druben2 Reviews

The Dying Gaul (I) (2005)

Such a pompous piece of superficiality

[2/10 · 28 September 2006]

If you like the glitzy Hollywood never-never land of the rich and beautiful and think that a few Buddhist sayings sprinkled in make it profound then this movie is for you. There is nothing about this story that is compelling to me. Is seems to be more about showing off a multi- million dollar piece of real-estate that anything else. There is no exploration of the family life or marriage of the couple and the "love affair" between the two men is completely unbelievable and stupid. The protagonist is supposed to be so broken up about the loss of his boyfriend that he quickly falls into bed with the married man, feeling no guilt that he is hurting the wife, who he actually likes better than the husband. We are supposed to feel his grief and think that the internet exchanges of silly Buddhist sayings based on deceptions is somehow deep. Its an insult to Buddhism, implying that new age aphorisms can be picked up by the Hollywood to try to get across some kind of message in a very superficial story. The sex isn't even erotic or convincing. So, why was this movie made? Why wasn't this one nipped in the bud? Sometime I can't believe the trash that Hollywood puts out!

The Little Foxes (1941)

A complicated film

[28 September 2006]

This film is complex. The characters do not nicely fall into the avaricious foxes vs the sweet innocent lambs. Hellman shows that the the weakness of Aunt Birdie, Alexander ad even Horace is a result of patterns of the avoidance of the political and social problems facing the south. They believed that if the "treated their darkies well" all would be well and each would know their place and all could carry out their decent Christian lives. I.E. They were living in la la land. But the aristocratic structures had crumbled and were replaced by venture capitalism, which was helping to pull the south out if its severe depression and help it once again to compete with the north. Regina was the New Woman, a feminist hero. She had escaped the domination of the men that surrounded her and held on the positions of power. And through her own skills and planning she was able to punish her brothers and rise to the top. She did not do anything dishonest herself, but she was not willing to let her brothers get away from the crime that they committed and used the knowledge of that to her own advantage. Horaces deliberate blocking of Regina's plans were weakly defended through Hellman's socialism, but this was contradicted with the news that the new mill would be paying the employees eight dollars a week compared to their usual three. So the town and the employees would benefit from this development. There is a lost world nostalgia in the film that serves no one. I suppose that I would put my money on David, Alexandras love interest, who seems to have a perceptive sense of what is really going on. Yes, Bette Davis plays Regina as cold and business like and in those days if a woman wasn't warm and maternal she was condemned because women could not have a stake in business and were seen as monsters if they did. So I say, hurray for Regina!

The Human Stain (2003)

This film did not work

[2/10 · 5 July 2006]

I think it was the storyline but it could have also been the poor acting and the director's decisions that failed for me in this film. First, the over-emphasis on sex really distracted from the plots. It is what I considered pure pandering to a sex-hungry public and should have been kept to a minimum. Nicole Kidman really disappointed me in this role. If she had been raised by wealthy parents, she would not have reverted to trailer trash mannerisms or ways of speaking and she certainly would have felt comfortable in the middle class restaurant. She could have conveyed her complexity in a much more subtle manner. the same with Anthony Hopkins, who Ifound bland and uninteresting. We needed some early indications that he was carrying some secret within him and that would have at least created some tension in this otherwise very predictable film.

The story lead nowhere. There was no redemption at the end. the fact that he told his girl friend that he was black was not redemption because they were going through a process of screwing and revealing their secrets all along and his revelation meant very little actually, since he never told his wife or the administration and kept apart from his family. So I was left with "so what." The Ed Wood character was uniformly consistent and made no changes. I couldn't understand that last scene with him on the ice which went nowhere. Its not like the Hopkins character was a noble man (as in the Ajax character he kept referring to). He was petty and selfish and, I'm sorry, I can only see that lust and sex were his motivation for being with that woman, since, in true Hollywood fashion, they are screwing within a half an hour of meeting. Did I get a feeling that love was developing between them? No.

The theme of racial switching due to light colored skin is fascinating and has been much better approached (in, say, Imitation of Life). not dealing with this issue in this movie and confusing it with spousal abuse, Vietnam PTSD, political correctness on campus, grief at the loss of children, writer's block etc. just confuse the matter and make the film too superficial.

Niagara (1953)

Homage to Hitchcock

[9/10 · 19 January 2006]

On seeing this movie a second time I recognized a few things borrowed from the master of suspense, Alfred Hitchcockm, as an obvious homage to the man. The first is the scene of Marilyn laying on the bed in the dark. The body in repose that expresses the lethargy of an evil heart is right out of the beginning scene in "Shadow of a Doubt," in which Joseph Cotton is the one on the bed. Having Cotton in this one as well confirms a connection between the two films. Also, the shots of the flashy shoes as a way of identify or misidentifying the characters is right out of "Strangers on a Train." Both of these were filmed before "Niagra." What surprised me, is that I thought the chase up the bell tower stairs was taken from "Vertigo" but that was filmed five years later. Maybe this was Hitchcock's homage to this film.

Eden's Curve (2003)

something a bit redeeming about this movie

[2/10 · 23 July 2005]

I basically found Eden's Curve to be a very poorly constructed that made it difficult to watch. However, there is something I must say about how the director captured something about the atmosphere of the early 70's in the choice of settings and clothing. The "back to the earth" philosophy and the interest in sexual exploration and drugs that was not dramatically decadent, as portrayed in many later versions of the 70's was right on, as was the "don't ask don't tell" pseudo-liberalism of the fraternity made up of east-coast intellectuals, except that I would have thought this was more likely of a New England school rather than one in Virginia, where I imagine the "good ole boy" mentality still dominated even elitist schools like this one. Another thing I appreciated and could relate to is that this was a time when homosexuality was not linked so much to leathermen or drag queens and I appreciated some homosexual roles not related to these terribly overused images. I felt it was very unfortunate that "gay culture" took on certain standard forms in the 80's out of Castro and Christopher Streets and these defined the movement and left out huge numbers of gay men that were more subdued in their lifestyles. I appreciated the film mainly as a way of remembering a more natural way we were about our sexuality and personal relationships without "the scene."

Amor de hombre (1997)

co-dependency

[2/10 · 29 May 2005]

I'll come right to the point: this movie endorses a relationship where a woman is at the beck and call of a histrionic drama queen of a gay man. She has no life and is always available to take care of the poor man who sleeps with lots of guys but falls in love with one that does him wrong. Neither of the characters develop or grow despite the illusion of a "sensitive loving friendship." Its not. Feminists will be furious with this characterization of the all giving "fag-hag" and the narcissistic and selfish gad-about gay man who takes advantage of her. Is this the way Spanish women are still brought up in Spain to pander to man's every whim? I thought this movie was going to expose how sick this relationship was but instead it created a illusory romantic happy ending, so I can't help but think the filmmaker was sentimentalizing and endorsing it. Not a good message for this day and age.

Testosterone (2003)

other angles on this film

[8/10 · 28 May 2005]

I have read all the comments about this film and think a major factor has been ignored. That is the political and national character of the film. First, Dean is an ugly American. He is rude and pushy and not at all suave or genteel. He has no interest in the culture of the country he has spent loads of money coming to. He is on some kind of wild west posse chase after the "wanted man." He knows no Spanish and is not the least apologetic for not speaking the native language and is even impatient when people don't understand English (I mean doesn't everyone speak English now?). He is a very unlikeable character except... that he is incredibly sexy and appealing in a more visceral way (hence the title of the film). This is testosterone as brutal male power: violence, highly sexual, vengeful, and compulsive. He had come to a country that is very far away from home. Buenos Aires may look like a modern American city but it is Latin American and based on a very different sensibility than anything in the USA and this was brought out nicely by the mother and the brother and sister team and the trip to the country house. The ultimate fate of Pablo and the final scene where we see the brother and sister reunited speaks of a bigger agenda here than just what Dean did to Pablo. The brilliance of this film is that this subplot, though always there, is quite subliminal. I liked this film first because I think it addressed the masculine characteristics associated with the hormone testosterone (and gratefully there were no campy drag queens as models of homosexuals) and for the interesting critique it offers of American arrogance in the world and a more refined and perhaps more nefarious Argentinian sensibility.

Denied (2004)

a complex and compelling portrait of adolescent sexuality

[14 March 2005]

I liked this movie quite a lot. If we are to believe Kinsey, it portrays a common enough situation in which the dynamics of male adolescent sexual experimentation is played out by two young men that are trying to work out their sexual identities. I appreciated the fluctuations in bisexual attraction and the inevitable pain this involves and how the young men do truly care for one another in their own confused ways. The film is sweet and gentle but also hard-hitting in its portrayal of lostness and the incapacity for shared intimacy. I found the acting to be quite good in an understated way and the characters very realistic. I think most viewers will identify with the void that can be experienced after high school and the struggle to find oneself when high school roles no longer suffice.

Lancelot of the Lake (1974)

Its not naturalism, so what is it?

[26 January 2005]

A director that intentionally drains all the emotion and any interpersonal energies from his characters must have a point, but I can't get it. It does not increase the mythic quality that Pasolini was able to capture, nor does it provide us with abstract ideas and messages that are somehow universal. This movie is just plain silly. The gore at the beginning without faces or personality and the very unrealistic constant clinking of the men never taking off their armor suggests that the whole "message" here is about the ridiculousness of war. It certainly is not a love story. Why then does the plot revolve so much around the dry and empty encounters between Guinevere and Lancelot? Everyone is insignificant and vacant. Why would Bresson possibly believe the audience would want to sit through such pointlessness? This is almost the polar opposite of "Diary of a Country Priest," which was deeply compassionate and expressive.

La Belle Noiseuse (1991)

This movie is, well, very French.

[16 January 2005]

Lots of questions come up about this movie: First, when is a film/story worth spending four hours with. It would seem to me to be necessary that it is an outstanding film which this one isn't. Unless you are not familiar with the artistic process of life-drawing and could be fascinated with it as a spectator sport, then don't rent this movie, you will be bored to tears. I multi-tasked during most of it. I have been an artist and the studio is familiar to me but I wouldn't impose the practice of sketching a nude on anyone. Of course there is the prurient interests in looking for extended amounts of time at a beautiful woman naked and if that's your thing then you will be richly rewarded. Second, did the model get paid for her modeling or is this another movie about how we should all adore the artist so much that we give our time to him? I saw no money trading hands which would have raised the status of the model to some kind of equity. I might just me too American and too much of a feminist (I am male) but it seems that the French have this habit of adoring their women as long as they are attractive sex objects at the total disposal of male projects. That is what this movie is about. The two female characters are completely devoted to the rather pathetic artist. The movie was made in the nineties. Shame on you Rivette. But then you are one of the "New Wave" generation when women were treated repeatedly as sexual geegaws for the male protagonists, so perhaps we should forgive you. Thirdly, does anyone think his art was that good to deserve all this reverence? It seems pretty undergraduate life-drawing class quality to me. This is another thing about French culture - after they have gotten rid of God and the king the artist takes his place. In this movie the artist lives in the largest and imposing villa of the village. Are we to think that this man's talent has provided him with enough success that he can live like a king? Fourthly, are we to believe that the few conversations the artist has with his model has brought them both into some kind of personal transformation? I would need a lot more from them than what I saw on screen. We are to take the creative process of this man as so important that it is effecting all the characters (including a "sister" of the boyfriend who ends up at the villa for no apparent reason). To risk being called a franco-phobe (actually I love France and French Culture, but it does have certain qualities that distinguish it from, say, Swedish or Swiss or German), the French do seem to lean to the hysterical side of human functioning - like Liz (the artist's wife) telling the art dealer how she hated him and then calmly goes about the conversation, smiling and kissing him when he leaves. I found lots of emotion in this movie that wasn't carrying cognitive content - like we, as the viewers, are to think that emotion alone makes a film complex and deep. I'm sorry its just a little too much to take. The movie is beautifully filmed, as is the tradition of the French, but it's aspiration to depth doesn't quite work for me. And please, four hours!

Sunshine (1999)

identification with the aggressor

[15 January 2005]

Sunshine is an epic movie that can be taken on a cultural/historical level as portraying the effects of the political changes to a Jewish family over four generations. That is not the approach I want to take. I wish to speak to the legacy of identification with the aggressor that is exhibited in all the leading men. We see in this film how, in order to survive, one can lose one's true identity in order to assume an identity that will allow survival. That alone is not very interesting. What is interesting is that the dynamic does not stop there but goes well beyond mere survival to actually becoming identified with the oppressor. We see in the film that in order to carry the illusion of power in powerless situations the Fiennes characters persecute the very people he (in his three many roles) comes from and loves. Is this because of a family legacy of cowardice or is this a fact of the human condition? Its a convincing story and should make us all wary of how we might identify as powerful at the expense of others in order to deny our own fragility.