SCORSESE MADE ME DO IT

 

The regulars over at The Pink Smoke got together to share some of their favorite Scorsese-recommended films. 

Click here or the image above to go to the article.

Enjoy.

THE SOUVENIR PART II

The absolute best thing about The Souvenir II is how Joanna Hogg managed to do the multi-layered meta storytelling thing without falling in to the trap of being overly “quirky”. This isn’t a 2-hour long music video with inside references. I don’t mean to take down other filmmakers in order to prop up stuff that I like but so often there’s this urge to add a heavy layer of fantastical dreamy quirkiness to deeply personal semi-autobiographical stories. This is just a personal thing. Some people like it. I don’t. A recent example of this would be Charles Kaufman’s I’m Thinking Of Ending Things. Actually, a lot of stuff related to Charles Kaufman fits in to what I’m talking about. From Adaptation to Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (I enjoyed these Kaufman-scripted movies when I was in my early 20’s but now that I’ve reached my 40’s, I’ve sort’ve grown out of them).
Without being too pretentious or eye rollingly personal, Hogg pulls off the task of making a film about a younger version of herself in a mostly realistic way. There are some isolated abstract moments, but at the end of the day this movie is grounded in reality.

The Souvenir II’s entire existence almost goes against a very poignant exchange that takes place towards the end of the film:


Patrick: Did you avoid the temptation to be obvious?

Julie: I think so.

Patrick: That’s all you can hope for, isn’t it?

I bring this exchange up because the movie is so obviously about Joanna Hogg (right down the protagonist having a similar name and the exact same initials as Joanna Hogg) yet there is this theme of not being too obvious as a filmmaker which makes for an interesting contrast. But perhaps that’s part of it all. Another layer of personal contradictory inside references stuffed in to the “cinematic universe” of the Souvenir (by the way - I’ve been using the term “cinematic universe” long before the marvel stuff took off). 

I actually wouldn’t mind seeing a third Souvenir story. These movies are so incredibly niche but they absolutely deliver for their niche audience…

While you should see the first entry in order to get the backstory of the latest, you could blindly watch the sequel and it still stands on it’s own. We pick up right where the first part left off and we follow Honor Swinton’s “Julie Hart” as she combines her grief from the events in the film first with her final student film.
A lot of the shots in The Souvenir II take place on a movie set which puts an emphasis on what I was talking about earlier. We see “Julia” (…Joanna) directing a film about herself which means we’re really watching Joanna Hogg direct a fictional version of herself directing a fictional version of her movie-self. It’s a breath of fresh air to see someone be incredibly open & personal without hiding behind that mixture of comically dramatic quirkiness I spoke of earlier (I’m sorry for using that word quirky so much but as soon as other filmmakers stop relying on it so much I’ll stop using it).

Another highlight of The Souvenir II is Richard Ayoade’s supporting performance as “Patrick”. It’s almost like Joanna Hogg went out of her way to please us folks who wanted more from his character after the first movie. It’ll probably go slightly unnoticed & under the radar but Richard Ayoade’s performance is one of the best supporting roles I’ve seen in years. For the folks that wanted more than just his one (brilliant) scene in the first film, your prayers have been answered.

Hogg also does the Olivier Assayas “thing” of making wealthy/privileged people seem interesting & fascinating. Dare I say she does it even better than Assayas?

At times, Hogg's latest feature feels like a love letter to UK cinema (which makes sense considering this is a movie about making movies). Some of the dialogue in the film directly addresses a lot of the basic stereotypes that come along with films set in the UK (rainy dreary kitchen sink settings) and Julie’s student film within the film comes off like an homage to both Derek Jarman & Terence Davies (Jarman-regular Tilda Swinton’s presence in The Souvenir II adds an additional layer to this).


This was the first movie-going experience I’ve had since February 2020 so it’s nice that my return to the movie theater ended up being the best thing I’ve seen I all year.

THE BEST INDEPENDENT FILM YOU'VE (PROBABLY) NEVER HEARD OF: MY CONVERSATION WITH WENDELL B HARRIS FOR ALTA JOURNAL

 

I got the chance to chat with Wendell B Harris Jr. about CHAMELEON STREET, the Black Star album, CATCH ME IF YOU CAN, his random appearance in Todd Phillips’ ROAD TRIP & more…

This convo was the culmination of a personal 23 year journey that started for me back in High School.

Click here or the image above to go to the interview...

RECENT PODCAST APPEARANCES

 Just a quick update...

I made some recent podcast appearances talking about two of my favorite things: Claire Denis & LL Cool J

Check me out on the latest episode of Shoot The Piano Player where we talk about Claire Denis' White Material.

Click the image below to go to the episode...

Also make sure to listen to my return to the Call Out Culture podcast where we delve in to the career of the legendary LL Cool J...

Click the image below to go to the episode...

TITANE - A LOVE LETTER TO DAVID CRONENBERG

David Cronenberg is a major influence in my life - Julia Ducournau, filmisnow.com

Crash  / 
Titane

This isn’t a review or a critique of Julia Docournou’s Titane. While there’s certainly lots of misunderstood reviews and think-pieces out there, you can still find some solid reviews on the film if you look hard enough. Titane is something that touches on everything from auto-eroticism & body transformation to childhood trauma & the idea of family. There’s a lot going on and a lot to write about and plenty to decipher. I just don’t think there’s any point to add yet another “review” or opinion on this heavily talked about film. I would like it to be known that I really am fascinated by this film...

My specific fascination with Titane concerns Ducournau‘s love of David Cronenberg and the imprint he has on her work.

*THIS CONTAINS HEAVY VISUAL SPOILERS SO IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN TITANE YET - DO NOT KEEP READING*

It’s no mystery that Titane is heavily influenced by David Cronenberg’s Crash. That was the big selling point coming out of it’s Cannes debut. Outside of both films being about intense auto-eroticism, Julia Ducournau has admitted to the influence herself…

I prefer the term ‘mutation’ inherited from Cronenberg - Julia Docournou

Crash  / 
Titane

Crash  / 
Titane

Crash  / 
Titane

Crash  / 
Titane

The biggest Crash homage is the opening sequence. It’s not so much that both films essentially start with intense car wrecks. It’s the immediate cut to the operating table in both Titane & Crash that makes the connection stronger…

Crash  / 
Titane

But the Crash influence is just one layer. I’d go so far to say that it’s almost surface. Cronenberg’s DNA is all over Titane. Not just Crash.
In fact - Cronenberg has influenced Julia Ducournau l since day one…

David Cronenberg is a major influence in my life. I discovered his films when I was a teenager - Julia Ducournau, focusfeatures.com

Faith Healer / 
Raw

The Fly / 
Junior

It should also be mentioned that Titane co-star (and veteran filmmaker) Bertrand Bonello also has some light ties to Cronenberg as well.
In On War, Mathieu Amalric (who plays a character name “Bertrand”) watches eXistenZ in one scene…

eXistenZ in Bonello's On War

Throughout the film I caught imagery from Cronenberg’s early (and almost never talked about) stuff like Fast Company…

Fast Company / 
Titane

...to M Butterfly in terms of transformed gender roles. Vincent Lindon’s obliviousness (…denial?) to the true identity of Adrien in Titane is quite similar to Jeremy Irons’ mindstate  in M Butterfly

M Butterfly / 
Titane

Then there’s his more well know films which seemed to have rubbed off in various ways…

Scanners / 
Titane

Dead Ringers / 
Titane

A History Of Violence / 
Titane

Dead Ringers / 
Titane

The Fly / 
Titane

Eastern Promises  / 
Titane

The Brood /  Titane

The Fly / 
Titane

The Fly / 
Titane

Maps To The Stars / 
Titane

Cosmopolis/ 
Titane

Shivers / 
Titane

Shivers / 
Titane

Dead Ringers / 
Titane

A History Of Violence / 
Titane

The Dead Zone / 
Titane

Shivers / 
Titane

At times Titane comes off like a slight reworking of Cronenberg’s Rabid more than Crash. Not only do both films begin with an auto accident that quickly transitions to the operating table (something brought to my attention by Martin Kessler), but the basic plot of the attractive woman that becomes a serial killer post-auto accident is basically the plot of Titane…

Rabid / 
Titane

Rabid / 
Titane

Rabid / 
Titane

A major positive of Titane (besides the fact that it exists) is that it got me to go back and think about how films like Fast Company & Rabid planted the seeds for Cronenberg’s fascination with the story of Crash (in addition to his obvious overall fascination with body transformation).

THE MOVIES THAT DEFINE NEW YORK - PART 2

 

I made a guest appearance in the latest Wrong Reel short; Movies That Define New York.

Click the image above (or here) to see myself, Bill Scurry, Bill Teck, Dan Pullen, Adam Rackoff, James Hancock and Moose Matson talk about some of our favorite New York-based films.

THE BLOOD ORANGES (SPECIAL GUEST BLOGGER NATHANIEL DRAKE CARLSON)

Philip Haas's adaptation of John Hawkes' novel is likely the least celebrated of his 90's era literary adaptations. Both The Music of Chance and especially Angels & Insects garner far more praise and attention. But as much as I respect and respond to both of those this one seems to me an even greater achievement. Its lack of notoriety I attribute mostly to a lack of presence/distribution and an excessive concentration by many of those who have seen it upon what is perceived to be its more risible elements (such as much of Charles Dance's dialogue). But this misses what is remarkable about the picture.

Set in the idyllic splendor of rural, coastal Mexico it's an extended consideration of and elaboration upon the notion of a self created and sustained idea of paradise, of utopia. As such its location in what is otherwise an impoverished area provides some ironic inflection for the privileged characters whose vision this is. Charles Dance and Sheryl Lee portray a married couple extolling the virtues of sexual freedom and open relationships (the movie is pointedly set in 1970 whereas the book is far more oblique in regards to both setting and time period--it really is of the mind's eye there). Into their lives comes another couple who are less uninhibited and must be made to see the merits of such a lifestyle and worldview. Tragic events do follow but they are by no means schematically attributed to any clear cut moral deficiency. It's a subdued tangle of mixed motives and perspectives set against a landscape of heightened expression, resulting in actions that can be understood in a variety of different ways. The "story" could not be simpler on a superficial level but it's the richness of the themes and subtext that are grasped as though on the periphery of vision which leave such a lingering sense of fulfillment. Haas's overall aesthetic is also a fitting complement to the material, amping up all the inherent implications of the romanticizing and exoticizing inclinations of his characters. The story is told out of sequence, in a way that gives appropriate but subtle emphasis to each vignette or scene, and employs an effective series of fade to orange or red transitions straight out of the cinema of someone like Roeg. All of this, meanwhile, is accompanied by a deeply evocative Angelo Badalamenti score.


Though the film was released in 1997 it often really does seem like an artifact from another era altogether, another world even, in which its very particular and pronounced sexual politics might be more acceptable. It may be, however, that an incapacity to read style and understand stylistic expression could form another impediment to an appreciation of the film. There is indeed much in the dialogue alone which exemplifies this (such as Cyril describing himself as a "sex-singer"). But part of the specific difficulty here has to do with the adaptation of a text which is defiantly lyrical in its language and symbolic into cinematic imagery that is inevitably unyielding and literal.

 

I've loved this film since I first saw it when it was initially released on home video but I only finally read the book a few years ago. That was a singular experience for me as I will confess that I regard the book as "better" than the film but this means little since I regard the book as among the very finest pieces of fiction I've ever encountered, almost even a validation of fiction as extreme as that may sound. It's an astonishingly sustained treatment of the comprehensive, all encompassing lyric vision that opens up much further and goes deeper than the film. It also goes far beyond the film's most clearly suggested themes of emphasis upon the controlling power of the narcissistic individual ego. Many critics still like to point that out (as Roger Sale famously said, "There is cruelty here that, because unadmitted, is not even palliated by the relish of sadism.") but as far as I'm concerned part of the book's breathtaking accomplishment is that such critiques are noted ironically within and yet ultimately made to seem minor, inconsequential (much of this has to do with Hawkes' own view on his work vs. what critics just assumed he must be doing). I had a conversation shortly after I read it with a professor of literature who had written a piece comparing the book to the film. He came away very dissatisfied with the film unsurprisingly. And though his arguments are very good, convincing ones they simply fail to give the film credit for what it does do--which is aim for what it can that's within its grasp, the grasp of what cinema can do, and accomplish that with excellence. The true test was in returning to the film after all this, which I did and was relieved and somewhat amazed to discover how well it held up to that kind of scrutiny, the most penetrating kind I can imagine.

- Nathaniel Drake Carlson

A FEW WORDS ON CANDYMAN (2021)

A few weeks ago critic/pundit Angelica Jade caught some momentary flack online for her harsh (yet honest) review of Nia Dicosta’s Candyman. Not that she shouldn’t have gotten pushback. The review is written to invite dialogue and some pushback. But it’s as if she was expected to blindly like the movie just because she’s Black. Having finally watched Candyman myself, I can say that she was pretty on point (read the review here).

I understand that Jade can be harsh at times and the “let people enjoy things” crowd can get easily triggered by people like her. But, in my personal opinion, thoughts like hers are needed with films like this. Anyone can & should have an opinion on anything they want. But who better to critique something like Candyman with a fine tooth comb than a prominent & vocal Black critic?
I know folks were rooting for this movie (and it’s still a success at the end of the day) but I did find it funny that a Black a person’s negative opinion about a film concerning deep Black issues was challenged in a somewhat immature way by non-Black people (mostly White if we’re being specific). It’s that pretentious neo-liberalism that feels like an overbearing cancer sometimes. Don’t you find it odd that the same people who cry about representation and having more Black voices gets mad at an actual (well thought out) Black voice when they don’t “fall in line”? I certainly find it odd…
Some folks have even gone so far as to call Angelica Jade the “female Armond White”. For those of you that are unfamiliar, Armond White is a very smart film critic notorious of being extra critical towards predominantly Black movies & shows (history only proves this. Look it up). I do find this label a little unfair because nowadays (and for quite some time) White’s entire personality is mostly based around being a Black conservative because now more than ever, Black conservatives love to make that conservative identity their armor in an effort to separate themselves from the pack. Today’s Black conservatives get off on being so-called “free thinkers” yet they support the same people, have the same talking points and kind of all think alike. Weird how that works out, huh?
That’s not to say Black folks on the opposite end of the political spectrum are free thinkers either. But when it comes to today’s Black conservatives they really think they’re something special when they truly aren’t. They just aren’t.
Angelica Jade isn’t really part of that crowd as far as I’m concerned.

Anyway…

I didn’t hate Candyman, but it seems like now more than ever movies (and TV shows) with Black leads exploring Black stories are being made to please folks on social media and, quite frankly, people that aren’t even Black. We’re at a point where a form of research for a movie is just scrolling social media to get ideas (see: Zola). While I don’t make it a part of my personality or wear it on a t-shirt for fake clout, I’ve been the victim of racism, police discrimination, and fetishy romanticization simply because I’m a (large) Black man. I don’t always need a movie to reinforce these things on a surface level. I already live it in real life.

Now…in no way should the atrocities & injustices committed against folks that look like me be swept under the rug or downplayed, but at the same time, Jesus Christ - Black characters can be defined by things other than trauma and drama and pain and other things that have become a moneymaking scheme by movie & television studios.

It’s like there’s an unspoken checklist of things to have in every popular Black movie/show in order for it to succeed or be taken seriously. It’s all so surface & cheap. Shows like Them, certain specific elements of Lovecraft Country, the Watchmen series on HBO, The First Purge, etc etc etc. 

Honestly - I slowly started to give up on Lovecraft when they made Emmet Till a “fun little Easter egg” on the show. I call bullshit. Emmet Till is more than a Easter egg/bookmark in a silly science fiction story. He was a child that was brutally murdered. But “blue check” twitter and the “I am not my ancestors” sector of Black folks thinks shit like that is cute & witty. It isn’t.

And does almost everything horror and/or thriller-related have to be some subpar reworking of Get Out (a movie I like but I don’t even like to admit I like nowadays because the majority of the fanbase behind it is so cringy and don’t even realize they’re the demographic being made fun of and criticized in Get Out)?


I guess one positive of Candyman is that it does make nods to classic films that came before it.

Cinderella / Candyman

Cinderella /
 Candyman

Cinderella /
 Candyman

Bram Stoker's Dracula /
 Candyman

Nosferatu / Candyman

Nosferatu / Candyman

Psycho / Candyman

There's even a possible reference to Jordan Peele's work...

US /
Candyman

This is totally speculative on my part but the idea of the haunted artwork on film, which we saw not too long ago in Velvet Buzzsaw, can be traced back to the early silent film The Portrait...

The Portrait /
Candyman

The Portrait /
Candyman

But a few cute references ain’t enough. Not even for me and that’s my “thing”…


I commend Dacosta for trying to correct certain elements of the original Candyman that didn’t sit well with some of us (the ghost of a slave murdered by white people that terrorizes other Black people is a tad bit wonky). I don’t want to give too much away or spoil anything but the big reveal towards the end is one big huge “wait - huh?” moment.
I do encourage you all to see the movie to come up with your own conclusion. It does need to be seen in order to truly grasp how much of an overall misfire it is.
And outside of the continued trend of making Black pain, Black trauma and serious internal Black issues a money-making genre, Candyman was just kind of bland, boring and messy.

I do want filmmakers like Nia Dacosta to succeed and thrive (we need more & more mainstream big budget/blockbuster directors that are Black as far as I’m concerned). But I also think we need to be more critical and expect more from certain films (and tv) that claim to “represent” Black people and their/our stories.
I’m not going to blindly like/support something just because I’m Black and it’s Black. It kind of feels like that’s the expectation these days (this is essentially how Tyler Perry got to where he is today and some folks still don’t see that they got played by him).