ross, Lord Finesse and other underrated/under-appreciated artists get some decent screen time). And of course there's plenty of archive footage featuring everyone under the sun who had anything to do with rap music in the 90's (Brand Nubian, Method Man, Kurious Jorge, Das Efx, Showbiz & AG, etc). For something that's just over 90 minutes, we get a lot of history. There isn't much structure, but, and sorry in advance for sounding pretentious, isn't that how it should be? Their show didn't have too much structure nor did a lot of the music & artists they featured on the show. This is probably the most fun I had watching a movie this year (after Mad Max: Fury Road). I only hope other folks who manage to see this film get as much out of it as I did.

No matter what nerdy artifact or piece of history that was omitted from this film (and there are plenty as the Stretch & Bobbito radio show is layered with years of historical moments & hip-hop trivia) it's still an important piece of hip-hip cinema (I'd like it to be noted that no other film critic or film site is documenting hip-hop on the big screen like PINNLAND EMPIRE).

This reminds me - with broader topics being covered within hip-hop cinema, maybe in the near future we can get a documentary to explore why slightly misinformed intellectuals like Michael Eric Dyson, Dream Hampton & Cornell West get the platform they do to discuss hip-hop while various members of Rock Steady Crew & Zulu Nation (you know - the articulate, knowledgeable veterans who've been part of the fabric of hip-hop since day one) do not. But that's a whole 'nother can of worms... 

Stretch and Bobbito: Radio That Changed Lives from Saboteur Media on Vimeo.

CEMETERY OF SPLENDOUR: THE CINEMA OF APICHATPONG WEERASETHAKUL PART 2

At this point I'm convinced you could take every feature film by Apichatpong Weerasethakul and edit together one long coherent narrative with very little effort (I guess we're just gonna make this a theme this year with my coverage of the NYFF). While this is a review of Cemetery Of Splendour, it also reads like a sequel to The Cinema Of Apichatpong Weerasethakul.

Sickness has been a common theme in Weerasthakul's work as of late. His 2010 feature (Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives) dealt with kidney disease, and the feature before that (Syndromes & A Century) took place inside of a hospital. Ghosts and/or supernatural occurrences have also been a staple within his work. Boonmee is visited by the spirits of his dead relatives throughout the course of Uncle Boonmee, while one of the main characters in Tropical Malady transforms into an animal by the end of the movie (a similar transformation also happens in Uncle Boonmee).
Cemetery Of Splendour is no different when it comes to sickness, spirituality & unexplained phenomenas. In the film we're witness to a mysterious/unexplained sleep epidemic that's disrupting a Thai village (just imagine an intense, more hallucinatory form of narcolepsy). We also watch the relationship between a hospital volunteer ("Jen") and a patient ("Itt") that teeters the line between motherly & flirty.

A possible callback?: Cemetery Of Splendor / Tropical Malady (I don't remember seeing the scene on the left in the screening I saw, but it's still some possibly deleted scene from Cemetery Of Splendour that's identical, same actor and all, to a scene in Tropical Malady)

Uncle Boonmee / Cemetery Of Splendor

The importance of Buddah/"The Shirine" in the films of Apichatpong Weerasethakul
top: Tropical Malady / Syndromes & A Century
Bottom: Uncle Boonmee / Cemetery Of Splendor

The hospital scenes in Cemetery Of Splendour look like interchangeable moments from both Syndromes & Uncle Boonmee. The characters in the aforementioned films could also very well be extras walking around in the background of Cemetery Of Splendour. A lot of the same actors are used (similarly) in every one of these movies. Co-star Banlop Lamnoi plays a soldier in both Tropical Malady & Cemetery Of Splendour. Lead actress Jenjira Pongpas plays the same caregiving aunt-like character in Blissfully Yours, Uncle Boonmee & Cemetery Of Splendour.

Apichatpong Weerasethakul's latest is definitely more enjoyable if you're familiar with his previous work (his last few features are easy to attain. Some are currently streaming between Amazon & Netflix, while a few shorts are up on YouTube). I'm not saying you can't enjoy this if you're a novice, but at the same time, watching Cemetery Of Splendour without knowledge of the films that came before it is kind of like being introduced to the cinema of David Lynch or Claire Denis by watching Inland Empire or Bastards, respectively.

Weerasethakul continues down the hallucinatory path that Carlos Reygadas made a dent in a few years back with Post Tenebras Lux (a path that was previously chipped away at by the likes of Tarkovsky, Sokurov & post-Thin Red Line Malick).
If there's ever been a case to draw a comparison between Reygadas & Weerasethakul - this is it (after the release of Post Tenebrasux Lux I found quite a few critics name-dropping Weerasethakul in their write-ups). Like PTL, reality, daydreams & hallucinations start to mesh in to one beautiful droning blob in Cemetery Of Splendour.
I'd be remiss to leave out how much I was reminded of Only God Forgives at certain points. Apichatpong's slow pace and use of neon-lighting (something new for him) was very similar to Refn's lens.

Cemetery Of Splendour

Only God Forgives

Cemetery Of Splendour

I did struggle with some aspects of this film. On one hand it's really cool that all of his movies weave together so seamlessly. But at the same time, it's difficult to decipher certain scenes in Cemetery Of Splendour from certain scenes in Uncle Boonmee or Syndromes & A Century. Apichatpong Weerasethakul is obviously not the first director to make a slight variation of the same basic plot. Take David Lynch for example - Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive & Inland Empire are all pretty much the same basic plot (split personality disorder, alternate universes colliding in to one another, etc). But the execution from one film to the next is pretty different. That's not really the case here with Apichatpong Weerasethakul's latest. While watching Cemetery Of Splendour I found myself going: "isn't this a scene from one of his older movies? I feel like I've seen this before".
But at the end of the day I have the desire to watch this again so that equates some form of success in my book. 

This is yet another film that belongs in the "sketchbook cinema" genre that I coined back in 2012 (To The Wonder, Tree Of Life, Uncle Boonmee, Post Tenebras Lux, and, most recently, Upstream Color). This isn't a criticism in any way but Apichatpong's latest feels like a beautiful, yet somewhat unfinished idea that he just had to get it out (like a detailed sketch you might find in an artist's well-kept sketchbook). It's like a gumbo pot of ideas ranging from spirituality to socio-political awareness. Prior to the NYFF screening, Apichatpong, who couldn't be there in person, sent along a rather cryptic message for the audience that would lead one to believe he was unhappy with the current state of Thailand. Throughout the course of the film he hints at everything from unwanted property development & issues concerning skin complexion, to hospitals in small villages not having enough equipment to take care of the sick.

Because Cemetery Of Splendour also deals with the idea of slumber, Apichatpong Weerasethakul leaves plenty of room for the audience to zone out from time to time. There were a few moments when I totally stopped paying attention and just zoned out to the hypnotic imagery in front of me (I also thought it would be interesting to write the first draft of this review dead tired on the train just after watching the film). One Enter The Void-esque scene in particular, where an overhead shot of an escalator overlaps with a neon-lit hospital room, stood out the most to me. Cemetery Of Splendour relies more on static shots & and its hypnotic tone than it does dialogue or a straightforward plot. That may sound boring to some of you (which is perfectly understandable) but those of you who like art-house cinema, moments of mind-numbing silence & experimental feature filmmaking will more than likely enjoy this.

THE LOBSTER

I'm not quite sure why The Lobster was described as strictly a drama prior to its release (I read more than a few seemingly legitimate sources late last year that described it as such). There are certainly a few heartbreaking moments, and the film does take an unexpected dark turn in the final act, but overall it's a dark comedy. Or perhaps "dramedy" is a more accurate label. The overall premise is too silly to be taken seriously no matter how straight-laced & (intentionally) dry the actors played their parts.
In The Lobster we follow "David" (Colin Farrell) - A somewhat introverted middle-aged architect whose just been dumped by his lady. This is a problem because he exists in a dystopian society/unintentional reworking of Logan's Run where humans are required to be in romantic relationships. Being single is not only frowned upon but if you haven't found a mate within a certain time frame you're turned in to an animal (of your choice) by the nameless Orwellian government that controls everything. David is sent off to a sort of "forced dating retreat" in order to find love but instead all he finds are equally desperate people trying not to be turned in to animals (we discover early on that one of David's family members has been changed over in to a dog).

See? The premise is pretty silly, isn't it? The ambiance & color palette of The Lobster is very cold & drab (much like Alps) but what goes on in most of the film is comedy. Dry & twisted comedy but still comedy nonetheless (Lanthimos jokingly blamed the drab color palette on the particular section of Ireland that served as the film's backdrop but I thought The Lobster looked almost identical to Alps which was shot in Greece).

After a failed relationship attempt with a coldhearted women, David eventually finds compatibility in the form of a nameless woman (Rachel Weisz) living with a society of outcasts off in the woods. Problems soon arise for David and the woman as their relationship is forbidden. Will their love prevail, or is their relationship doomed?

Ariane Labed (left) & Yorgos Lanthimos (center) at the Q&A last night

Adults sometimes put a lot of pressure on themselves when it comes to finding love to the point where they become desperate. The motions that some of the characters in The Lobster go through to find a partner is an obvious not-so subtle comment on the idea of speed dating which, in my opinion, is rooted in desperation on some small level. I understand the purpose behind speed dating but the idea that strangers are essentially rushed to meet each other under the setting of a date is a little weird to me (no offense to anyone who found a lasting relationship through speed dating. I certainly don't want to downplay the positive aspects that can come from it).

I imagine some fans of Dogtooth & Alps are worried about Yorgos Lanthimos making the transition to English-language cinema as it may compromise his style or just not "work" in the vein of Wong Kar Wai's My Blueberry Nights or Park Chan Wook's Stoker (I know those films have their fanbases but at the end of the day they were pretty disappointing when compared to the films that came before them). I had my own reservations. John C Reilly's presence worried me because he's starting to become a doofy caricature of himself more & more which can distract from a film (there were definitely shades of that in The Lobster but Reilly was tolerable overall). But rest assured that Lanthimos' dry semi-surreal fucked up humor is all over The Lobster. In one scene we see a donkey get shot in the head execution style and we're supposed to find it funny. In another scene David/Farrell kicks a little girl in the shin. And like with all of his films, there's plenty of goofy/awkward dancing (I'm still not certain if Yorgos played up his particular style a little bit now that he has a larger audience).

I asked Yorgos Lanthimos if he looked at The Lobster as an extension of Alps (I feel like both stories exist in the same cinematic universe). While he doesn't share my spectrum-brained fascination with connecting every movie in existence, he did acknowledge that there are quite a few similarities between both films. With The Lobster Lanthinos continues to explore themes concerning identity (Alps) and the false meanings we sometimes put on things (Dogtooth). Dogtooth & Alps fans should also find comfort in the fact that Yorgos regulars Ariane Labed & Angeliki Papoulia shine in their supporting roles (not to take anything away from Farrell, Weisz & Ben Winshaw as they all give solid performances as well).

This feels like is a natural progression for Yorgos Lanthimos. No matter how many similarities there are to his previous work, he's still trying his hand at a completely new genre (science fiction) and exploring new ways to tell a story (this is his first film to use both voiceover narration and a traditional film score). And for an Orwellian science fiction film, I though it was cool that he embraced nature instead of storm troopers, claustrophobic settings & pretentious-looking modern architecture (basically...he didn't try to copy Terry Gilliam's Brazil like so many others have in the past).

The Lobster may not be for everyone but if you're a fan of the aforementioned films like Dogtooth & Alps (along with obscure Monty Python sketches or Rick Alverson's The Comedy), want to see Colin Farrell step outside of his comfort zone, and appreciate dark & subtly quirky humor - then I highly recommend this.

UNCLE JOHN (CutPrintFilm.COM)

I had the pleasure of watching & reviewing Steven Piet's feature film debut; Uncle John for cutprintfilm.
Check out the review when you have a moment and support this film if it's playing at a theater near you...

enjoy (click picture to go to review)

AMY

Amy Winehouse is probably the last (good) pop artist to have a connection with (good) hip-hop music, so this documentary did kind of strike a chord in me (some might make a case for Justin Timberlake or Joss Stone, but not me). I became a fan of Winehouse after listening to her album “Frank” which used some of the same samples & beats as Nas’ God Son album (both artists worked with producer Salaam Remi)…

While collaborations/relationships between Christina Agiulera & Redman or Justin Beiber & Lil Wayne seemed a little forced, Amy Winehouse’s relationships with the likes of Nas (who was strangely not present in this documentary), Mos Def and a pre-Jimmy Fallon Roots seemed a little more organic (side note – anyone find it strange that The Roots played the fictitious talk show house band in Spike Lee’s Bamboozled then ended up being the real house band for Jimmy Fallon’s talk show exactly a decade later?). Sure, Mos Def & The Roots aren't my all-time personal favorite artists (I haven’t loved a Roots album since Things Fall Apart) but they still have an authenticity that a lot of hip-hop artists (on a large platform) don’t.

And lets be honest – any pop singer/non hip-hop artist that wants to prove they’re “down” with rap music or hip-hop culture always loves to namedrop post-’99 Outkast Andre 3000 or Busta Rhymes (no disrespect to either artist but those guys and their personas are a bit “safe” to site). 

Although troubled, for reasons that this documentary delves in to, Amy Winehouse seemed like a pretty authentic person (bratty, self-destructive & complicated too) so it makes sense that she would align herself with other authentic artists even if they were outside her genre.

While Amy isn't exactly a “groundbreaking” documentary in the vein of Stories We Tell, Pina, Leviathan or The Act Of Killing (a few recent films I personally feel are keeping theatrical documentaries alive) it still isn't formatted like a boring/run of the mill music documentary that’s 50% interviews/50% concert footage. A large majority of the film is made up of archival footage took by family & close friends, personal pictures, old audio recordings and even old answering machine messages left by Amy (style-wise Amy is similar to recent documentaries like Black Power Mixtape or Soderbergh’s And Everything Is Going Fine). What I appreciated most about Amy is that we actually saw her love of (all) music (filmmakers often forget to focus on what makes a musician stop wanting to be just a fan and become a contributor).
Director Asif Kapadia also made it a point to focus on the music (sonically, Amy sounded like a music engineer worked on the film). You wouldn’t think from watching the trailer but even though this is an incredibly intimate film, it's still very much a “big” theatrical experience (not saying it cant be enjoyed on a laptop or phone, but seeing this big makes it worthwhile).

Before her untimely death, Amy Winehouse was making unsavory headlines for a good five years. If you spent a semi-decent amount of time on social media or just reading a newspaper, you’d know this even if you didn’t listen to her music. Asif doesn’t spend a good part of his movie shining a spotlight on that aspect of her life (although there are certainly a few montage sequences that chronicle her tabloid escapades). Instead he focused more on her demons and, more importantly, where they came from. Her story isn't that much different from a Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin or Kurt Cobain. The tortured/troubled artist isn't anything new. But very few films delve deep in to the root of the problem (even a great film like Last Days doesn’t get too deep in to the “who/what/when/why” of Kurt Cobain’s depression). And, like a lot of tortured/troubled folks, the root of Amy’s problem, in my opinion, were her mother & father. Amy does not paint the most flattering picture of her dad. In the first half of the film he’s made out to be this emotionally unavailable part-time dad and in the second half he comes off like this opportunistic enabler. Obviously editing went in to how he was portrayed but there’s enough factual evidence (documentary or not) that makes it hard to not give him a side eye. I mean really – if your daughter damn near overdoses and requires numerous interventions, why would you continue to push her to perform (…make money) instead of going to rehab? And I know some folks might roll their eyes at the age-old exploration of the relationship between the unavailable dad and the insecure daughter, but the father/daughter relationship is an important & complicated one that I imagine goes deeper than most films have dared to go. I don’t want to use this review to bash Amy Winehouse’s father, but I’m almost certain anyone who sees this will come out judging him in the end.


128 minutes is a nice chunk of time to dedicate to any movie, let alone Amy Winehouse, so there is a level of dedication you need in order to sit through this, but the payoff is certainly worth it. Amy does carry some of the intimacy of a documentary like Stories We Tell and Asif manages to fit an entire life in to one film without really skipping much (no matter how short-lived Amy Winehouse’s life was, that’s still a difficult task).

THE CINEMA OF BRUNO DUMONT TOLD THROUGH IMAGES & STILLS

You can never just enjoy a Bruno Dumont film. There's always some level of struggle or frustration that comes along with the viewing process. I've never heard anyone refer to his movies as "ok" or "pretty good". His stuff is usually considered terrible or masterful. There is no middle ground. You either love Bruno Dumont or you hate him. Even I'm a big fan of his work and there's still a few films that really frustrate the hell out of me (Flanders & Hadewijch).

But that's what I love about him. Bruno Dumont always leaves me feeling intrigued, pleasantly confused & wanting to talk about cinema with my friends (Camille Claudel, 1915, Hors Satan & L'il Quinquin are some of my personal favorites of the decade so far).

While the images in this article certainly represent the cinema of Bruno Dumont, I highly suggest checking out my individual reviews of his films to gain an even better understanding of his work.

L'il Quinquin

Camille Claudel, 1915

Hors Satan

Humanite 

THE HOLY SPIRIT

From the titles of his films and how they’re promoted (The Life Of Jesus & Hors Satan) to all the shots of his characters praying on bended knee (Camille Claudel, 1915, Hors Satan & Hadewijch) – it’s clear Dumont's relationship with God goes deeper than simple fascination (although Dumont claims to be an atheist, I don't think you can make the kinds of films he does and not have some kind of relationship with God). 

We often see his characters take the form of Jesus on the cross (L'il Quinquin & Hors Satan) or struggle with some kind of torturous relationship with Christianity or Catholicism (Hadewijch & Hors Satan).

Both Camille Claudel's brother and Celine (Hadewijch) truly believe they have a personal relationship with God when in reality they're both a little disturbed.

In Hors Satan we follow a mysterious drifter who takes up residence in a small French town. In the first half of the film he helps out a young girl that's being abused by her father (we never actually see the abuse but we're lead to believe that's what's going on). Later on he heals a young bedridden girl who appears to be possessed (he even starts to gain "disciples" at one point in the film).

Camille Claudel, 1915

Camille Claudel, 1915

Camille Claudel, 1915

Hadewijch

Hadewijch

Hadewijch

Hadewijch

Hors Satan

Life Of Jesus

L'il Quinquin

Lil Quinquin

Slack Bay

Jeannette, The Childhood Of Joan Of Arc

LONELINESS, DEPRESSION & DESPAIR

Camille Claudel, 1915 is probably the best example of Dumont’s exploration of depression as the film just oozes with sadness (it's also based on true events). It’s the perfect movie to watch for people who don't get depression or have the wrong idea about what it is (personally, I feel Dumont doesn’t get enough credit for exploring the triggers behind depression). 

But loneliness, isolation & despair are prevalent throughout his entire filmography...

In Humainte our lead character Pharaon struggles with the loss of his wife & daughter. In Flanders Dumont explores the post traumatic stress of war. Our Bonnie & Clyde-like protagonists in The The Twentynine Palms are loyal to each another but at the same time all they do is fight and have aggressive sex which is an indication of some form of unhappiness.

Camille Claudel, 1915

Camille Claudel, 1915

Hadewijch

Hors Satan

Twentynine Palms

Humanite

Humanite

Life Of Jesus

RECURRING SHOT: "DOWN BY THE WATER"

Another example of Dumont’s religious fascination comes in the form of baptism scenes, both literally (Hadewijch & Hors Satan) and metaphorically (Humanite)...

Hors Satan

Hors Satan

Humanite

L'il Quinquin

Twentynine Palms

Hadewijch

Slack Bay

Jeannette

Hadewijch

RECURRING SHOT: A WARM EMBRACE

Flanders

Hors Satan

Hors Satan

Humanite

Hors Satan

Life Of Jesus

L'il Quinquin

Humanite

Twentynine Palms

Slack Bay

RECURRING SETTING: RURAL FRANCE 

Flanders

Hadewijch

Hors Satan

Humanite

L'il Quinquin

Jeannette

Slack Bay

RECURRING SHOT: THE DUMONT GLARE

Flanders

L'il Quinquin

Camille Claudel, 1915

Hors Satan

Slack Bay

Twentynine Palms

Flanders

Hadewijch

Hors Satan

INFLUENCES & INSPIRATIONS 

I don't know if I'm capable of writing about an early Bruno Dumont film without mentioning Robert Bresson (at one point in his career Dumont was nicknamed “the artistic heir to Bresson”). 

It goes without saying that most filmmakers are influenced by each other, but in the case of modern European arthouse filmmakers like Bertrand Bonello, Eugene Green, Miguel Gomes, Manoel De Oliviero and Bruno Dumont, the Bresson influence is so strong that you have to mention it. The dry tone and cinematography within Camille Claudel & Hors Satan contains shades of L’argent & The Devil Probably (with a touch of Maurice Pialat's Under The Sun Of Satan). The nuns in Hadewijch & Camille Claudel come right out of Diary Of Country Priest.

But legends like Tarkovsky & Dreyer rubbed off on Dumont as well. When reading up on Hors Satan (from blogs to legitimate reviews written by critics I respect) Dreyer's name kept coming up. This makes sense as Hors Satan deals with faith, religion and the presence of God just like Dreyer's work (one key scene in the Hors Satan involves a character being brought back to life after they've been pronounced dead like in Ordet). 

Dumont also branches out to non-cinematic sources for inspiration. The scene of the cow being airlifted at the beginning of L'il Quinquin looks like a Salvador Dali painting come to life while the murder scene from Humainte was clearly influenced by the work of Marcel Duchamps…

Humanite

Hors Satan

Hors Satan

Hors Satan

L'il Quinquin

L'il Quinquin

L'Argent/Slack Bay 

Sonatine / L'Humanite

Zabriski Point / Twentynine Palms

Blissfully Yours / Hadweijch

8-1/2 / Slack Bay

Clean, Shaven / L'Humanite

Susanna / Camille Claudel, 1915

Daughters Of The Dust / Slack Bay

The Fall / Li'l Quinquin

Ordet / Jeannette

The Exorcist /
Jeannette

The Devils /
Jeannette

The Passion Of Joan Of Arc / Jeannette

Un Chien Andalou / L'Humanite

The 400 Blows / L'Humanite

Jeanne Dielman /
Flandres

JEAN EPSTEIN'S (POSSIBLE) INFLUENCE

While Dumont's work has many similarities to Bresson, I rarely hear folks mention the (possible) influence of Jean Epstein...

The Fall Of The House Of Usher / Flanders

Mauprat / Flanders

the same could be said about Dreyer...

DREYER'S INFLUENCE

RANDOM ACTS OF VIOLENCE/THE NEW FRENCH EXTREMITY

Bruno Dumont was a varsity letterman of the New French Extremity movement during the late 90’s/early 00’s so you can always expect isolated moments of murder & violence.
He also has a fascination with rape and/or rough unsensual sex. Dumont crafts these scenes of men ramming themselves inside of women (almost as if they're stabbing with their penis). In Twentynine Palms we see both main characters attacked & raped by a gang of thugs (preceded by scenes of hard pounding & face fucking between the two lovers in the film). In Humanite not only does the film center around the rape & murder of a young girl, but all the sex scenes are rough and difficult to watch. In The Life Of Jesus a gang of boys sexually assault a young woman and the last third of Hors Satan focuses on the rape & murderer of another young girl.

Hors Satan

L'il Quinquin

Flanders 

Twentynine Palms

Twentynine Palms 

Life Of Jesus

Slack Bay

NON-PROFESSIONAL ACTORS

Bruno Dumont often casts inexperienced actors with some type of physical disability or awkward mannerism/facial "imperfection" that you almost can't help but notice and, depending on how vein you are, possibly snicker at or comment on. Casting homely-looking lead actors is clearly Dumont challenging the viewer's perception of what beauty is on the big screen. 

In Camille Claudel, 1915 Dumont used actors with real physical and/or developmental disabilities.
The female co-lead in Humainte is often referred to as “overweight” and her figure is sometimes talked about more than the actual movie. 

The co-lead in L'il Quinquin has a hair lip and Dumont doesn't shy away from shooting nonstop close-ups of his face. Sure Stacey Keech, Joaquin Phoenix & Michael Kenneth Williams paved the way for mainstream actors with facial disfigurements, but for every one of them there's a hundred Chris Pines, Chris Hemsworths & Paul Walkers (the other co-lead in Quinquin has uncontrollable non-stop facial ticks as well).

L'il Quinquin

L'il Quinquin

Humanite

Humanite

Camille Claudel, 1915

Flanders

Hors Satan

Twentynine Palms

SEX & THE NAKED BODY

No one is ever really naked for the sake of being naked in his movies (there’s a nude in scene in Hadewijch that might be the one exception). When someone is nude in the world of Bruno Dumont its because they’re about to have sex or they just finished having sex (Twentynine Palms, Hors Satan, The Life Of Jesus, Humanite or Flanders). 

When his camera focuses on a man’s lower body, it’s not to show us his well maintained physique, but to indicate that his female character is looking directly at his bulge (Humanite). 

Dumont almost always casts these R. Crumb physiqued women (Flanders, Humanite & L’il Quinquin) so he can highlight the large natural breasts, butts & hips.
And again – there’s almost never anything sensual or erotic about the sex in his movies. It’s usually rough (Humanite), incredibly rough (Twentynine Palms) or ridiculously rough to point where I have to look away in disgust (Hors Satan).

Life Of Jesus

Humanite

Humanite

Humanite

Twentynine Palms

Twentynine Palms

Flanders

Hors Satan

YOUTH

Young people in Bruno Dumont’s films often find themselves in over their heads. I wouldn’t say he portrays children in the most realistic way (they are sort of caricatures on some level) but he doesn’t rely on their “cuteness” in the way so many other filmmakers do (he isn't afraid to place kids in dangerous & uncomfortable situations). With Hadewijch we see a young character taking on religious responsibilities that so-called god-fearing church-going folks wouldn't want. The kids in L’il Quinquin don’t seem to be scared that a serial killer is on the loose but rather curious. The youngsters in Life Of Jesus seem to be jaded yet they’re so inexperienced and have yet to really do anything important with their lives.

L'il Quinquin

Hors Satan

Hors Satan

Hadewijch

Life Of Jesus

Jeannette...

SURREALITY 

Putting aside all the dry Bresson-esque ambiance, Bruno Dumont’s movies are downright weird at times. That’s a major part of what makes his movies so unique. In the world of Bruno Dumont his characters can levitate (Humanite) and stick to walls (L’il Quinquin). In Hors Satan, some of the women in the village are plagued with an unexplained illness and require exorcisms. And often times, his characters spurt out random lines of dialogue that have nothing to do with the anything…

Hors Satan

Humanite

Lil Quinquin

Lil Quinquin

Slack Bay

STEPPING OUT OF THE COMFORT ZONE

Although films like Humanite, Flanders & Hors Satan truly define the cinema of Bruno Dumont, he’s still not afraid to step outside of that Bresson-influenced comfort zone of religious symbolism, non-professional actors & monotone/deadpan dialogue. In films like Camille Claudel, 1915 & Twentynine Palms he collaborated with professional/established actors like Juliette Binoche & Katerina Golubeva.
And most recently he branched off in to the (dark) comedy genre for the first time with L'il Quinquin where for the first time it was ok to laugh at the people in his movies…

Twentynine Palms

Camille Claudel, 1915

Lil Quinquin