Author Topic: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons  (Read 75768 times)

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #170 on: May 24, 2016, 04:49:01 AM »
Do you have to do them in order ?
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #171 on: May 24, 2016, 06:43:36 AM »
Do you have to do them in order ?

As much as I have to do anyhing. This started because I was listening to older episodes, and when they started talking about the Western marathon, I just wanted to be able to watch the films as I progressed through them. As it stands I'm a little ahead of the episodes I've listened to, but I like following the progression of the podcast.

It's also something that motivates me to keep a relatively steady rythm : I'm not allowed (by myself) to watch most of Bergman or Almodovar before I get to them, so I'd better keep going.
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #172 on: May 27, 2016, 11:39:54 AM »
Woyzeck (Werner Herzog, 1979)



Adam & Sam's take

Filmed right after Nosferatu, Woyzeck is another adaptation : in this case of a incomplete 19th century play that Bertold Brecht was famously fond of. Unlike Nosferatu, it seems at first that this is perfect material for Herzog to pursue his contemplation of human existence, albeit with a more socio-political bent this time. Woyzeck, seemingly a simpleton, is pressed on all sides : the captain scolding him and urging him to be "a good man", the scientist treating him like an animal to be experimented on, his own religious conscience (constantly quoting scripture) and the general awfulness of the world (the officer who sleeps with his wife and humiliates him). Herzog seems to argue that any systemic vision of life, be it political, scientific or religious, leads to dehumanization of others.

But then the story has to kick in. Like in Nosferatu, Herzog just has to come back down to Earth and go on telling whatever story it was that inspired him in the first place, and... it's not great. I'd even say it's pretty terrible : Kinski can certainly play pathetic, but a tragic hero ? I don't know. Maybe Herzog is questioning our own tendency to dehumanize what we don't understand by having Kinski playing a character we should be empathizing with... in that case Werner (years of listening to Paul F. Tompkins makes me feel quite familiar with him) : well done, you won, I'm a horrible human being and I have a hard time feeling bad for a character played by Klaus Kinski. I can feel pity him, at the most.

I just don't think Herzog is very interested in narrative storytelling, and where he made up for it with atmosphere and style in Nosferatu, he... really doesn't here. It's almost incoherent, frankly : Woyzeck seems to identify that his wife is cheating on him and doesn't care, but two scenes later he notices again and it sets him off to the point of murder ? You could argue that what makes him do that is the humiliation he then suffers in the inn/tavern, but his reaction is already different before that : maybe we're supposed to believe he just didn't undersand the first time ? Which brings us to the fact that throughout the first film, Woyzeck seems to be intellectually limited at the very least, but that completely goes away in the latter half.

The pacing is also questionable : this a very short movie (under 80 minutes), but it certainly doesn't feel that way. By the time he gets to the big scene, in which Woyzeck kills his wife, he had completely lost me, and I could see how the choice he makes to slow it down and linger for so long on Kinski's face (which, ok, he does all the time, but those takes are particularly long) could make it pretty powerful, but I could only appreciate it from a distance.

4/10
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #173 on: May 27, 2016, 12:05:37 PM »
I just don't think Herzog is very interested in narrative storytelling

I think that's very true, and Woyzeck is his worst attempt at it. His best narratives -- Aguirre, Fitzcarraldo, Kaspar Hauser, Signs of Life, Nosferatu -- are memorable for their atmosphere and oddball asides. Woyzeck doesn't have much of the former and maybe one or two of the latter. It's mostly just a story and a character that aren't that interesting.

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #174 on: June 01, 2016, 05:26:28 AM »
Mies vailla menneisyyttä / The Man Without a Past (Aki Kaurismäki, 2002)



Adam & Josh's take (starts at 44:04)

The premise of this film (a man gets beaten up, wakes up amnesiac, not knowing his name) lends itself to a quest for identity, self-discovery and perhaps the kind of social commentary that good sci-fi always allows. And those elements are all present, but not in the way you'd expect : Markku Peltola's character never seems that interested or concerned by his past, instead focusing on starting a new life however he can.

The mood and setting are what I appreciate the most here. The use of folk and rockabilly music coupled with the maritime industrial setting of people living in abandoned containers* gives the film a sort of hopeful melancholy that really defines the whole film : one might see it as an indictment of modern society as disconnected and neglectful of ones in need, but that is constracted by what I'm taking to be the film's overall point which is the value of community, something that clearly still exists in the most desolate of situations.

I do think the social commentary that Kaurismäki inserts through our main character's interactions with institutions (struggling with the "no name" problem) are somewhat toothless and easy. It feels like he wants to show that, yes, modern society is heartless and cold, but his heart's not really in it and he's a lot more interested in the portrayal of community, where he finds warmth in the most understated moments : the scenes discussed in the podcast with the jukebox are highlights in that regard.

*I now have an idea of why this Finnish director made a film called Le Havre, living in containers is very much a thing there too, though it's more structured than what's depicted here.

7/10
« Last Edit: June 04, 2016, 03:07:10 AM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #175 on: June 04, 2016, 04:45:45 AM »
Fitzcarraldo (Werner Herzog, 1982)



Adam & Sam's take

I knew it ! Herzog is a closet humanist !

More on that later, but Fitzcarraldo is really everything I hoped it would be, and more. In Aguirre, I felt that Herzog simply didn't have the budget and/or technical mastery to quite accomplish what he was setting out to do. Which... yeah, does that remind you of a certain eponymous character ? More on that later too. In Woyzeck, I questioned Herzog's ability and/or willingness to simply tell a story and Kinski as a likable character we can empathize with on a level beyond "well, he IS human..." : Fitzcarraldo proves me wrong on both counts. I can't believe how warm Kinski's performance is here, how much he made me constantly root for him throughout : a lot of that is in the filmmaking of course, but Kinski's very communicative smile (!!!) does wonders too. So does his witsful staring : it's the first time I really felt like I knew what he was dreaming about. As far as the story goes : the first half-hour of setup is by far the weakest part of the film, but it is very much necessary and gives the film a momentum that Aguirre didn't... not that Aguirre needed it, that film's aimlesness is certainly part of its point, but Fitzcarraldo ends up almost being an adventure film, with Herzog even giving us a few "gathering up a crew" moments, with the ship's captain and cook.

This all means that once we get into the jungle, we care about these characters, even the secondary ones. We want Fitzcarraldo to succeed : because he's endearing, because Claudia Cardinale wants him to, and for the beauty of the gesture. That last one is where I'll get back to my original point : of course Herzog's humanism strikes through in the sense that Fitzcarraldo succeeds. His true goal was never to bring rubber back and become rich : it was to bring the opera to the jungle, and get a steamer over a mountain and build a railroad through the Amazon jungle... it was to accomplish something and to be someone, more than just another insignificant mortal. Fitzcarraldo made me realize that Herzog really, deeply, admires characters like Fitzcarraldo, Aguirre and even John Okello (the revolutionary he borrowed the "Wrath of God" lines from). He might have them soliloquy about the meaningless of life, and surely he does have a good chuckle when they fail because he's conflicted about their grand attempts, but in the end they're right... and Herzog himself is of course exactly like them, something I had somehow not realized until now (even after listening to the Aguirre commentary) : his cinematic enterprises are just as mad as anything they do, by definition in Fitzcarraldo's case.

To get back to the actual film, what makes it stand out is that it is simply a thrilling ride, once the steamer starts its journey. The initial progression with tension mounting up, helped by Popol Vuh dread-inducing score and the knowledge of what silence meant in Aguirre (hearing the first jungle bird made me realize I had really missed them from that film). That the natives this time end up helping out could seem like a cop out, but it is a great turnaround : the film is simply filled with these characters who want to accomplish something more : Herzog is quick to dismiss the idea that the Jivaro would think Fitzcarraldo is a god, but they do want to see if that boat can get through those rapids, and even minor characters like the guy who was waiting for Fitzcarraldo at the train station further serve Herzog's humanistic streak here, as do those loving shots of the steam engine accomplishing the impossible.

Then we get to the business of bringing the boat over the mountain, and I'm very mad that Sam stole my Andrey Rublyov reference, ten years ago. The similarities with that film's last hour were striking to me, with the difference being that I was even more afraid it would fail here, given Herzog's reputation. As the guys mention, every noise it makes while it's getting along is excruciating, and the moment when it enters the water on the other side is as magical as anything I've seen on film. The passage through the rapids is almost too much : just that moment has made the whole thing worthwile already, and they could have died right there that I would have still seen this film as a celebration of the human spirit. But it allows for the wonderful epilogue : Kinski's never looked so happy, and I was right there with him.

9/10 (the first half-hour is painful enough that it does prevent it from getting a perfect score, at least on first viewing)

Sidenote : Aguirre is really growing on me as a film. As I watch more Herzog, I feel like I misunderstood some what he was doing there.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2016, 06:28:21 AM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #176 on: June 04, 2016, 06:50:13 PM »
Herzog is certainly a genius.  As a film, I'd give Fitz about a 3.5 for my own sake. As a symbol of colonial activity, as a depiction of Herzog as a mad genius, I'd give it a 5/5.   A misguided man in all the right ways.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #177 on: June 05, 2016, 06:55:24 AM »
Herzog is certainly a genius.  As a film, I'd give Fitz about a 3.5 for my own sake. As a symbol of colonial activity, as a depiction of Herzog as a mad genius, I'd give it a 5/5.   A misguided man in all the right ways.

Misguided because of the ethically questionable filming conditions ? It's a bit hard, with Herzog, to separate the film from everything around it. There's a documentary about the making of Fitzcarraldo right ?
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #178 on: June 05, 2016, 12:17:23 PM »
Herzog is certainly a genius.  As a film, I'd give Fitz about a 3.5 for my own sake. As a symbol of colonial activity, as a depiction of Herzog as a mad genius, I'd give it a 5/5.   A misguided man in all the right ways.

Misguided because of the ethically questionable filming conditions ? It's a bit hard, with Herzog, to separate the film from everything around it. There's a documentary about the making of Fitzcarraldo right ?

Yes.  And yes.  And yes:  Burden of Dreams.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #179 on: June 15, 2016, 05:27:16 AM »
Cobra Verde (Werner Herzog, 1987)



Adam & Sam's take

While Cobra Verde has its moments, I mostly stand with Adam on this one : Herzog's difficulties with narrative storytelling are on display here, as they are in every film in the marathon really, except this time he never really gets to the good stuff. Reflecting on it, I think part of the reason Fitzcarraldo works so much better than Aguirre is its running time : they both start with a clumsy half-hour of setting up, but Aguirre is almost over by the time the mood reall sets in, while Fitzcarraldo still has an hour to go. Cobra Verde, meanwhile, seems to permanently be stuck in that first half-hour : on the surface it follows a similar structure to Fitzcarraldo, in that we meet Kinski's character in a colonial setting, being sent by rich men to do something crazy in "uncivilized" land, and then the film follows him there. The circumstances are different of course, mainly because (as Adam mentioned), Cobra Verde (the character) doesn't have as clear a goal as Fitzcarraldo has : he's going in Africa to restart the slave trade after the king of Dahomey rebels against it, but it seems to be more about personal advancment than anything else. He's closer to Aguirre in a sense, but without the delusions of grandeur.

I suppose Herzog is saying that Fitzcarraldo, had he lived in another time, would have been just as horrible as Cobra Verde is : slavery is a means to and end to him, and morality means very little when faced with human ambition. Herzog, perhaps, argues that bringing a boat over a mountain isn't that different from establishing a slave-based kingdom : both are incredible accomplishments, the second one just happens to be morally reprehensible. That's all interesting theoretically, but it makes Cobra Verde a much tougher watch, and I'm not sure Herzog is really up to the task of tackling slavery as a topic. The way he closes the film feels especially wrong, with Kinski monologuing about how slavery is humanity's worst deed, and Herzog stopping just short of coming on screen himself by having text over the credits saying something that amounts to little more than "Slavery's bad, guys".

Herzog's biting on more than he can chew, and even his usual musical interludes, as joyful and wonderful as they are on face value (literally), are less effective because of it (also the way women are treated in the film in general). Again, one might argue that it's the whole point : Herzog is perhaps saying that we're all hypocrites, celebrating great achievments and humanity as long as we don't have to face the dirty things that were done to get there... True enough, but I don't know that the film is focused enough to drive that home : too much plot, not enough striking imagery : there is some of that (the Sisyphus-like sequence at the end and the confrontations with the King of Dahomey), but it doesn't flow as well as in his Amazon films (get it ?) or Nosferatu.

As for Kinski... I won't go as far as Adam and say he's outright bad here, but there is seomthing to what he observes about Herzog exposing him in a way. This is Kinski at his most unhinged, to the point that it feels like a preview of the "Mein liebster Fiend" documentary : for the first time in this marathon, I found myself thinking about Kinski during the film, instead of his character. This is especially true in the amazon training sequence, which is basically just Kinski screaming and hacking at African women for 15 minutes. Some of it might be diminishing returns as well : his staring isn't enough to establish Cobra Verde's character, so Herzog's decision to almost entirely skip his early life as an escaped miner, turned bandit then plantation overseer, ends up not working as well as it might have a decade earlier.

4/10
« Last Edit: June 15, 2016, 05:33:26 AM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

 

love