http://celinejulie.blogspot.com/2007/09/maternal-love.html
Thank you very much, Mat, for your information.
(If I remember anything wrongly, please forgive me and help me correct it as I don’t trust my memory for films I saw long ago)
I like CASINO (1995, A) a lot, though it’s not the kind of films I would like to revisit again and again, because it presents another world-- the world of mafia/gangsters--where I’m not drawn to. But I like the ending of the film, which seems to lament that Las Vegas has turned into a place for family holiday. It’s strange.
CASINO also has one of the most memorable scenes of Scorsese’s films that I saw. It’s the scene of the freeze frame when Sharon Stone was throwing chips in the air.
Other scenes from Scorsese’s films which linger long in my memory:
1.The ending of GANGS OF NEW YORK (2002, A+) when the landscape of New York is changing with the passage of time. We have seen the brutality happening more than a hundred years ago. We have seen the suffering of lives there more than a hundred years ago. Then we can imagine the harsh lives of people living there 125 years ago, 100 years ago, 75 years ago, until we see the World Trade Center. This scene is very sad and hurtful for me. It seems to speak about the constant suffering of humanity.
2.The scenes when Jessica Lange put on a lipstick in the middle of the night in CAPE FEAR (1991, A)
3.The scenes of a backward tracking shot (I don’t know if I use the right word) in THE COLOR OF MONEY (1986, A+). I think it’s Paul Newman in that scene. He is going to play a pool, and then the camera is backing away from him across a few pool tables.
4.The scene near the end of THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (1993, A+) when Daniel Day-Lewis is imagining that Michelle Pfeiffer is turning back.
-------------------------------------------------------------
This is my reply to Raya in my blog:
http://celinejulie.blogspot.com/2007/09/time-changes-fondness-of-films.html
--Hi Raya! Unfortunately I have seen only two Garrel’s films: THE BIRTH OF LOVE (1993) and LE COEUR FANTOME (1996). It’s hard to say which one I prefer. If I have to choose, I will choose LE COEUR FANTOME, just because it is harder for me to describe how or why I like it. I can describe more easily what I like in THE BIRTH OF LOVE. But I usually love films which give me feelings I can’t describe in words.
In THE BIRTH OF LOVE, I like:
1.The scene of a son calling out for his father
2.The scene of Johanna ter Steege reading a letter to Lou Castel. This scene is so simple, but so magnificent. I overlooked this scene when I saw it, but a Thai critic praised this scene a lot. His writing changed my feeling towards the scene, and probably changed my thinking towards many scenes in many movies I saw afterwards. I used to look for exciting, strange, showy, intentionally impressive scenes, but this film and the writing of that critic made me love simple scenes, too.
3.The face of a tired wife (Is she Marie-Paule Laval?)
4.The scene of Lou Castel and Jean-Pierre Leaud talking in a car
It’s hard for me to say which scenes I love more than the others in LE COEUR FANTOME. I feel as if the emotions in this film run deeper than in THE BIRTH OF LOVE. LE COEUR FANTOME seems to show “life” in a way which touches me very powerfully. Oh, writing about Garrel’s films is too difficult for me. I would love to write ten good reasons why I love LE COEUR FANTOME, but it is beyond my ability. This film just makes me feel so great, and feel some indescribable feelings towards LIFE.
The DVD of REGULAR LOVERS is available in Bangkok, but I haven’t bought it yet.
--The latest film which makes me feel I have to attune my wavelength in order to enjoy the film is FROM THE EAST (1993, Chantal Akerman, A+++++).
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1197/1476419573_ea30f78d9d_o.jpg
4 comments:
Well, my memory isn't great either, and most of the Scorsese films you mentioned are one that I've only seen one time, a long time ago. I think it's interesting that you remember certain scenes/shots/moments, though. Kubrick once said that all films, even bad films, have at least one interesting ide or shot, so watching any film is never without some benefit.
My favourite Scorseses are actually the gangster films like Casino and GoodFellas and The Departed. I have no interest in gangsters, and know nothing about them, but Scorsese makes them fascinating to me.
I think his very best film, though, is Taxi Driver. Whereas his gangster films, on the big screen, are exhilerating, Taxi Driver is profoundly moving. It's one of those films which, for me, improves every time I see it, and to see it on the cinema screen is a transcendent experience.
I think I saw TAXI DRIVER (1976, A) when I was too young to really appreciate it. I saw it about 15 years ago from a Thai-dubbed video. I like it a lot, but I think I would appreciate it more if I see it again. I can hardly remember anything in it now. I just remember that I love Cybill Shepherd in this film. She is very charming. I like her character in this film more than her characters in THE LAST PICTURE SHOW (1971, Peter Bogdanovich, A) or in THE HEARTBREAK KID (1972, Elaine May, A+).
TAXI DRIVER is written by Paul Schrader, who directed some films I hope to see again, too. I saw LIGHT SLEEPER (1992, Paul Schrader, A) about 15 years ago. At that time I thought it was a little bit boring. But later I thought it has its own charms, its own rhythms of life, which can’t be found in most Hollywood films shown in Bangkok. Judging from my fondness, LIGHT SLEEPER has moved from C+ to A during the course of 15 years.
Beautiful. I just saw The Birth of Love last night and realized how great Jean Pierre Leaud is (and we shall see in an upcoming Tsai Ming Liang film I hope). But Castel takes the whole film I think.
I love Garrel. I've only seen 5 of his films after discovering Les Amants Regulier, which I wrote about here, but he's one of my personal cinematic detours. For some reason, he reminds me of a Nouvelle Vague Cassavetes.
I just saw a short documentary about Lou Castel. It’s called INTERVIEW (2003, Jeanne Faust, A+). I’m not sure if it’s a real documentary or not. It is about a woman who wanted to interview Lou Castel, but Castel did not cooperate at all. He just frowned at her in front of the camera all the time, and never tried to answer her questions. It is funny but serious at the same time.
I have seen only five film directed by John Cassavetes. They are:
(in roughly preferential order)
1.FACES (1968, A+)
2.SHADOWS (1959, A+)
3.GLORIA (1980, A+)
4.LOVE STREAMS (1984, A+)
5.MINNIE AND MOSKOWITZ (1971, B+)
I can’t stand the hero of this film.
--I’m not an expert on Cassavetes or Garrel, but I think they both make films which capture the truth about life or essence of life very well. They both make films which don’t belong to normal film patterns. I feel as if they create the characters first, then they let the lives of the characters control the structure of the films, whereas other filmmakers just use normal film structure, and create characters whose lives would fit very well in that normal structure. This kind of filmmaking (the film structure control the characters) would not let the characters really “breathe”, really “live”, unlike Cassevetes or Garrel who let the characters control the film structure.
As I’m obsessed with making lists, I think I’d like to make a list of films which makes me feel that their characters really breathe, really live, or are very life-like.
FICTIONAL FILMS/STAGE PLAYS WHICH SHOW ME “LIFE”
(in alphabetical order)
1.ABIGAIL’S PARTY (1977, Mike Leigh)
2.THE ALL-ROUND REDUCED PERSONALITY – REDUPERS (1978, Helke Sander)
3.AMOUR D’ENFANCE (2001, Yves Caumon)
4.BERLIN CHAMISSOPLATZ (1980, Rudolf Thome)
5.LE COEUR FANTOME (1996, Philippe Garrel)
6.EVERYTHING’S FINE, WE’RE LEAVING (2000, Claude Mourieras)
7.FACES (1968, John Cassavetes)
8.FORGET ME (1994, Noemie Lvovsky)
9.THE GREEN RAY (1986, Eric Rohmer)
10.HIS BROTHER (2003, Patrice Chereau)
11.I AM A SEX ADDICT (2005, Caveh Zahedi)
12.JEALOUSY IS MY MIDDLE NAME (2002, Park Chan-ok)
13.LATE AUGUST, EARLY SEPTEMBER (1998, Olivier Assayas)
14.LENA’S DREAMS (1997, Gordon Eriksen + Heather Johnston)
15.LOULOU (1980, Maurice Pialat)
16.MY SEX LIFE…OR HOW I GOT INTO AN ARGUMENT (1996, Arnaud Desplechin)
17.UNA NOVIA ERRANTE (2007, Ana Katz)
18.PAS DE SCANDALE (1999, Benoit Jacquot)
19.SOMEONE TO LOVE (1987, Henry Jaglom)
20.SOME SECRETS (2002, Alice Nellis)
21.THE THINGS OF LIFE (1970, Claude Sautet)
22.TRASH (1970, Paul Morrissey)
23.A WEEK’S VACATION (1980, Bertrand Tavernier)
24.WILD BEES (2001, Bohdan Slama)
25.YARM PLOB 2 (2007, Jarunun Phantachat)
This is a Thai stage play about three female friends talking to each other for an hour long in late afternoon.
--I think I like this kind of films very much. I wish I could see all the films recommended by Ray Carney, who seem to be an expert in this kind of films.
You can view the list of films recommended by Ray Carney at:
http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/indievision/other.shtml
--Though I love the films Ray Carney love, I also love the films Ray Carney hate. That means I always agree when Carney praises some films, but usually disagree when Carney criticizes some films.
--Excerpts of Ray Carney’s writings:
http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/newsevents/movsked.shtml
“Films like What Happened Was and Faces and Mikey and Nicky and Wanda make the work of Jonze and Anderson and Solondz and Lynch look like Sesame Street. They don’t rely on shock tactics and surprise revelations. They don’t need special effects, narrative tricks, or revelations to make things dramatic. The characters don’t have to have deep, dark secrets in order to hold our interest. “
http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/carncult/orfilms.shtml
“Life is mysterious, but its mysteries are entirely different from the mystifications in L.A. Confidential, Blood Simple, Blue Velvet, or Psycho. Their mysteries are shallow. They can be cleared up with a few words of explanation. Their puzzlements are trivial–matters of fact and event, of who did what to whom. Make a film about real mysteries, mysteries that don't involve facts but feelings–like the mystery of who we are, the mystery of why we do hurtful things to ourselves and others, the mystery of why the effects of our actions can be so different from our intentions, the mystery of why we can never see ourselves as others see us.”
–Excerpted from Ray Carney, "The Path of the Artist," Part III, MovieMaker, Issue 38 (Spring 2000).
Post a Comment