Breathless (1960)

When I feel a bit less inspired I try and find films that inspire me, and that sometimes means going back.  Breathless by Jean Luc Godard is one of those films.  I did see it while in film school, but I've grown to admire it more and more, and after seeing it again the movie reverberates through me in what good cinema is.    For those who cannot get over Godard's style I understand that it may not be your cup of tea, but Godard is one of the more innovative directors of the era then most.  In each film he pushes cinema a bit further in what he thinks it should be.  Sometimes it's entertainment, but most times there is a message.  In a way it's a feeling, a response he wants to get out of his audience, and Breathless certainly does that.  From its cinematography to its editing the film has a feeling of restlessness.  Even in the sequences where the characters talk about nothing in particular.  To Godard these scenes are important, and it contributes to the films feel.  Before Breathless films were studio driven, and more fantasy.  Godard puts some reality into his films through conversations and actions of his characters.  Godard gives the film a reality bent like today's reality TV, and this is way before reality TV even started.

The documentary feel feels real.  The disjointedness of the editing seems real.  It's what gives Breathless that feeling of  which separates it from other films.  Breathless is a tribute to old American film noir films where the characters and story line are not going to wind up happily ever-after.  Breathless really works with that as the main character (Michel) talks about doom, and his death.

I have to say that I was a bit more impressed by the production, and it still held up for me.  I was fascinated with a 23 minute sequence in a cramped apartment where Michelle and Patricia talk.  It has 64 cuts in that sequence, and by doing so Godard gives us the audience a feeling of things closing in. Yet all it is is a conversation of Michel trying to sleep again with Patricia.  The way Godard cuts it and shoots the film gives you a certain feeling.  Something is coming, and something bad.  Michelle's downfall is also Patricia, and it is ironic that the girl he has feelings for is the one who betrays him.  Of course this is one of the formulas of the film noir called the femme fa tale.

The film really holds up, and dare I say it is a classic.  What inspires me most is that these films that were considered part of the new wave were done by friends, and lovers of cinema.  It was an attempt to wrestle movie making away from the studios.  Technology allowed the portability of the camera to come out from the studio walls and bring a more real feel to cinema.  Maybe that's where I see or have hope for the future.

With technology changing again, and more and more people having access to the tools to create movies and get them seen maybe there's another renaissance in cinema to come.  That's what excites me, and looking back at these classics inspires me.

Iron Man 3

It's getting to be summer season, and summer movies have always been fun and roller coaster rides in a way.  I was a fan of the first two, and was interested in the third.  I also hoped that my boys would also be excited, and they were to a point.  But now after seeing it something still bothers me.  Also when I asked my boys if they liked it they said it was okay.  Right there is when I thought my vibe of the film was right.  Something was off with this one.

Was it something to do with the actors?  I can't say that was the problem.  The actors were all good.  It was more the film as a whole.  The pacing in Iron Man is off, and while watching it you do feel how off they are.  Also the story is lame.  I was a comic book fan of Ironman, and I do remember a villain by the name of "The Mandarin", but I believe it was some eastern block enemy.    I won't give any spoilers here, but the enemy here was weak.  The writers write about suicide bombers, and PTSD, and yet it doesen't work.

Tony Stark is Ironman, but he is just a man, and in the comic he was an alcoholic.  He had issues, and that's what made Ironman vulnerable at times.  If the movie tried going that way more I think it would be more interesting.  Instead they sugar coat it, and glance over Tony's problems.  What I am suggesting may be too dark.  After all this is a superhero movie targeted to the young.  That is the films mistake.  It talks down to it's audience.  The actors do a good job in the film, but they are just going through the motions.   It didn't resonate with me, and worse it didn't resonate with my boys, and they don't care about depth, and Ironman's weakness.  They wanted to see battles, and superhero deeds, and there were none.

At the end there is a battle, but it comes too late.  By the end I really didn't care.  Suddenly there are an army of Ironmen.  Cool, but couldn't that happens sooner?   When I said this out loud my dear wife looked over at me and said that there wouldn't be a movie if that would have happened. The movie would have ended just as it started.

I really wanted this movie to work, but by franchising the Marvel brand Marvel has forgotten what made their superheros so human in our eyes.   The movies don't cover that area.  They did in the beginning.  Tony Stark was a party person, and his company sold weapons.  There was a dark side that he was part of, and the duality of that was interesting.  Here it seems that after fighting aliens in the movie "The Avengers" Stark is suffering from anxiety.  Interesting dilemma  but it is never fully worked into the story, and is solved pretty quickly with some advice a boy gives him.

So yeah I have problems with it.  Everyone I talk to tells me it was too long, yet the other films were just as long or longer and I've never heard that.  The pacing is off, and all I had to do is look at my boys.  They enjoyed the battles, but they were far and few in between.

Yes I know it's PG-13 rated, but still if you can't keep an 11 year old's attention then you've lost a lot more then that 11 year old boy.  My wife even said it felt way too long.

So in the end I have to give this film a pass.  Good fodder for a movie night at home, but is the movie worth seeing in the theaters I really don't think so.  

I did not go to the 3D IMAX presentation of the film.  Our family doesn't like the 3D.  To me it's been a gimmick since it's inception, and I can't justify paying more to see a film that is sub-par.  The studios need to invest in good writers instead of bells and whistles like 3D.  Maybe they do more business that way.

I do have more hope for other summer movies, but as for Iron Man 3.  Save your money wait for Video on demand or DVD.  As for the segment after the credits.  It was also very lame, and only appealed to us Marvelites, and even then I have to say it was lame.  Come on boys you can do a lot better.

Back to the beginning....

It's been a time of reflection and re-tooling for me. Getting back to basics and picking up a few new media tools. I've been reading "Everything is Cinema: The working life of Jean-Luc Godard" by Richard Brody. I've always been fascinated and have admired the French New Wave.  To me nothing in the cinema has been as innovative as the French New Wave.  Sure there have been great films made since the New Wave, but not since that time has cinema become as innovative or as intellectualized since the New Wave.  New terminology was thought of, and new theories had been discussed and discovered.  Maybe I romanticize the era too much but I do know that time was a time of innovation, and experimentation.

It's what I'm doing or trying to do.  Just trying some new stuff, and getting a bit more schooled in new ways of doing things.  Here's an interview of Godard.

The State of Cinema

Soderbergh says a few things that are right. The distinction between cinema and movies is real, and something I always think about.

Man of Steel

Seeing this brings back the little kid in me who looked forward to summer movies.   I also want so very much to share this with my boys.  See the joy and the wonder in their eyes.  Funny how a movie can be so emotional on so many levels.

Roger Ebert 1942-2013

I was shocked to hear the other day that well known Roger Ebert lost his battle with cancer.  He had been battling the disease for some time, and even in the face of adversity he became more vocal in his passion which was the cinema.

I can remember in my youth when he and Gene Siskel were on a certain UHF channel which was hard to get in.  Back in those days you played with the TV's rabbit ears and hoped for a good signal.  I was so happy when they made it onto PBS, where the signal was a lot better.  Listening to Ebert and Siskel was like discovering new country.  My own burgeoning interest in cinema grew as I reached my teenage years and their program furthered my own love for the cinema.  Movies weren't just for entertainment.  They were art, and they said something to all of us.   Eberts love for the cinema came from his show, and his writings.  He knew good cinema and he was the first to shout from the rooftops when a particular film was good.

Even when battling cancer he could not be silenced.  I admired him, and thought he was a kindred spirit.  Ebert's love was infectious, and I am still one of those individuals who carries a torch for great cinema, and Mr Ebert was one of those who fostered that love in me.  For that I am eternally thankful for him doing so.  He helped a young boy get over adolescents and see that there was a wider world out there.  That one could carry his passion into adulthood and make it a cornerstone of his life.  Through the cinema I have found so many other things to be enthralled about, but it is from my passion for cinema that these things came from.  Roger Ebert had a hand in that.  I'm sure he has touched others in the same way, and that's an accomplishment no one can ever take.

Thank you Roger for all that you did.  You will be missed, and we who have been so influenced by your passion will try and carry on.  The world is a bit dimmer, but you will always hold a special place in our collective hearts.  God speed Mr. Ebert, and thank once again.

Jess Franco 1930-2013

Say what you want to say about Jess Franco and his films I can only say that they were some of the most original and provocative films ever made.  He pushed the envelope, and even in his 80's he continued to produce.  I feel a more in-depth blog should be devoted to him and his films, but that's for another time.  For now I will say that he will be missed and cinema has lost another icon. 

http://www.fangoria.com/new/rest-in-peace-jesus-jess-franco-1930-2013/

Rest in Peace Jess.