How sterile it is! And what a total waste of an interesting subject! These are some of the thoughts that sprang to my mind when watching Birthday Girl. And I was also wondering how come Nicole Kidman would ever lend herself to such a project without a heart, a project that feels more like one of those sensational stories on a tabloid. The script does not offer any insight into the human and the cultural conflicts, but instead relies heavily on sensations and stock of stereotypes. There is no 'live-in' feel to the setting either. It is a waste of talents on all sides.
I should have asked myself how come I had picked this film among others. And the only answer was perhaps that although I am not a fan of Nicole Kidman (despite The Hours), it was one of those titles that one remembers for no other reasons than the stars in it. And of course, these days one cannot rely on the synpnosis on the DVD. Not only they can get the minute details wrong, but they also on what the film is about.
May 26, 2009
May 25, 2009
Vicky Cristina Barcelona
I have been visiting the Esplanade library regularly ever since I landed in Singapore some four and a half years ago. I became aware from early on that there are a number of small rooms where one can rent to view a film, but never had I ever been inside or let alone to find out it is so straightforward to gain access to such facilities. The experience of yesterday afternoon took me by surprise.
I noted from my previous visits that the above film was in the state of 'on transit', so yesterday, I tried my luck to see if it was available - only to find that it is on 'restricted viewing'. When I approached the counter as instructed, it took the librarian a little while to find it on her screen, but once she located it, she asked matter-of-factly: 'so you want to watch it now?' By way of explanation, she then added that it was not allowed to take away from the library, but I could use one of the rooms to watch it - at no cost. All she asked of me was but to fill in a form to give my contact details (she didn't bother to check my documents though), and to give her 15 minutes to track down the DVD! I was thrilled.
And so I spent the next two hours there to watch the film... not that it is two hours long, but the DVD controller is rather different and I could not work out how to skip the many trailers before the the start of the film. I was lucky that the room was not as freezing as it normally was, otherwise I could have come out with a cold.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
I first heard about it when a colleague asked whether I would like to watch it in the cinema. But by the time we worked out which time that suited us, the film was off the first round of screening in Singapore! A few minutes into the film, I was glad the the failed attempt had relieved me from a possible embarrassment of watching it with a colleague whom I barely know personally.
Sure, it had got most of the Woody Allen trademarks: middle-class well-to-do people who seem to have nothing to care about but their private thoughts and or more spiritual concerns; a voice-over that has developed the the story; an (attempted) murder of passion; endless talks; slightly nerotic people who cannot stop talking; and, of course 'not much action', as a friend puts it in her blog. But that is possibly where the similarities end. It is a very different Woody Allen film, not just that
1 it was not filmed in his beloved native city, NY
2 it did not feature the director (either in person or voice-over)
but also because...
The film is about a whole different generation, the young ones in their twenties or early thirties are now the central characters, rather than say, just a side-kick for being his girlfriend(s) or objects of desire; The story is about free love - not just embodied by nearly all Woody Allen characters, but the central subject matter of the film.
But perhaps the most distinctive differences is that it feels more like a travelogue about Spain with Cosmopilitan type of stories thrown in as an appetiser to keep audience hooked, or the other way round. There is no depth in the characters, and most of the actors, except perhaps for the two Spanish speaking ones, look just like their 'normal selves', and do not give a damn to what they are playing. They are as much as a tourist and in their character roles. What is more, perhaps this is the 'annoying bit', the 'neutral' voice-over is too eager to give out all details so that we can switch off the brains and just 'enjoy the flow'. The easy listening music that plays throughout the film enhances the effect of a travelodge, which helps to make the whole watching experience rather light-hearted, and not at all thought-provoking.
A complete change of tactic in filmmaking for Woody Allen.
I noted from my previous visits that the above film was in the state of 'on transit', so yesterday, I tried my luck to see if it was available - only to find that it is on 'restricted viewing'. When I approached the counter as instructed, it took the librarian a little while to find it on her screen, but once she located it, she asked matter-of-factly: 'so you want to watch it now?' By way of explanation, she then added that it was not allowed to take away from the library, but I could use one of the rooms to watch it - at no cost. All she asked of me was but to fill in a form to give my contact details (she didn't bother to check my documents though), and to give her 15 minutes to track down the DVD! I was thrilled.
And so I spent the next two hours there to watch the film... not that it is two hours long, but the DVD controller is rather different and I could not work out how to skip the many trailers before the the start of the film. I was lucky that the room was not as freezing as it normally was, otherwise I could have come out with a cold.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
I first heard about it when a colleague asked whether I would like to watch it in the cinema. But by the time we worked out which time that suited us, the film was off the first round of screening in Singapore! A few minutes into the film, I was glad the the failed attempt had relieved me from a possible embarrassment of watching it with a colleague whom I barely know personally.
Sure, it had got most of the Woody Allen trademarks: middle-class well-to-do people who seem to have nothing to care about but their private thoughts and or more spiritual concerns; a voice-over that has developed the the story; an (attempted) murder of passion; endless talks; slightly nerotic people who cannot stop talking; and, of course 'not much action', as a friend puts it in her blog. But that is possibly where the similarities end. It is a very different Woody Allen film, not just that
1 it was not filmed in his beloved native city, NY
2 it did not feature the director (either in person or voice-over)
but also because...
The film is about a whole different generation, the young ones in their twenties or early thirties are now the central characters, rather than say, just a side-kick for being his girlfriend(s) or objects of desire; The story is about free love - not just embodied by nearly all Woody Allen characters, but the central subject matter of the film.
But perhaps the most distinctive differences is that it feels more like a travelogue about Spain with Cosmopilitan type of stories thrown in as an appetiser to keep audience hooked, or the other way round. There is no depth in the characters, and most of the actors, except perhaps for the two Spanish speaking ones, look just like their 'normal selves', and do not give a damn to what they are playing. They are as much as a tourist and in their character roles. What is more, perhaps this is the 'annoying bit', the 'neutral' voice-over is too eager to give out all details so that we can switch off the brains and just 'enjoy the flow'. The easy listening music that plays throughout the film enhances the effect of a travelodge, which helps to make the whole watching experience rather light-hearted, and not at all thought-provoking.
A complete change of tactic in filmmaking for Woody Allen.
May 22, 2009
Solas
I watched this little gem, English title: Alone, last night. At the beginning I wasn't so sure about it as the heroine seemed too one-sided and a bit of a stereotype: she was short temper, bitter and anguish all the time, whether it was at the hospital when she was given some gentle advice by her father's agreeable doctor, or in her depressingly grim flat where she was supposed to help her visiting mum to settle down between visiting hospital. She had in fact a pretty face (and we were also given a glimpse of her trimmed body many would die to have) but whenever she was in her 'second skin', the loose fitting, masculine and ugly jacket, she shrunk into a trapped animal that matched her dirty little flat: all grim, with no sign of life. When she was on her own, she drank and smoked as if it was her second nature. She was pitiful but she did not deserve our sympathy. Her mother on the other hand was like an angel trapped in an used, out of control body, who took in all the abuse from both her ungrateful daughter and her hospitalised but possessive husband. We didn't know how but gradually she turned the tiny flat, effortlessly, into a place with flowers, warmness and a place to rest. To top that all, she found time to knit for both her undeserving daughter and the doctor's new born, while she was seen quietly developing a friendship with her daughter's downstairs neighbour.
The film didn't give much on how come such a nurturing, and creative in a typical feminine way, mother would have raised such a grumpy and bored daughter, a monster like animal who allowed herself to be consumed by hatred. The only hint, which was repeated on several occasions was the alcoholic and abusive gambling father would hit his offspring whenever the wife was not an immediately available victim. But surely, one would ask, if the mother was so angelic, the relationship between mother and daughter would not have been so frosted and even hostile, and that the caring and creative nature would rub off to the daughter? OK, the mother had let the daughter down in that she had tolerated all her life such a violent husband and seemed powerless when the children were caught in the domestic violence, but why hadn't the daughter picked up something from the resourceful mother? Why the daughter ended up just like her monster father?
But if we can accept that perhaps this is life, that there are times we take after exactly the person we dislike or even hate, then we can start to appreciate the film better. To me, the best parts of the film are the relationship that developed between mother and her daughter's widower neighbour; and that between the neighbour and the daughter after the mother's departure. Both lonely though in different ways, the two elderly soon found comfort in each other's companionship and for a short period, their everyday life evolved with helping each other out in the most mundane yet comforting way as if they were old couples. The performance by Anthony who played the widower was the highlight of the film. He had an expressive face but his performance was always understated but effective. Having lived alone for a while, he developed near 'human' relationship with his dog who understood his master implicitly and would make gestures to console him, which in return gave the widower a natural outlet for his feelings, be it tenderness, excitement, disappointment, frustration or longing for the continuation of the friendship. The relationship between him, a widower and her, a virtual 'widow' was most appropriate of their age and circumstances - who after a lot of sufferings, understood that in spite of themselves, they had to accept life as it was and not to argue with it. They resigned to their obligations and 'fate' but not with too much anguish, or at least not so apparent and strong as what the younger generation, the daughter, who believed she had been done a bad deal by life and hated the whole world for it.
The efforts from the mother's side however eventually left marks on the daughter. When the widower took the first step by visiting her (having been rejected by her mother by a firm promise of any kind), the daughter took the cue to invite him in and a most unexpected but beautiful relationship was developed despite the clashes of their personalities. The last part of the film was one of the most humorous, witty and warm in cinema. Still in her helmet (for believing that she had seen all and that she was the one that had suffered the most), her throne was rounded down bit by bit by the lonely but loving, and indeed handsome widower. It was here that the character of the heroine become more convincing when a more tolerant and human side evolved in the constant fight, negotiation and renegotiation with the widower. The whole scene was shot in the widower's flat which looked warm and inviting, a great contrast to the daughter's flat before her mother's visit.
The film didn't give much on how come such a nurturing, and creative in a typical feminine way, mother would have raised such a grumpy and bored daughter, a monster like animal who allowed herself to be consumed by hatred. The only hint, which was repeated on several occasions was the alcoholic and abusive gambling father would hit his offspring whenever the wife was not an immediately available victim. But surely, one would ask, if the mother was so angelic, the relationship between mother and daughter would not have been so frosted and even hostile, and that the caring and creative nature would rub off to the daughter? OK, the mother had let the daughter down in that she had tolerated all her life such a violent husband and seemed powerless when the children were caught in the domestic violence, but why hadn't the daughter picked up something from the resourceful mother? Why the daughter ended up just like her monster father?
But if we can accept that perhaps this is life, that there are times we take after exactly the person we dislike or even hate, then we can start to appreciate the film better. To me, the best parts of the film are the relationship that developed between mother and her daughter's widower neighbour; and that between the neighbour and the daughter after the mother's departure. Both lonely though in different ways, the two elderly soon found comfort in each other's companionship and for a short period, their everyday life evolved with helping each other out in the most mundane yet comforting way as if they were old couples. The performance by Anthony who played the widower was the highlight of the film. He had an expressive face but his performance was always understated but effective. Having lived alone for a while, he developed near 'human' relationship with his dog who understood his master implicitly and would make gestures to console him, which in return gave the widower a natural outlet for his feelings, be it tenderness, excitement, disappointment, frustration or longing for the continuation of the friendship. The relationship between him, a widower and her, a virtual 'widow' was most appropriate of their age and circumstances - who after a lot of sufferings, understood that in spite of themselves, they had to accept life as it was and not to argue with it. They resigned to their obligations and 'fate' but not with too much anguish, or at least not so apparent and strong as what the younger generation, the daughter, who believed she had been done a bad deal by life and hated the whole world for it.
The efforts from the mother's side however eventually left marks on the daughter. When the widower took the first step by visiting her (having been rejected by her mother by a firm promise of any kind), the daughter took the cue to invite him in and a most unexpected but beautiful relationship was developed despite the clashes of their personalities. The last part of the film was one of the most humorous, witty and warm in cinema. Still in her helmet (for believing that she had seen all and that she was the one that had suffered the most), her throne was rounded down bit by bit by the lonely but loving, and indeed handsome widower. It was here that the character of the heroine become more convincing when a more tolerant and human side evolved in the constant fight, negotiation and renegotiation with the widower. The whole scene was shot in the widower's flat which looked warm and inviting, a great contrast to the daughter's flat before her mother's visit.
May 21, 2009
The Bells at St. Mary
Watched The Bells at St. Mary last night and I understood for the first time why Ingrid Bergman had written to Roberto Rossellini some four years later to offer her service to his project. If roles as in The Bells of St Mary were what a top actress could get back in the mid-40s, then what Roberto was doing at the height of neo-realism Italian cinema was indeed not a breath of fresh air; exciting and adventurously.
Despite the all star cast, the film is dull and the script stagnant. The worst bit though was the scenarios with young children - whose stage performance resembles those of the Chinese counterparts in the dark age of Chinese cinema; between 1949 to 1979 when they were made to talk and behave exactly like adults.
If The Bells was a minor let-down - because I had only picked it up from the shelf thanks to its rather misleading synopsis, then The Bare Foot Countessa could be considered a major disappointment. Probably because of the quality of recording back in the 1940s and his thick voice which made it even more difficult to follow, I have never been able to see the charm of Humphrey Bogart that keeps him 'alive' all these years. What attracted me to it then was Ava Gardner, who, despite her lack of confidence in her acting, was rather good at the job, and I was hoping to find something to convince myself that this was the case.
But the way the story was told put me off entirely: it started from a funeral and ended with a funeral and the part Ava Gardner played was more a case study by her more 'superior' males - all of whom claimed to have some insight knowledge of this female object. In other words, it was a typical example of those films that had been heavily cited and critised by the feminists.
Despite the all star cast, the film is dull and the script stagnant. The worst bit though was the scenarios with young children - whose stage performance resembles those of the Chinese counterparts in the dark age of Chinese cinema; between 1949 to 1979 when they were made to talk and behave exactly like adults.
If The Bells was a minor let-down - because I had only picked it up from the shelf thanks to its rather misleading synopsis, then The Bare Foot Countessa could be considered a major disappointment. Probably because of the quality of recording back in the 1940s and his thick voice which made it even more difficult to follow, I have never been able to see the charm of Humphrey Bogart that keeps him 'alive' all these years. What attracted me to it then was Ava Gardner, who, despite her lack of confidence in her acting, was rather good at the job, and I was hoping to find something to convince myself that this was the case.
But the way the story was told put me off entirely: it started from a funeral and ended with a funeral and the part Ava Gardner played was more a case study by her more 'superior' males - all of whom claimed to have some insight knowledge of this female object. In other words, it was a typical example of those films that had been heavily cited and critised by the feminists.
May 12, 2009
Il Postino
I am surprised that when I google this film, there is not much about it! It was about a journey taken by a fisherman who discovered nature, beauty, metaphors, love, himself and politics through - the poetry by Pablo Neruda (a 'poet of women', he insisted). The music was engaging and Massimo Troisi, who gave his life to the film by delaying his heart replacement surgery, was incredibly authentic in his role of a humble fisherman-cum-postman. And the ever understated Philippe Noiret gave his usual low-key but convincing performance as the exiled Chilean poet.
This was the second time I watched this film. The second taking though was not just because I would like to watch it again, but also because when I saw two copies on the shelf, I could not get over the fact that barely two summers ago, it was on 'restricted' list: which means to borrow it, a letter from the supervisors was required certifying that the title was on the research list of the interested party! And even if the letter was produced, it could only be watched in the library.
At that point, I had already encountered many films, mainly the French ones, whose scenes (usually with a hint of of sex) been erased from the tape, sometimes for up to five scenes and 10 minutes in total in a single film. It was in a quiet Chiswick flat when I could get hold of a copy. Since I presumed it must due to some nude scenes that had offended censored in Singapore, I waited till my friend left his flat before I put the DVD on!
Imagine my puzzle and indeed frustration after watching the film in a sunny summer morning (when one should be taking the advantage of such rare warm weather to walk along the river and admire the swans, black and white). Yes the leading actress sported her sexy curve with revealing low cut dress, and she looked extremely seductive. And yes, there are three sequences where a poem on a naked female body was the centre of the scenes... But so what? It is easy to assume then that it must be the way the Communists had been portrayed - in a human and even favourable light that had led to the restriction.
Whatever the reasons, the lift is a sign of relaxation and progress that should be encouraged and applauded. I celebrated it by watching it again, and when I return it, I will make sure that it is left in the box that marks 'I LIKE it'.
This was the second time I watched this film. The second taking though was not just because I would like to watch it again, but also because when I saw two copies on the shelf, I could not get over the fact that barely two summers ago, it was on 'restricted' list: which means to borrow it, a letter from the supervisors was required certifying that the title was on the research list of the interested party! And even if the letter was produced, it could only be watched in the library.
At that point, I had already encountered many films, mainly the French ones, whose scenes (usually with a hint of of sex) been erased from the tape, sometimes for up to five scenes and 10 minutes in total in a single film. It was in a quiet Chiswick flat when I could get hold of a copy. Since I presumed it must due to some nude scenes that had offended censored in Singapore, I waited till my friend left his flat before I put the DVD on!
Imagine my puzzle and indeed frustration after watching the film in a sunny summer morning (when one should be taking the advantage of such rare warm weather to walk along the river and admire the swans, black and white). Yes the leading actress sported her sexy curve with revealing low cut dress, and she looked extremely seductive. And yes, there are three sequences where a poem on a naked female body was the centre of the scenes... But so what? It is easy to assume then that it must be the way the Communists had been portrayed - in a human and even favourable light that had led to the restriction.
Whatever the reasons, the lift is a sign of relaxation and progress that should be encouraged and applauded. I celebrated it by watching it again, and when I return it, I will make sure that it is left in the box that marks 'I LIKE it'.
May 08, 2009
Family matters
I am reading Family Matters by Rohinto Mistry recently and every now and then I have to put the book down because the farce, sorrow and horror in the family drama was such that one has to take a break from it. It dawned to me how similar we humans can be when the social system is identical, in this case, the lack of an established and sound social welfare system that protects the senior citizens and guarantees them the chance to lead a decent life after they lose their earning power.
May 07, 2009
L'Atalante
L'Atalente was the name L'Atalante is the name of a barge where the story of tender love, jealousy, separation, and reunion between a newly wed young couple. I didn't realise I had watched it some three years ago until when Michel Simon welcomed the bride on board.
Though it was my second viewing, it felt as fresh and powerful as ever. I was impressed with the high calibre performance from all three main actors, in particular that from Dita Parlo whose face and body languages tell a thousand stories. The story was simple but it had a sensuousness and raw touch that never aged - that of human being, the primitive desire that words can never express, and the longing for touch, love, or simply seeing each other and being together. It was also very poetic especially the scene depicting how deeply Jean was missing his wife. Not a word from him about his wife since he abandoned her for jealousy but what a lost soul he had become: he let his beard grow, lost interest in life, and in the end, he plunged his head into a bucket of cold water, and then himself into the river. The 'miracle' - that in water one could see their lovers - was a secret between the couple and therefore his workmates thought it was simply another act of madness from their silent and moody captain. These sequences of Jean's misery, regret and loneliness was almost like a silent movie: the characters of central concern remain quiet silent throughout and all we heard was but occasional expressions of concern from his mates which work more like captions. Yet the power of the image was such that the sentiments of both characters were convened strong and live.
Probably because of its age (made in 1934), the picture looked rather raw but so was its power in reaching the audience. It might be a simple or even a cliche story but the story telling was just magical.
Though it was my second viewing, it felt as fresh and powerful as ever. I was impressed with the high calibre performance from all three main actors, in particular that from Dita Parlo whose face and body languages tell a thousand stories. The story was simple but it had a sensuousness and raw touch that never aged - that of human being, the primitive desire that words can never express, and the longing for touch, love, or simply seeing each other and being together. It was also very poetic especially the scene depicting how deeply Jean was missing his wife. Not a word from him about his wife since he abandoned her for jealousy but what a lost soul he had become: he let his beard grow, lost interest in life, and in the end, he plunged his head into a bucket of cold water, and then himself into the river. The 'miracle' - that in water one could see their lovers - was a secret between the couple and therefore his workmates thought it was simply another act of madness from their silent and moody captain. These sequences of Jean's misery, regret and loneliness was almost like a silent movie: the characters of central concern remain quiet silent throughout and all we heard was but occasional expressions of concern from his mates which work more like captions. Yet the power of the image was such that the sentiments of both characters were convened strong and live.
Probably because of its age (made in 1934), the picture looked rather raw but so was its power in reaching the audience. It might be a simple or even a cliche story but the story telling was just magical.
May 06, 2009
Loves of a blond
There is really no sign of a blond in it; even if the heroine is one, there is no way to tell in this black and white film made in 1965! But this is no complaint at all. It is one of the best films I watched lately. Well scripted and wittily directed, it was perfectly acted with poignant insight of a grim communist state.
There were many highlights and comic moments in this short film. The first was when we saw a civilian with several army officers around a desk. The army officers looked serious and said they had to consult their upper authorities before they could respond. But what was on the table was in fact an invitation to a party. The father figure, who we learnt later on was a manager of a shoe factory was concerned that there were so few boys around that the factory that girls suffered from lack of hugs by men after a hard day's work! The serious faces of the army officers - as if they were considering something of solemn nature - were of great contrast to the shameless behaviours of three army officers who were trying to seduce the girls for a one night stand at the actual party. It says a lot about the hypocrisy of those in the uniform. But it was brilliant also for another reason: the patriarch in the factory manager was the same as that in China barely three decades ago.
The second highlight had to be the party scene when three army 'uncles' (rather than 'boys' as the girls have observed when they alighted the special train) were discussing how to get the three young girls over to sit with them without showing too much interest in them. They called the waiter over and asked him to deliver a bottle of wine to their table but the poor waiter mixed up the tables and gave the bottle to the wrong table where three middle age women were showing signs of boredom and distress for the lack of interest from the roomful of army 'uncles' of their ages who were interested only in girls. And just when they were caught by this surprise gift, one of the 'uncles' marched to the table and grabbed the bottle away!
The climax was the scene at the pianist home when the heroine turned up with a suitcase late at night to everybody's surprise. In the interview included in the DVD, Milos Forman explained that because the couple were played by non-professional actors, all he did was to instruct them to say something to some effect rather than giving them written dialogues. In other words, the wonderfully performed scene of doubt, frustration and anger was largely improvised with the actors composing their own lines! What a genius the woman who played mother was! A human history about the failure of the socialist system across all broad and the more common concerns of a controlling parent could be read in her monologues: disappointment over her husband's earning power, frustration over the gap with her only son, and concerns over his future.
The interview with the director is fascinating to anyone who are interested to compare the film industry of all communist states. Milos was classified, at least through this film, as director leading the 'New Wave' cinema of the early 1960s in Czech. He had wanted something different from the 'socialist realism' cinema around that time, and he wanted to capture the 'real life' of the people he knew so well. With a shoe string budget, he could only have access to two cameras. The solution he came up with to tackle all those 'problems' had actually turned him into an 'innovative' director - or at least so to his contemporaries at home. How similar it was to the circumstances Jia Zhangke found himself in when he first launched his directorial career back in the late 1990s who had got a lot to say (of no interest to mainstream directors!) but not much money to fund his project. What Milos Forman revealed in the interview could well have been written by Jia, especially the bit about improvisation and use of amateur actors. The two were four generations and thousands of miles apart, but they came up with the same ideas, or nearly so.
Jia's Unknown Pleasure has also got a nude scene of the hero, but while the one in his was depressing, the one in Loves of A Blond is both humorous and sexy. That must be the main differences between the two who grew up in socialist countries but in different continents.
There were many highlights and comic moments in this short film. The first was when we saw a civilian with several army officers around a desk. The army officers looked serious and said they had to consult their upper authorities before they could respond. But what was on the table was in fact an invitation to a party. The father figure, who we learnt later on was a manager of a shoe factory was concerned that there were so few boys around that the factory that girls suffered from lack of hugs by men after a hard day's work! The serious faces of the army officers - as if they were considering something of solemn nature - were of great contrast to the shameless behaviours of three army officers who were trying to seduce the girls for a one night stand at the actual party. It says a lot about the hypocrisy of those in the uniform. But it was brilliant also for another reason: the patriarch in the factory manager was the same as that in China barely three decades ago.
The second highlight had to be the party scene when three army 'uncles' (rather than 'boys' as the girls have observed when they alighted the special train) were discussing how to get the three young girls over to sit with them without showing too much interest in them. They called the waiter over and asked him to deliver a bottle of wine to their table but the poor waiter mixed up the tables and gave the bottle to the wrong table where three middle age women were showing signs of boredom and distress for the lack of interest from the roomful of army 'uncles' of their ages who were interested only in girls. And just when they were caught by this surprise gift, one of the 'uncles' marched to the table and grabbed the bottle away!
The climax was the scene at the pianist home when the heroine turned up with a suitcase late at night to everybody's surprise. In the interview included in the DVD, Milos Forman explained that because the couple were played by non-professional actors, all he did was to instruct them to say something to some effect rather than giving them written dialogues. In other words, the wonderfully performed scene of doubt, frustration and anger was largely improvised with the actors composing their own lines! What a genius the woman who played mother was! A human history about the failure of the socialist system across all broad and the more common concerns of a controlling parent could be read in her monologues: disappointment over her husband's earning power, frustration over the gap with her only son, and concerns over his future.
The interview with the director is fascinating to anyone who are interested to compare the film industry of all communist states. Milos was classified, at least through this film, as director leading the 'New Wave' cinema of the early 1960s in Czech. He had wanted something different from the 'socialist realism' cinema around that time, and he wanted to capture the 'real life' of the people he knew so well. With a shoe string budget, he could only have access to two cameras. The solution he came up with to tackle all those 'problems' had actually turned him into an 'innovative' director - or at least so to his contemporaries at home. How similar it was to the circumstances Jia Zhangke found himself in when he first launched his directorial career back in the late 1990s who had got a lot to say (of no interest to mainstream directors!) but not much money to fund his project. What Milos Forman revealed in the interview could well have been written by Jia, especially the bit about improvisation and use of amateur actors. The two were four generations and thousands of miles apart, but they came up with the same ideas, or nearly so.
Jia's Unknown Pleasure has also got a nude scene of the hero, but while the one in his was depressing, the one in Loves of A Blond is both humorous and sexy. That must be the main differences between the two who grew up in socialist countries but in different continents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)