Author Topic: Ferris' GooseEgg Marathon: 40 great films from this decade  (Read 101364 times)

Clovis8

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11719
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #180 on: December 12, 2009, 11:53:28 AM »
Given his community (fashion etc) you can see how nobody would think of a better way to communicate. It's easy to imagine that nobody he knew had any experience in codes etc. I would guess the idea of a different, more efficient method,  probably never crossed anyones mind.

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10830
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #181 on: December 12, 2009, 12:13:23 PM »
Given his community (fashion etc) you can see how nobody would think of a better way to communicate. It's easy to imagine that nobody he knew had any experience in codes etc. I would guess the idea of a different, more efficient method,  probably never crossed anyones mind.

I'm torn between dropping the subject - because obviously it is a true story, and it's an incredible feet what both he and all those around him had to do ...and continuing the conversation draws the thread further away from the positive elements of the film...

but I'm with URI...assign each letter a 3 digit code, each of the digits between 1 and 4.  The most times someone would have to blink for a letter is 8 times.  It would take an interpreter at least a few days to get used to it, but I've got to think this is FAR more efficient in the writing of a BOOK!

a -  1 1 1
b -  1 1 2
c -  1 1 3
d -  1 1 4

e -  2 1 1
f -  2 1 2
g -  2 1 3
h -  2 1 4

i -  1 2 1
j -  1 2 2
k - 1 2 3
l -  1 2 4

m - 2 2 1
n-  2 2 2
o - 2 2 3
p - 2 2 4

q -  3 1 1
r -  3 1 2
s -  3 1 3
t -  3 1 4

u -  3 2 1
v -  3 2 2
w -  3 2 3
x -  3 2 4

y -  3 3 1
z -  3 3 2

I think even a fashion guy could figure this out ;).  this I just came up off the top of my head this morning.  If I'd put some thought into it I'm sure there are far more efficient ways still.

For instance you could rearrange to make the most common letters requiring the fewest blinks.  

In John McCain's war camp they worked out a similar code system to communicate between prison cells using scratches in the dirt.  


"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

Clovis8

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11719
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #182 on: December 12, 2009, 12:16:41 PM »
That is basically the code my girlfriend and I thought of as well. However, I still think it is easy to imagine how many people would not think of this type of system if they had little math or logic background.

I didnt bring up the fashion world as a way to say people in fashion are stupid, just that the skill set they need to succeed in their world does not include the skills needed in creating an efficient communication code.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 12:19:16 PM by Clovis8 »

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #183 on: December 12, 2009, 12:23:59 PM »

I didnt bring up the fashion world as a way to say people in fashion are stupid, just that the skill set they need to succeed in their world does not include the skills needed in creating an efficient communication code.

I was thinking pretty close to the same thing.  Programmers (ahem) and engineers have certain kinds of thinking.  And professional writers/medical staff have other modes of thinking.  It's seems inefficient, but it was acceptable to them. 

If only Ferris and Uri were there!  He could have written the equivalent of War and Peace!
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #184 on: December 12, 2009, 12:49:18 PM »
Given his community (fashion etc) you can see how nobody would think of a better way to communicate. It's easy to imagine that nobody he knew had any experience in codes etc. I would guess the idea of a different, more efficient method,  probably never crossed anyones mind.

I'm torn between dropping the subject - because obviously it is a true story, and it's an incredible feet what both he and all those around him had to do ...and continuing the conversation draws the thread further away from the positive elements of the film...

but I'm with URI...assign each letter a 3 digit code, each of the digits between 1 and 4.  The most times someone would have to blink for a letter is 8 times.  It would take an interpreter at least a few days to get used to it, but I've got to think this is FAR more efficient in the writing of a BOOK!

a -  1 1 1
b -  1 1 2
c -  1 1 3
d -  1 1 4

e -  2 1 1
f -  2 1 2
g -  2 1 3
h -  2 1 4

i -  1 2 1
j -  1 2 2
k - 1 2 3
l -  1 2 4

m - 2 2 1
n-  2 2 2
o - 2 2 3
p - 2 2 4

q -  3 1 1
r -  3 1 2
s -  3 1 3
t -  3 1 4

u -  3 2 1
v -  3 2 2
w -  3 2 3
x -  3 2 4

y -  3 3 1
z -  3 3 2

I think even a fashion guy could figure this out ;).  this I just came up off the top of my head this morning.  If I'd put some thought into it I'm sure there are far more efficient ways still.

For instance you could rearrange to make the most common letters requiring the fewest blinks.  

In John McCain's war camp they worked out a similar code system to communicate between prison cells using scratches in the dirt.  

:D ferris, I think you and Uri would get along great.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #185 on: December 12, 2009, 12:52:33 PM »
Good write-up ferris, even if I disagree completely. My main problem was the one thing you said the movie didn't do, it lost me the first time it broke from its narrative structure to fill in a plot point and then it became progressively worse as the movie would continually break from its narrative structure with no rhyme or reason beyond milking emotion out of the audience in overly manipulative ways. I can't recall, I have tried to forget the movie to be frank, but it was either the phone call from the dad or the shaving sequence with the dad that was the worst offender in this regard, existing only so that the audience can go "aw, isn't that sad" but not staying in step with the structure of the film.

Actually now that I think about it my biggest problem with the breaks was that the film ties the single perspective into the awakening of the main character. The more control he gets over his condition the more the camera opens up, but despite establishing this as a thematic structure the film breaks from it all the time in order to manipulate, like the lone shot of the wife at the train station taking place at a point when his world should still be closed off.

Either way, good write-up.

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #186 on: December 12, 2009, 12:57:57 PM »
Do you mean they couldn't they figure out another communication code - rather than going through the whole alphabet every single time? eg. Morse code? If this is what you meant, this REALLY bugged Uri, too. The inefficiency of the method, however lovely to listen to, bothered him.

Yeah, those doctors and nurses and folks-- I mean, what else were they doing?  They should have taken out a few days to figure out a really good system of communication, rather than just keeping the guy alive.  

Real stories are tough-- reality keeps getting in the way.  And it worked great in the movie.
steve, you seem pretty irritated with the suggestion that there could have been a better way? Uri, quite honestly, is a very compassionate , uncritical person (much more so than I am, in fact) - but he's also very practically minded and for him, watching them use the system they used was like watching a someone patiently emptying a plugged up bathtub with a spoon when he or she would just have to walk over to the next room to get a bucket. And for the record, with me, Uri loved the film. This point about communication was just one of the things that came up in our much larger discussion of the film after we saw it.

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10830
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #187 on: December 12, 2009, 01:34:21 PM »

I didnt bring up the fashion world as a way to say people in fashion are stupid, just that the skill set they need to succeed in their world does not include the skills needed in creating an efficient communication code.

I was thinking pretty close to the same thing.  Programmers (ahem) and engineers have certain kinds of thinking.  And professional writers/medical staff have other modes of thinking.  It's seems inefficient, but it was acceptable to them.  

If only Ferris and Uri were there!  He could have written the equivalent of War and Peace!

I'm willing to concede the point - I'll admit it's easy for me to judge in hindsight.  In the grand scheme of my opinion of the film, this is a very minor.  And to OAD's point - sympathy is where I come from too.  The scene where the wife has to translate for the mistress (or was it ex wife/wife?  wasn't entirely clear) was pretty excruciating.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 01:40:56 PM by ferris »
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10830
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #188 on: December 12, 2009, 01:52:58 PM »
Good write-up ferris, even if I disagree completely. My main problem was the one thing you said the movie didn't do, it lost me the first time it broke from its narrative structure to fill in a plot point and then it became progressively worse as the movie would continually break from its narrative structure with no rhyme or reason beyond milking emotion out of the audience in overly manipulative ways. I can't recall, I have tried to forget the movie to be frank, but it was either the phone call from the dad or the shaving sequence with the dad that was the worst offender in this regard, existing only so that the audience can go "aw, isn't that sad" but not staying in step with the structure of the film.

Actually now that I think about it my biggest problem with the breaks was that the film ties the single perspective into the awakening of the main character. The more control he gets over his condition the more the camera opens up, but despite establishing this as a thematic structure the film breaks from it all the time in order to manipulate, like the lone shot of the wife at the train station taking place at a point when his world should still be closed off.

Either way, good write-up.

I admittedly forgot aobut that train station shot.  Yeah that one is a cheat.  In fact I was looking back at my review this morning and noticed the screenshot with the pool is a cheat as well.  ("Cheat" may be too strong a word - but I'm struggling to think of a more elegant and less divisive word for it at the moment!)

There are two main flashback scenes - one with the shaving and one with the car ride.  The latter is fine.  It did answer some questions.  The earlier one didn't pack much emotional punch for me, however I'd just come from a friend's house where my friend was decribing quite emotionally the difficulty of having to brush his mother's teeth for the first time.  It was really uncanny actually, and I stopped the movie and called my wife in to see it because of the coincidence.  

I meant to mention something about the dream sequences.  I thought these too were fine - and the imagery was cool in places (like the gracier crashing into the ocean) - you had to come up with some way to show how he was lost in his imagination.  I appreciated the way that was done.  Although watching people eat oysters is disgusting.

I'm a little more lukewarm on this film this morning after taking some time to seperate the story from the filmmaking.  But Bill, I'm struggling to think of better ways to tell the same story and still have it compelling enough to propell the narrative.  Despite any flaws I have this is a great story - and it certainly does it's job of introducing this conflict, perking my interest in the source material and most of all making me think a bit different about the huge differences between mental and physical handicaps
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 02:21:39 PM by ferris »
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

ferris

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10830
  • "Bravo Vincent....Bravo!"
Re: Ferris' Goose Egg Marathon: Ten Great Films from this Decade (2000-2009)
« Reply #189 on: December 12, 2009, 05:25:11 PM »
Goose Egg Marathon Film #10



I'm Not There
(2007, Todd Haynes)


“I accept chaos, I'm not sure whether it accepts me”

To me, this line, uttered by Ben Whishaw’s character sums up the core of what is at once awe-inspiring and completely frustrating about Todd Hayne’s 2007 “I’m Not There” – a glorified and slickly presented biopic highlighting the life and events of Bob Dylan.  

It’s a line actually attributed to the man, Bob Dylan, and underscores the main theme of this film –Dylan as a an artist whose complexity and social detachment makes him pretty difficult to nail down for a fortune cookie one-liner or the cover of a cereal box, but he’s surrounded by those who want to label and corral his personas as if to herd a field full of tomcats.  

Todd Haynes take a unique…no BRILLIANT method to investigate the many faces and personas of this classic folk singer, casting six different actors to portray different times of his life.  The technique is particularly effective at forcing the audience to see the constant conflicts between his own life and the life thrust upon him.  Hayne gives particular credit to his audience – expecting them to keep track of constantly intercutting representations of Dylan’s life, unexpected casting and portrayals, oblique imagery and lots of jump cuts between eras are characters – sometimes overlapping in a meta kinda way.  It has at once a Coen Brother’s feel and the mind of a Fellini film.  And for this I really appreciate being made to work to follow the narrative.  When you overlay the gorgeous and often overwhelmingly profound music, there is a quite a bit to keep track of.



However like Dylan’s life portrayed in this film, this “chaos” line sounds deep and clever – until you start to deconstruct it and realize how empty it is...

There are strange areas where we are spoonfed – in some cases it’s almost head-slapping.  Case in point:  early on the younger Dylan, named Woodie Guthrie, carries a guitar with “This Machine Kills Fascists” scribbled on its case.  It’s a great device – especially if left subtle.  But it’s quickly followed by this exchange:

“You have a weapon in there?”

“No, well not in the traditional sense”

We didn’t need that.  

And for 20 minutes we’re presented with the entire conflict that arose from Dylan’s first foray into electric guitar and the backlash of fans and critics.  Rather than let us emphasize with Dylan’s plight for ourselves, we’re given the line “You just want me to say what you want me to say”.  Yeah you mentioned that.  And you will again like four more times.

Later we several scenes scattered around the film that are nice subtle overtures to Fellini’s 8 ½ - which I take as a nice symbol for the meta difficulties of art and celebrity.  But the symbolism gets beat over our head when we see Dylan floating tethered to string.

   
 

But back to positives!  Because there are many!
I will say I particularly appreciated the conflict between Cate Blanchett’s Dylan and the reporter Keenan Jones (played by Bruce Greenwood).  In particular, there is an exchange in the back of a limo in which Dylan rebukes the line of questioning – it later comes to roost in a TV expose (much in keeping with real events in a 1963 Newsweek article) criticizing his disingenuousness and façade.    These exchanges open up a pretty unique theme – can you separate the message of an artist with the beliefs of the artist?  It the Cat Stevens problem: can you separate “Morning has Broken” from his spiritual choices years later?



I often have this thought when you see a elected official or spiritual leader get in trouble because acts of their personal life conflict with their messages from the bully pulpit.  At that point do you really throw out the baby with the bath water?  Is the problem of abusive priests enough to disparage the entire religion?  Does a president’s one-off affair make him a good candidate for impeachment?
 
This film raises great questions about the cult of celebrity and to what extent an artist is expected to live up to his public persona.  It highlights the issue of the constant barrage of questions that are usually more about the reporter or fan than about this subject himself.  Questions weights around the ankles carried place to place.  Even a relatively harmless comment about Lee Harvey Oswald becomes a national stir.  (An aside you have to love John Lennon’s attitude about this in this song “God” – taking his critics head on for the flap about his “more popular than Jesus” comment years earlier)



However, if I do have one problem with the film is, we are given no hooks into Dylan that make him a sympathetic figure.  His has risen on a wave of popularity and media attention that gave him a place of prominence in the culture of the 60s.  He has the largest voice of this generation, but when asked to take responsibility for his perceived abandonment of the cause and the folk music that so characterized it, Dylan’s response is one of reproach.  “You think you know who I am, but you don’t know”.  This have-it-both-ways attitude is a tough sell.  Even the most indie of films and artists are marketing in a gift box with a red bow – this is the dilemma of needing your work seen and appreciated by others but not wanting to get stuck in your little box.  





However Todd Haynes does take this criticism head-on!  There’s this scene with Dylan and Allen Ginsberg at the foot of a huge crucifix when Dylan shouts at Jesus: "Why don't you do your early stuff?"
Man I’ve gone on so long and I didn’t even get into the music and performances.  Let me just say they are rich and magnificent as the reputation that proceeded it.  Yes Kate Blanchet was much deserving of the praise she received.

The music is well – fantastic of course.  But much more the production, arrangements and vocals where very nice – never overreaching, very respectful to the source material, and quite simply a pleasure to the ears.





There is a lot to love here.  So I almost hate to levy the criticizisms I’ve raised here.  But in the end, this 2:15 movie could have packed a far better punch at perhaps 1:50.  In fact, this could have been all-time great.  And that’s what makes this frustrating.  I would have loved to see an edit where the music did most of the talking.  Let us soak in the magnificent cinematography by Edward Lachman and the enigma of three decades of Dylan’s evolving lyrics.


Verdict:
Had very high aspirations and accomplished a lot, but perhaps in the end promised a lot more than it could deliver on.  Great soundtrack!

Grade: B 
« Last Edit: January 29, 2010, 04:52:14 PM by ferris »
"And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs" - Exodus 8:2 KJV
(switchboard)

 

love