Cinema's greatest classics

[moktan]

watched the following classics of late.......

Intolerance: Love's Struggle through the ages: gripping, huge canvas (the sheer logistics seem mind boggling), the politics of the movie (made almost a 100 years ago) is contemporary, sensitive...and best of all a great story or stories fascinatingly told.....

Rules of the Game (french with english subtitles) initially felt like an Oscar Wilde play...but delving deeper its a more meaningful tale..again a very gripping story, a humanist drama told with a rare sensitivity and humor.....

Battleship Potemkin...whatever historical baggage this movie bears..it's still a classic even though I , as a viewer wasn't positioned as an aspiring film-maker...or ideologue of a certain type of cinema..

Goddard's Breathless....the only curiosity i have is..how can an aspiring film maker free himself from this movie and find his own oeuvre?.. everything about it seems to breathe down your neck like a breathless bully...

Barton Fink...i discovered the Coen Brother's after Fargo..this one was ok but the hype was a bit of a let down..(too cerebral??) if you don't give it that benefit of the doubt then its a trivial tale idiosyncratically told..

the seventh seal...a fascinating story..in the hands of a lesser master it could have been a caricature..but i found everything that one wants from a movie in this...history, fantasy, heroism, philosophy and best of all the grandeur of image that FILM is supposed to be all about...
just my two pence..i don't have any pretensions of being a movie buff..i was just following the dictates of a 'cultural syllabus'..

 

[ajay124]

@moktan
"i don't have any pretensions of being a movie buff"
I always enjoy reading your comments about music,books and films,because they seem to come from an individual perspective rather than a herd response.I believe one needs a 'restless' imagination,a 'curious' nature and a 'rational' mind to sift the chaff from the grain.
One does not have to be a 'cinephile' to understand and enjoy cinema.Just as one does not have to be an 'audiophile' to understand and enjoy music.
For a deeper appreciation of cinema,music or books one needs to have a broad based exposure to all the arts.An exposure that transcends genre's,generations,nations and centuries.To appreciate the 'arts' one needs to be a wanderer,a gypsy,a time and space traveller.Sometimes pitching a tent for a breather,but most of the time on the move.For books,cinema and music their are no borders or allegiances.A small nation like Albania can produce a writer like Ismail Kadre,whose one dozen works of fiction may be a more important body of work than the entire output of 'printed matter':sad: by many 'big' nations.The films of Ingmar Bergman or Andrei Tarkovsky can challenge and overpower the entire cinema of many nations.
The Seventh Seal is a fascinating film which reveals a new layer with every viewing.It was the opening salvo,an overture to Bergman's famous 'Absence of God' trilogy...."Through a Glass Darkly","Winterlight" and "The Silence".
Whether one views these films as Berman's negation of faith or affirmation of faith is an individual response.But all the 'heavy stuff' can be left for repeat viewings.The first view of these films should be 'thoughtless' a simple surrender to the seduction of Bergman's cinema.
Film as Art: Danl Griffin's Guide to Cinema

 

[esanthosh]

^ While I am yet to see any Tarkovsky (have to do soon), Bergman's films have a profound influence on me. Many movies can be 'entertaining', but I generally don't think about them after an hour (though I don't shun them either).

But, 'good' films on the other hand are those which make me think about them over and over again. With some of Bergman's works, films last only about 90 mins on screen, but set me thinking about them for 2-3 days or even a whole week. The thing about these films are that they are "open". As your understanding changes with repeat viewing / reading / knowing more, so will your perception and interpretation of the film.

 

[ajay124]

^ While I am yet to see any Tarkovsky (have to do soon), Bergman's films have a profound influence on me. Many movies can be 'entertaining', but I generally don't think about them after an hour (though I don't shun them either).

But, 'good' films on the other hand are those which make me think about them over and over again. With some of Bergman's works, films last only about 90 mins on screen, but set me thinking about them for 2-3 days or even a whole week. The thing about these films are that they are "open". As your understanding changes with repeat viewing / reading / knowing more, so will your perception and interpretation of the film.

Tarkovsky's films

Ivan's Childhood 1962
Andrei Rublev 1965
Solaris 1972
Mirror 1974
Stalker 1979
Nostalghia 1982
Sacrifice 1985

The last two films shot in 'exile' in Italy should be left for the last.A casual viewing of Nostalghia by a first time Tarkovsky watcher would merely lead to perplexity and incomprehension.Beginning with Ivan's Childhood and following a timeline would be a good option.I have owned the DVD of Sacrifice for four years now but have not seen it even once.One day the moment will 'announce' itself that it is time to watch Sacrifice.Alone or with the one person I know in Chandigarh,who has even a glimmer of understanding of Tarkovsky.I have not watched Sacrifice till now because the good things in life are few and far between and it is nice to have something to look forward to in the future.
YouTube - Andrey Tarkovsky on "Andrey Rublev" - 1/2

 

[ajay124]

I will not pretend that I 'understand' Tarkovsky's films fully or even to a large extent.It is the elusive nature of their 'reality' and 'meaning' that I find fascinating.Sometimes I watch them in order to 'understand' them,but most of the time I merely surrender to the beauty of the most stunning visuals ever captured on film.Visuals which are as ephemeral,magical and perfect as the snowflakes that gently and silently swirl over the landcape in his films.
YouTube - Tarkovsky, Nostalghia (1983)

 

[moktan]

some movies i watched recently...

Ran (Kurosawa)..having watched his adaptation of Macbeth (Throne of Blood) many years ago, i was looking forward to this 'treatment' of King Lear and wasn't disappointed...i have always been intrigued by Japan (how a manifestly ultra modern country is one that leaks with tradition- Empire of Signs?)..the movie is a visual delight...and in its portrayal of the historic facets of Japanese life, one tends to get that National Geographic kind of 'satisfaction 'if not anything else.....Ran though is an existential statement and in this i could connect it with the next movie i watched..
Bergman's 'Through a glass darkly'..(this was a familiar Biblical phrase though modern translations tend to render it differently..)...
this is a claustrophobic movie if there ever was one.....the entire action is played out in an island and in black and white (suffocating)...the story revolves around a family in which each individual members are islands on their own....everyone sadly is suffering in his or her own way..
the thread that binds both Ran and this Bergman flick is this proselytizing about the futility of faith....(in the Bergman flick, God -or whatever illusions that a sick mind has of IT- is trivialized into a spider, whereas Kurosawa thinks it fitting that the Buddha devotee be decapitated and the last, enduring image is that of a devotee alone and on the edge, blind, with his Buddha gone to the wind..)....
both are extremely sad, tormented, claustrophobic and pretentious cinematic exercises, with almost farcical endings ..but Ran scores because it offers a chunk of history etc.. ..

after watching these two...Dr Strangelove was a relief.....it brought me back into a familiar territory...ironical, cerebral, humorous, topical, relevant and ENTERTAINING....
also watched Hitchcock's North by North West and Vertigo...the latter is ingenious and slick...however both movies are at best exercises in entertainment...
in conclusion, if i ask my self what would i consider the better investment of my time?...
i would definitely vote for the Kubrick experience....i could get the similar 'philosophic experience' (of Ran and more so the Bergman movie ) by reading a book or a poem...i would expect more from a movie.......
just my two pence...

 

[esanthosh]

Bergman's 'Through a glass darkly'....this is a claustrophobic movie if there ever was one.....the entire action is played out in an island and in black and white (suffocating)

If you found "Through A ..." claustrophobic, wonder what you'll say about "Scenes from a Marriage"?

 

[moktan]

a 'good' movie redeemed that suffocating experience..kurosawa's DERSU UJALA...now that is a movie..honestly who wants to waste the possibility of a FILM on anything that could have been accomplished either on the stage or on a page......
drama can be on stage, poetry and philosophical treatises can be on page....
but for a movie one needs a CANVAS and if that is provided both temporally and spatially, WIDE and expansive as in a kurosawa flick then who is to blame for finding sundry other cinematic experiences insipid..

 

[ajay124]

@moktan
You seem to be on a film watching spree.Good!
Many people find Bergman claustrophobic,suffocating and depressing.Many do not like the excessive introspection and wrestling with faith and moral issues.One would need to be well versed with the intricacies of christianity to understand Bergman's religious beliefs and doubts.As an 'outsider' I can only comprehend the religious element in his films partially.I normally avoid reading review or film analysis by critics as that is akin to being spoonfed the opinons of somebody else.Personally I find Bergman exhilarating and entertaining for the psychological insight his best films provide.I have little interest in the trivialities,stupidities and lies of mainstream cinema.I find the lack of originality,imagination and honesty in them depressing.
I do not consider the climax of 'Through A Glass Darkly' trivial or farcical as you do,but find your views interesting.Incidentally the spider probably refers to a passage in Dostoevsky's Crime And Punishment.I remember this film not so much for its 'absence of god' theme.More for its portarayal of the schizophrenia of Karin.Our mind is our only link to the 'real' world which we behold and sense around us.The disintegration of a persons mind can snap this link and transport him to 'another' world.A world not confined by the order and rigidity of our 'sane' world.Exploring this 'other' world through the 'dark glass' of art can be exhilarating and downright scary!But illuminating and revealing too.Revealing about the sanity and reality of our 'real' world

 

[ajay124]

Many people try to explore the 'other' world by using drugs.They believe they are experiencing or understanding something which 'sober' people cannot comprehend.But drugs do not reveal anything.They merely deaden and ultimately destroy one's mind and senses.Addicts give great weightage to their experiences but there is nothing mildly interesting or illuminating about them.The infantile lyrics and music of the 'psychedelic' rockers and the 'literary' :indifferent14: outpourings of the Beat generations is a good example of a 'druggie' taking himself and his experiences too seriously.

 

[trakesht]

.They foolishly believe they are experiencing or understanding something which 'sober' people cannot comprehend.But drugs do not reveal anything.They merely deaden and ultimately destroy one's mind and senses.Addicts give great weightage to their experiences but there is nothing mildly interesting or illuminating about them.

To put it mildly, I beg to differ

 

[ajay124]

I have edited out the word 'foolishly'.Too judgemental.Personally I prefer the occasional islay single malt or 'old world' wine to relax with.For a 'high' I rely upon western classical music.Currently the modern composers like Mahler,Shostakovich,Stravinsky,Bartok,Schoenberg

 

[moktan]

@moktan
You seem to be on a film watching spree.Good!
Many people find Bergman claustrophobic,suffocating and depressing.Many do not like the excessive introspection and wrestling with faith and moral issues.One would need to be well versed with the intricacies of christianity to understand Bergman's religious beliefs and doubts.As an 'outsider' I can only comprehend the religious element in his films partially.I normally avoid reading review or film analysis by critics as that is akin to being spoonfed the opinons of somebody else.Personally I find Bergman exhilarating and entertaining for the psychological insight his best films provide.I have little interest in the trivialities,stupidities and lies of mainstream cinema.I find the lack of originality,imagination and honesty in them depressing.
I do not consider the climax of 'Through A Glass Darkly' trivial or farcical as you do,but find your views interesting.Incidentally the spider probably refers to a passage in Dostoevsky's Crime And Punishment.I remember this film not so much for its 'absence of god' theme.More for its portarayal of the schizophrenia of Karin.Our mind is our only link to the 'real' world which we behold and sense around us.The disintegration of a persons mind can snap this link and transport him to 'another' world.A world not confined by the order and rigidity of our 'sane' world.Exploring this 'other' world through the 'dark glass' of art can be exhilarating and downright scary!But illuminating and revealing too.Revealing about the sanity and reality of our 'real' world

what you say here is very interesting.and maybe such inputs (esantosh's included) will force me to watch bergman from a newer, fresher perspective. your view points are highly appreciated. being slightly more acquainted with the 'intricacies of christianity' than the average person, i can see where bergman is coming from and i can definitely see where he is going. in this respect, he reminds me of soren kiergkegaard, who too grappled with the question of faith and came to just the opposite conclusion to which bergman arrives. bergman's view point is hardly edifying. he demands certainty from his quest of faith and when that is not forthcoming he dismisses the quest entirely. its a waste of time. kierkegaard on the other hand passes that void with a leap of faith. he says..
"Once all attempts at comprehension are shown to be self-contradictory, the matter will appear in its proper light; it will then be quite clear that whether one is willing to believe it or not must be left to faith. I can very well comprehend (and this isnt at all too divine to be comprehended) that a person who for the life of him has to comprehend and can only form opinions on what would have itself to be comprehensible will find this very meager. But if the whole of Christianity hangs on this, on its having to be believed, not comprehended, on its either having to be believed or ones having to be offended by it, is it then so commendable to want to comprehend?"

 

[ajay124]

@moktan
Some great films in my opinion.Feel free to watch them or not watch them.Like them or dislike them.Praise them or trash them.Personally I rate them among the best ever made.
Andrei Rublev/Tarkovsky
Dairy Of A Country Priest/Bresson
Viridiana/Bunuel
L'avventura/Antonioni
Fear Eats The Soul/Fassbinder
Winterlight/Bergman
Underground/Kusturica
Ballad Of Narayama/Imamura
La Dolce Vita/Fellini
Passion Of Joan Of Arc/Dreyer
Metropolis/Lang
Children Of Paradise/Carne
Hiroshima Mon Amour/Resnais
Umberto D/De Sica
Tokyo Story/Ozu
Mephisto/Szabo
Damnation/BelaTarr
The Round Up/Jansco
Farewell My Concubine/Kaige
Ugetsu/Mizoguchi
Ikiru/Kurosawa

Have not watched but would like to.
Ivan The Terrible/Eisenstein
Hidden/Haneke
Time Of The Gypsies/Kusturica
Decalogue/Keislowski
Satantango/Bela Tarr

 

[ajay124]

Yesterday morning I came across the words 'Black Swan' while surfing the web and my immediate reaction was that it was a reference to Nassim Taleb's famous book about outlier events which have not been statistically predicted,but come as a complete surprise.Taleb became a star after his book became a bestseller following the global economic meltdown of 2008.
The reference to 'Black Swan' turned out to be to a new Hollywood film currently riding on an Oscar cloud.Having stopped following the Oscar's or Hollywood several years back I only come to hear of Oscar trivia accidentally
I read the Wikipedia article about the film and since the film was running in a local multiplex I went to watch an afternoon show.In the Wikipedia article it is mentioned that the director Darren Aronofsky's influences for the film are Polanski's "The Tenant" and Dostoevsky's "The Double".There is also a mention about similarities to an anime film called "Perfect Blue".Watching the film I felt that the real influence is Michael Haneke's stunning film "La Pianiste".The classical music background,a "frigid",on the edge,female protagonist battling sexual and psychological demons,frequent shots of washrooms,self injury,a domineering intrusive mother....Black Swan seem to owe a huge debt to the Haneke film.Most of all for the fragile,hunted persona of Natalie Portman which mirrors Isabelle Hupert in La Pianiste.
Black Swan turned out to be a watchable film with a good performance by Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers a ballet dancer playing the lead role in a production of Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake".I will not spoil the pleasure of watching the film by revealing more of the plot.But the central performance,the music of Tchaikovsky,the 'doppelganger' theme made it an interesting Sunday afternoon at the movies for me.I don't expect much from a Hollywood film but on the downside the biggest disappointment (for me) was the films obvious disconnect from the magnificient music of Pyotr Ilych Tchaikovsky.Not once in the film did I feel that the director or any of the actors in the film had an empathy or love for classical music.Not once did the ballet dancer Nina Sayer's or the 'maestro' Thomas Leroy or the supporting cast give even a passing hint that they were overwhelmed by the music of Swan Lake.
A note about the Chandigarh audience.The film ran to a full house because of the Oscar hype.From the not so hushed conversations going on during the film and as the audience exited from the hall it was obvious that the majority of the good people had emerged clueless about what was happening in the film.The dumbing down of mainstream cinema has been so successful that audiences cannot even comprehend a small iota of complexity in a film.
A note about La Pianiste (The Piano Teacher).Michael Haneke's film is based on a novel by the (surprise) Nobel Prize winning Austrian writer Elfriede Jelinek.This film is a personal favorite.I think it is far superior to Black Swan in content,in direction and in acting.Natalie Portman has done a good job but Isabelle Hupert is (imo) possibly the greatest film actor of the 20th century and the role of Erika Kohut in La Pianiste is one of her most memorable performances.

 

[Pratters]

Glad you watched Black Swan. Interesting you mention a full house. I went to watch The Fighter a couple of weeks ago and it had a pretty good crowd as well. There is actually a good market for hollywood films in India if they do it right.

 

[trinitron]

the kings speech - an impressive visual treatment which u hardly see in british films. film is a treat for eyes combined with set decorations and costumes which look so historically accurate making it realistically emotional period drama, packed with colin firth playing king george VI, geoffrey rush playing kings therapist and helena carter kings wife. dir.tom hooper;s use of wide angle lenses made performance look more tighter and superbly dynamic. in cinema its not about the performance but the "performance capture" is something which makes all the difference! that's what i learned through this film. it deserves all the recognition!

half of the crowd walked out of the theater, "it was so slow" is the all time favorite reaction by the people who watched the movie completely. i don't think anyone liked the movie except me. crowd was hardly 10 to 15.

the fighter - was a lovely film. the scene when dickey (christian bail) gets out of the prison getting ready to train mickey (mark wahlberg), the whole drama created between mickey, dickey, their mom, mickeys girlfriend and the trainer is so beautifully portrayed and performed. christian bail's two fisted performance was alone worth the ticket. divided we fall but united we win that's what the film was all about. the final championship fight gave the same thrills which we get when we watch the real thing.

tomorrow BLACK SWAN. hope i get the tickets..

 

[Hiten]

Have not read the whole thread but why only serious movies are considered "Classics" ? A 'funny look at life' kind of movie can be classic too, or would that be considered frivolous.
Thanks.

 

[malvai]

Have not read the whole thread but why only serious movies are considered "Classics" ? A 'funny look at life' kind of movie can be classic too, or would that be considered frivolous.
Thanks.

Not really Hiten... If that were the case, Charlie Chaplin films wouldn't be considered classics!

 

[Hiten]

No, not downright funny, slapstick, hilarious stuff.
A funny, skeptic look at life or event or history OR a black humor etc.