10/31: Inland Empire


The first time I saw David Lynch's much-discussed newest feature Inland Empire, a few months ago, I was convinced that the narrative threads of this complex, twisting film were all just outside my grasp. I felt sure that another viewing or two would clarify things, make the connections between the film's obvious multiple layers of reality and fantasy clearer, just as they had when I watched Mulholland Drive a few additional times. Revisiting it now, a few new things did indeed click, associations and connections that I'd missed the first time in the film's dense layering of stories and images and echoes upon echoes. On the whole, though, my experience of the film was remarkably similar to the first time I watched it — dark, strangely compelling, mesmerizing in the flow of its imagery and the sudden transitions between locales and realities. And I felt, once again, that the overall thread of its narrative was somewhere just beyond my grasp. In fact, I'm starting to think that it's something of a mistake to even approach the film in a narrative mindset. Lynch's films of late have often been thought of as "puzzle films," but really this only works even slightly for Mulholland Drive. The labyrinthine Lost Highway twists and turns away from the kind of narrative analysis that Salon performed on Mulholland in their now-famous feature, and even that interesting explanation leaves plenty of mysteries unresolved and loose threads untied when the film is over.

This is even more true of Inland Empire, which resists even the least attempt at plot summary. The film is a three-hour fever dream, a dense collage of alternate realities in which Laura Dern plays an actress, a Southern belle committing adultery, a Los Angeles prostitute, and an abused wife telling her story to a shadowy man who may be out to help her or hurt her. These stories weave into each other without warning or explanation, and some seemingly unconnected fragments may actually be part of the same story. And all this is connected, somehow, to a young girl sitting alone in a room watching TV. She's a Polish prostitute from an earlier era, who may have been killed by the mysterious carnival barker known only as the Phantom, who may in turn be connected to Dern's husband in all her various iterations, played by Peter Lucas. There are, of course, numerous explanations for all this, and some of them are fairly compelling, but none that I've seen or thought up seem to hold together quite as well as the through-line in Mulholland Drive. To some extent, the film is the story of the actress Nikki, who in playing the part of the adulteress Susan, begins to fall for her co-star (Justin Theroux) in real life as well. As she begins to conflate the film with reality, her mind becomes unhinged, and she's drawn into both the film and the much earlier, more violent Polish folk tale that inspired the film's supposedly cursed script. On the face of it, this is an interesting idea, but it hardly begins to explain more than a few of the film's many facets, and leaves plenty of loose ends dangling.

This second viewing has convinced me, for now, that this film may be better approached as a pure avant-garde work, without looking for or expecting any such narrative coherence. I've come to see that what holds my attention in the film is not the shards of narrative that swirl around Laura Dern's shifting identities, but the terrifying atmosphere created by Lynch's disorienting visuals. Much has been made of his decision to turn away from film for digital video, and not just DV but a particularly lo-fi, consumer-grade digital camera. In fact, this is a perfect fit for such hallucinatory material, and the dark, hazy visuals frequently call to mind Derek Jarman's super-8 work, which achieved a similarly smeared, ugly aesthetic by reducing the grade of film and then blowing it up to 35mm for projection. Here, Lynch also pushes his technology to its limits, and the result is a very distinctive look. Large segments of the film are almost entirely encased in blackness, with flashes of light and blurry, barely glimpsed faces floating in the dark. As with the last viewing, I took a while to get adjusted to the DV in the opening scenes, especially during Dern's freaky encounter with a prophesying Grace Zabriskie. But once I'd settled into the film, the darkness and distorted, artificial quality of the DV proved to lend themselves very well to Lynch's never-ending series of funhouse mirrors disguised as a narrative.

Inland Empire is, as befits its length, many things. It is, first and foremost, an exhaustive catalogue of David Lynch's ideas and obsessions, a kind of meta-text to his previous films. His favored themes show up yet again, especially his exploration of the Hollywood star machine, which is ridiculed and skewered here, along with Hollywood's recycling of other cultures' ideas, its treatment of women, and its reliance on cliché. These are of course familiar themes from Mulholland Drive, and the exploration of identity and playing roles dates back at least to Lost Highway. But Inland Empire is not so much a retread as a distillation, a development of his signature themes into their ultimate expression. Laura Dern, back in a Lynch film for the first time since Wild At Heart, gives a powerhouse performance, acting a lot of the time in unsparingly tight close-ups that require her to act intensively with her facial expressions, while also handling the shifts between an array of different characters all played by her. She's the centerpiece of a film that's brimming with ideas and images, enthralling from its first image to its last.

[Note: I have more comments about this film in my write-up of its mini-feature "sequel" made up of deleted scenes, More Things That Happened.]

I Knew This BS Was Coming....


First the cover of "Today's Black Woman", now this. It is said that Elise Neal may play Karrine "Supahead" Steffans in a biopic.

Why, why, WHY is this woman given so much attention? Believe me, as I comment on this, there is absolutely no haterade involved, as some people like to accuse me of here and there--I have a good life...I just say what I feel.

As someone who has worked in entertainment, I know that it is one of the easiest feats in the world to eff a celebrity if you choose to. You basically just have to stand upright and have half a pulse. 99% of the time, they are either just amusing themselves or just seeing if they can get it. Example: One well-known rapper's opening line to me was "you know I wanna bone you right?" Romantic....it's like shooting fish in a barrel to get with these guys.

So why is opening your legs and putting your mouth on someone cause celebre'? I could even allow if she was an interesting hoe, which she is not, just delusional. I am dumbfounded every time she calls herself "a great mother" (in her book she admits to leaving her son with various strangers for long stretches of time, without checking on him) or a "best-selling author" with her embarrassing elementary school style of writing. Check with Toni Morrison on that one.

What does make her different from the thousands of other women who have similar stories (whether they went there or not) is that Supahead's mouth (and other holes) are 20 sizes bigger in a shameless quest for fame at any cost. I agree with Jamie Foxx and the moniker he bestowed her on his radio show: "Pre-paid hooker". Please let this movie go to the nearest dusty 99 cent DVD bin.

For a funny post about Supaho, click here.

Lady Looks The Blues....


A looong way from "Mahogany". rws

Hmmmmm.....

Interesting....from AOL:

Rock star Lenny Kravitz will finally follow the steps of his mother, actress Roxie Roker (The Jeffersons), ex-wife Lisa Bonet (The Cosby Show), and daughter Zoe (The Brave One) and make his acting debut in the independent film 'Push', which is being directed by Lee Daniels.

Also featured in the film are Mo'nique, Paula Patton and newcomer Gabourey "Gabbie" Sidibe.

According to Variety, the film is about Clareece "Precious" Jones, an overweight, illiterate African-American teen in Harlem. Just as she's about to give birth to her second child, Jones is accepted into an alternative school where a teacher (Patton) helps her find an alternative path in her life. Mo'nique plays the girl's mother and Kravitz plays a nurse who shows kindness to Jones.


From IW: Is Lee the reason why Lenny had that short term ill-advised James Brown hair?

Please, Please, Please--Just Be Quiet

So there is this "black" film critic that is seemingly starved for attention, Armond White, who is always going against the grain. I don't really speak on him, cause I think he does it on purpose so he can see and hear his name in public. He said some pretty f'd up things about the Don Cheadle/Kasi Lemmons movie "Talk To Me", which I commented on this summer in my post "Urkel Is That You?" and here.

Well, it seems that Mr. White is still riding the crazy train to senility based on an article I read on The Politic.Com:


Black Cinema & White Criticism

Armond White rides to the defense of mediocre black director Tyler Perry. Why is Perry consistently slaughtered by the critics? Yep, you guessed it. If you have an ear for the absurd with an intellectual bend, this may be one of the funniest articles you ever read. Some excerpts [including a spirited defense of R. Kelly’s “vernacular”]:

"Most critics don’t “get” Tyler Perry basically because most critics are whites who are not only clueless about Perry’s African-American culture, but unsympathetic to his particular expression.

"It’s alarming that American film critics alienate themselves from the aspects of Perry’s films that should be universal.

"Perry’s critical beat-down isn’t an issue of knowledge—or taste—so much as cultural preference.

"Nothing in Knocked Up is as meaningful as Perry’s spectacle of men who must restrain their anger physically or his politically incorrect fashion show of women proudly, luxuriously wearing furs as signs of pleasure and achievement.

"This happens to be the basis of R. Kelly’s extraordinary music-video opera, Trapped in the Closet—a work of true genius that the media has also underrated and ridiculed. The media mocks R. Kelly’s vernacular (calling it “crazy” is the easiest way to avoid its daring and brilliance) just as Perry’s comedy and Eddie Murphy’s in Norbit are disdained as unsophisticated or vulgar.

"Besides, Denzel will take us back to modern slavery next month.


From IW: What?

Today In B'Days


Nia Long is 37-wow.

I was never excited by her as an actress, but she has been in plenty of high profile black films, and is a staple of Black Hollywood. Happy birthday.

Michael Beach is 44.

10/30: La Truite; Holiday


Joseph Losey's La Truite is a strange and deeply unsettling film, not so much because of what happens on screen — not much happens at all, actually — but because of what it obliquely suggests. It's a work of odd stasis, with a curiously elliptical narrative that frustrates at every turn. Of course, Losey has always been a somewhat difficult figure to get a grasp on, and that is perhaps nowhere more true than in this nearly asexual meditation on sexuality. Isabelle Huppert turns in a stellar performance as the manipulative Frédérique, the daughter of the owners of a country trout farm, where she works, as the opening scene shows, squeezing out the bladders of fish as though she's milking them. This casually disturbing image sets the tone for the film, as Frédérique has made it her mission in life to milk men for all they're worth without ever offering them much in return. She marries the fey, perpetually ailing and conflicted homosexual Galuchat (Jacques Spiesser), to whom she seems genuinely devoted despite their sexless union, but this doesn't stop her from seducing, almost offhand, two businessmen who the couple meet at a bowling alley.

She runs off with one of these men, Saint-Genis (Daniel Olbrychski) on a business trip to Japan, and though she turns on the charm in some ways, she keeps him constantly at a distance and totally frustrated. Huppert's performance is remarkable because she manages to convey a subtle aura of seduction that emanates from her body at all times without her ever even doing anything. Frédérique is crass and hardly a match for the glamorous women who are set against her, played by an aging but still radiant Jeanne Moreau and the black model Lisette Malidor. Nevertheless, she exudes a subtle sexual pull that seems to draw every man in her vicinity to her, like a trout letting off pheromones.

Losey lets the implications of her manipulations and coldness play themselves out from such an objective distance that at times it feels like the narrative is in danger of slipping out of reach. Losey's objectivity verges on indifference at times, a coldness towards these characters that is very much like Frédérique's indifference towards the men around her. His presentation of the nouveau riche business class is a deadpan satire with few enough jokes but plenty of sharp critical observations, as in the dryly funny dinner scene where Losey skewers the banal chatter and pompous self-inflation of the bourgeoisie money-makers. The film is all about careful observation and accumulation of detail. Not for the sake of psychological insight, since the characters are ciphers with little enough explication of their actions, but for the examination of the ways in which sex, power, class, and money interact with each other.

This was Losey's penultimate film, made in France at the end of his lifelong post-McCarthy exile from Hollywood, and it finds the director's keen analytical mind and unique perspective still in full flower. The intentionally showy camerawork, marked by constant pans, unsteady tracking, and attention-getting zooms, keeps the viewer destabilized at every point, always too far away from Frédérique's story to really get into her head. The only exception is the haunting and powerful final shot, in which Losey finally allows a moment of psychological insight to penetrate his character. He sustains a long close-up on a cryptically smiling Huppert, framed against a window as her husband is visible outside, pacing back and forth. By the end of the film, she's manipulated herself into a position of relative power and prestige, a seeming happy ending, but when asked if she likes things better now, she can only say, "It's all the same." Losey holds the shot a moment longer, the static close-up offset by the background tension of the pacing Galuchat, an enduring image of disillusionment and Frédérique's belated realization of her life's essential emptiness.



Holiday is the kind of fun, witty, vibrant, and intelligent Hollywood comedy that, unfortunately, modern Hollywood no longer shows the least interest in making. This film is a sheer joy to watch, the kind of film where you can simply get lost in its characters and milieu while they're on screen, only to find that they're still lingering with you long after the film is over. Director George Cukor has a light touch for comedy, deftly balancing the witty banter and comedic scenes with a real sense of drama. This drama arises from the fact that one senses, from the very beginning of the film, that Cary Grant's Johnny is a much better match for the free-spirited Linda (Katharine Hepburn) than he is for her more straitlaced sister Julia (Doris Nolan). Part of this is sheer Hollywood gamesmanship — when Katherine Hepburn shows up in what seems at first to be a supporting role, it's instantly clear that she's going to have to take control of the film and end up with the leading man somehow. But Cukor is also wise to let the romance between Grant and Hepburn develop naturally, subtly, so that their growing love is clear to the audience well before it's clear to either of them.

When the film opens, Johnny and Julia have just gotten engaged after a whirlwind romance when they met on vacation. Johnny's a rough-and-ready fellow who's pulled himself up from very humble origins to become a moderately successful businessman, but he's stunned when he discovers that Julia is a fabulously wealthy heiress from the old-money Seton family. The fit proves to be poor, especially since Johnny has dreams of striking it rich in business early in life so he can then take a few years off to explore the world. He's therefore not too eager to settle down into the kind of staid life in finance that Julia's father envisions for him, and as the engagement announcement looms closer, it becomes increasingly clear that Julia is carved from the same mold as her father. In contrast, the iconoclastic Linda is a true breath of fresh air. Of the three Seton children, only Julia seems comfortable in their sheltered, money-über-alles existence. Linda retreats into childhood memories of their mother and the "play room" that she set up as an alternative to the marble pillar glamour of their mansion. Their brother Ned (Lew Ayres), meanwhile, retreats into alcoholism, and his bleary-eyed performance provides a kind of foreshadowing of what might become of Johnny if he follows through on marrying Julia — smashed dreams and chronic depression.

At the heart of this film is a magical New Year's Eve party that locates a small core of fun-loving vibrancy amidst a sea of pretension and empty riches. Linda is distraught that her father has not allowed her to throw the intimate party she envisioned for Julia's engagement, instead turning it into yet another dull society ball. Linda retreats once again into her play room, and over the course of the party her inner sanctum becomes a similar retreat for all the party's genuine souls. Johnny's whimsical friends (Edward Everett Horton and Jean Dixon, in great bit turns) are drawn there before long, as is Ned, and finally Johnny himself. The quintet find themselves throwing an impromptu party of their own, with a puppet show, Ned playing the piano, and Johnny and Linda attempting back flips and acrobatic feats. It's a magical interlude, a small holiday from the dullness of the society party happening a few floors below, and the intrusion of Julia and her father at the end is a rude awakening, the destruction of something beautiful and pristine that was developing among those free-wheeling spirits.

The film never actually gives poor Julia much of a chance. Jean Dixon isn't much of a challenge for the wise-cracking, earnest Hepburn, and the audience is rooting for the proper match between Grant and Hepburn from the very first moment they appear on screen together. What's special about the film is the urgency with which it imbues this budding romance, the sense that this is a crucial decision for Johnny. In the climactic scene where Julia's father begins laying out the road ahead for them if he marries Julia, the tension begins mounting to tremendous levels as it becomes clear just how bad a fit for Johnny this constricted life would be. The film certainly parodies the old money lifestyle; when Julia earnestly tells Johnny how much fun business can be, one can't help but laugh, especially in light of Grant's shell-shocked expression. But more importantly, the film stresses that different lifestyles suit different people, and that the choices we make in life define the paths that are open to us. Johnny and Linda, ultimately, realize this, and realize the importance of going off on their own holiday together, making choices for themselves.

She Must Be Having Whitley Flashbacks....



From Rhymes With Snitch. This may explain why Jasmine's been looking 70 instead of 40:

OK, so Jasmine Guy co-executive directed the Turks and Caicos film festival last week and invited Amanda Bynes to collect the "Rising Star" award. I know, why the hell would she invite Amanda Bynes? Because of Hairspray? Who went to see that? Anyway, after demanding four first class airline tickets and two double hotel suites, Amanda arrived on the Island and didn't attend one single event. She even bailed on a celebrity boat cruise with Michael Clarke Duncan and Gabrielle Union. They say she spent the whole time jet skiing. Anyway, after Jasmine confronted her, Amanda's people sent word that if Jasmine spoke to Amanda again, she'd leave and not accept her award. Amanda's friends told Page Six that Jasmine acted like a "drunken bitch" and that her husband even apologized to Amanda for it. "She's crazy," Mandy's friends said, "She [Jasmine] was screaming at her, 'I didn't invite you here to have fun! I invited you to work!'


From IW: Didn't they already have this festival 2 months ago? I wrote about it here. Why would you make Amanda Bynes of all people be the guest of honor? Are you trying to be purposely low-budget? Why is Jasmine Guy directing anything? Why is there a persistent rumor that Eddie Murphy's ex and her newly stripper-sized chest is messing around with Lisa Raye's husband (the Prime Minister of Turks & Caicos)....and why wasn't Lisa Raye there-what else does she have to do?

Soooo many questions.....


Update: Received this pic from coloredgirlswhohaveconsidered. Put the glass down, girl, just put it down.

10/29: Invocation of My Demon Brother; L'amour existe; The Wild Blue Yonder


Revisiting Fantoma's second collection of Kenneth Anger's films, next up was Invocation of My Demon Brother. This is another of Anger's expressions of his ritualistic magic, like the earlier Inaugaration of the Pleasure Dome, but I for one found this film to be much more effective, with a visceral assault of wild imagery. Anger densely layers superimposed images of his ritual performances, creating intense and often frightening collages. He superimposes multiple faces together, forming complex webs of eyes or laughing mouths packed into the frame, and speeds up rapidly edited ritual footage to enhance its immediacy.

The film's bracing visual impact is matched by the brutal score from Rolling Stones frontman Mick Jagger; if it wasn't for his name in the credits, I would've guessed this was a modern noise composition. The soundtrack is a rough, noisy feedback improvisation in the spirit of Lou Reed's infamous Metal Machine Music, a mechanically rhythmic exploration of harsh electronic tones bleating and squealing behind the images. The periodic bursts of less disciplined textured noise become a component in the overriding rhythm as well as the piece goes along, and the film's editing rhythms often play off of the music. This is one of Anger's most potent outbursts of visual excess.



I was somewhat surprised to discover that Maurice Pialat's 1960 short film debut, L'amour existe, was not the minimal dialogue-based drama I would've expected as a starting point for his career. Indeed, for his first film, Pialat forgoes narrative altogether, crafting a free-associative essay film that has much more in common with the first efforts of Alain Resnais than I ever would've guessed based on their respective later work. The film begins with an elegiac childhood remembrance. A romanticized voiceover narrates a series of key childhood moments — afternoons in the cinema, a map that aroused fantasies of far-off places — while Pialat's camera tracks across the suburbs of Paris. The film is an endless series of such stately tracking shots, the grand romance of the camera's gestures serving as a counterpoint to the general squalor that Pialat is depicting.

His film is essentially a recounting of the full life cycle of a lower-class suburban laborer, commuting into the city and back for hours every day, working hard for little pay, given exceedingly little free time and nothing of substance to fill it with. The film's introduction, in boyhood, is relatively brief, and then, the voiceover says, "the suburbs grow up" and the time of carefree adolescence comes to an end. From there, his camera roams freely across the streets of Paris and its surrounding environs, while the narration presents a poignant depiction of post-war Paris and the plight of its workers. The bulk of the film is taken up by this discussion of the working life, exploring the disconnection of workers from culture and art, the long hours, the decrepit neighborhoods outside Paris, the cramped public transportation. After all this, Pialat suggests, the workers are released into the relative peace of old age, which he depicts as a pale shadow of childhood's carefree spirit.

This is a lovely, understated cinematic poem that combines an evocative tone with a probing social conscience. Its an interesting start for Pialat, but on reflection not quite as odd as I initially though. All of his films display a sharply honed moral sense and an interest in the seeming banalities of existence, even if later on he would turn to narrative features rather than documentary essays.



Werner Herzog's The Wild Blue Yonder is a unique, compelling, but ultimately uneven effort from this master director of the uncharted and unusual. Herzog's work has always ventured in search of the unexplored territories, and his greatest sympathy has always been with those characters — real or imagined — who set off to do the impossible or the foolhardy. Some of his greatest work, especially in the latter part of his career, has been concerned with finding these adventurers in real life and crafting visionary documentaries around their surreal journeys. In a few of these, like Fata Morgana and Lessons of Darkness, documentary and fiction blend almost seamlessly, with Herzog narrating journeys into the unreal using footage wholly taken from the real. These science fiction documentaries, of which Wild Blue Yonder is the latest example, have often ranked among Herzog's most fascinating films, but this one doesn't quite reach the same ecstatic heights.

In the film, an alien (Brad Dourif) lands on Earth as part of an exhibition fleeing his now-inhospitable home in the faraway Andromeda galaxy. He's stunned to find, though, that the people of Earth are in the process of sending out their own astronauts in search of a better place to live, and he can only watch in awe and sadness as those astronauts land on and explore his former home, an icy planet in Andromeda. Herzog depicts this journey using documentary footage shot on a real space shuttle exhibition and on a diving exhibition below the ice floes in Antarctica, as well as periodic archival footage from NASA and the history of aviation. There are also a handful of fictional vignettes with Dourif, as the alien visitor, ranting and spouting his philosophy. Dourif is the film's first big problem. His oddball persona and earnest lunacy is more than a little off-putting, and he often seems like he doesn't know whether to play the alien as threatening, poignant, or silly. The result is mostly just awkward. Fortunately, he's a little better when he's relegated to voiceover, and he especially tones down his melodramatic intonation when he begins to narrate the Earthling astronauts' mission, adopting a more hushed and whispery tone that's better suited to the film's overall mood of melancholy contemplation.

Indeed, once the film gets past a bumpy start that's heavy on Dourif and lots of CIA conspiracy theory nonsense, things become much more promising. Some of the space shuttle footage is still a bit dry, and Herzog mostly lets it stand on its own, possibly banking on a certain awe factor associated with the weightless movement of the astronauts. I can't speak for everyone, but a lifetime of being exposed to this kind of footage has possibly diminished its inherent impressiveness too much. This is not true, however, of the footage from Antarctica, taken by improvisational guitarist and deep sea diver Henry Kaiser. As the astronauts disembark from their shuttle, they descend into a gorgeous underwater netherworld, teeming with strange life and flooded with a gorgeous blue light. Herzog has always been fascinated by the foreignness of our own planet, and both Fata Morgana and Lessons of Darkness were structured as the experience of Earth through the eyes of alien visitors. Here, the concept is taken a step further, as images from Earth stand in for another planet. The Earth is made strange to its own inhabitants, who poke around and explore its recesses as though they were on a true alien world. It's some truly awe-inspiring photography, and here Herzog is probably wise to let it stand mostly on its own. Its eerie beauty speaks for itself.

Also contributing to the film's strange appeal is the haunting, utterly original score, performed by cellist Ernst Reijseger with Senegalese vocalist Mola Sylla and a choir of Sardinian singers. The music is stunning, achieving a strange blend somewhere between African vocal music, European religious music, and modern avant-garde composition. It's a perfect complement to Herzog's gorgeous imagery, evoking an otherworldly aura that helps to disassociate the images from their earthbound origins, aiding the transition to an imaginary icy world in the Andromeda galaxy. The music was so beautiful, so unique, that I had to immediately order the soundtrack CD as soon as the film was over. Reijseger's compositions elevate the film to a whole other level.

Wild Blue Yonder winds up being an interesting but only partially successful venture into Herzog's trademark territory of "ecstatic truth." The film examines man's isolation from his environment, possibly the universal condition if even aliens feel the same disconnection. Beings from one planet flee to another, only to find that the denizens of that planet are also heading off for uncharted waters. In examining this poetic situation, Herzog pulls in NASA science, string theory and astrophysics, and some of the most beautifully shot underwater footage I've ever seen. With such an odd mix of ideas and images blended together, not to mention the collision of Dourif's fictional framing story with documentary realities, it's perhaps not surprising that this film hangs together a bit awkwardly. Still, there's plenty of great material here to make this well worth seeing — as pretty much all of Herzog's films are.

Don't Mean To Be A Debbie Downer But....


I was talking to one of my friends yesterday who told me that they had a bootleg copy of "American Gangster". It was strange, I actually felt my heart drop.

I have never been one to scream anti-piracy or "don't break the law".....I feel most studios make a gang of over-inflated dough, and I am certainly no angel myself. My thing is live and let live, unless there are serious disrespect issues.

Someone even sent me an email (albeit a kinda crazy one) pleading that I blog something about the piracy of American Gangster...I was still unmoved. I know that people can't always afford the movies, can't get a sitter, and if they're like me, really don't like going to the theater (too cold, people flappin' the lips, etc.)

I saw a screener of the movie that someone who worked on the film had, so I got lucky....I really don't know why I want this film to do well, but I do.....I think it's because Denzel is the closest thing we have to a Sidney Poitier in this generation--and he keeps us looking dignified and intelligent at all times.

I don't wanna preach, but if this time you can support this instead of the corner bootleg man...especially since I think it's awfully damned suspicious that a pristine copy was made available....."something in the milk ain't clean" as the kids say.


For more suspicious activity as of late, check out the shenanigans that happened with Tyler Perry's "Why Did I Get Married" here (make sure to scroll down). Unclean milk indeed.

TERRENCE WATCH!-part five


It's about time I got some Terrence news...I was starting to get the sweats! From Dlisted:

Terrence Howard left Crimson the other night in Los Angeles with a lovely blonde and by lovely blonde I mean skanky natural brunette. Something tells me that isn't a Halloween costume Terrence is wearing. A velour tracksuit to a nightclub? Poor girl is totally looking for the baby wipes. "I swear I had them earlier Terrence! I swear! My coochie is clean!!!"

From IW: I knew it was only a matter of time before he went there....he looked waaay too comfortable hanging out with Paris Hilton. She can have him; at this point I can't see any self-respecting sista wanting to deal with his madness (and those outfits, murse *manpurse* intact).

Hanging out in L.A.? I might have to do some up-close surveillance, haha.

wtf is that chick wearing in the back?

Today In B'Days

Miss Best Weave in Hollywood (she really won that!), Gabrielle Union is 35. I thought she was still in her 20's....her skin looks fantastic.

Tracee Ellis Ross is also 35. She looks pretty good too.

Melba Moore is 62, and I wonder why she isn't acting these days?


Update: Purple Zoe said Melba looks great for her age; agreed for sure. I received this note from her manager:


i am melba moores manager ron richardson [in] answer to your question melba would be acting if the right roles came about. if you know of any holler pass my number on to anyone interested. shes still here. her last movie was the fighting temptations with beyonce knowles but its time for larger roles. she's a legend and deserves it. she hasn't lost a beat her, my space page is www.myspace.com/melbamoore attached is her latest shot.




10/28: Arabic Series #11-19; The Ox-Bow Incident


Stan Brakhage's Arabic Series is a suite of 20 short 16mm films, ranging from 5 minutes to half an hour in length, that rank among the director's most abstract and challenging works. I missed out on #s 0-10 yesterday at the Anthology Film Archives, but I was here for today's screening of #s 11-19 in the series (though #12 seemed to be absent). These films confound even the limited potential for figurative or thematic interpretation that I discussed in my last Brakhage post, existing entirely in a framework of visceral sensory experience that represents Brakhage at his most primal and elemental. The films all deal with light and color in their most basic forms, crystalline shards of prismatic light dancing across a grainy black surface.

Over the course of the eight films in the series I saw, Brakhage explores a variety of forms of light, everything from star-like pinpricks, to diamond-shaped bursts, to diffuse shifting glows that spread across the frame or collide with other areas of color. There are frequently points when the frame goes entirely black, a dense grainy black that seems to hint at the return of the light at any moment. At times, it seems like Brakhage or someone else is standing between the camera and the light source, or placing some object between them, so that the light peeks around the edges of the obstruction like a sunrise coming over a hill. At other times, superimposed (probably optically printed?) bits of light play off each other, scattered across the black of the frame. The individual films have their own identities, too: #13 features mostly diffuse color fields while #14 is a bit spikier and pointillist, and the final three films are especially colorful and lively, with bursts of bright blue and red, super-saturated golden yellows, and pale purple washes. But on the whole the films work best as a cluster, because the careful, meditative quality of the works — a stark contrast to, for example, the frantic pacing of Brakhage's hand-painted work — lends itself to extended contemplation.

Brakhage himself compares these films to music, specifically modern composition, and the comparison makes a certain amount of sense. These are carefully calibrated explorations of rhythm, and the relationships that Brakhage develops between different areas of color and light might easily be thought of as akin to the relationship between sounds in music. With their measured rhythmic pacing and self-contained, entirely non-figurative imagery, these films seem to invite a wholly different experience of viewing. This is, of course, true of all Brakhage's films to some extent or another, but most of his other films at least provide a handhold for those inclined to look for one. The hand-painted films at least offer the possibility of figurative identification amidst the constantly shifting forms, and the photographic montage films like Cat's Cradle or A Child's Garden and the Serious Sea, no matter how rapidly edited, usually provide at least a hint of figures and mini-narratives and events. There is nothing of this kind to hold onto in these films. This is pure light, and not even light that can be traced back to a source, since Brakhage has entirely divorced these images from even a trace of concrete reality. This makes these films perhaps the purest expression of Brakhage's art that I've yet come across. If cinema is an artform of light, the Arabic Series is cinema in its most primal and instinctive form, splashing light across the screen in mesmerizing patterns and leaving the spectator overwhelmed when it's all over.



William Wellman made his name with The Ox-Bow Incident, a potent use of the Western genre to tell an allegorical story of miscarried justice and mob rule. Two drifters (Henry Fonda and Henry Morgan) wander into a small town just as a local rancher is murdered by cattle rustlers, and they find themselves swept up with an angry lynch mob to go track down the perpetrators. The mob quickly stumbles across three men camped out in the mountains, driving cattle assumed to have been stolen from the rancher, and they set out to give the men a hasty show trial and then lynch them. There is a battle of wills between the forces of justice and those of mob revenge, as it becomes increasingly clear that the men are probably innocent. The obvious point, the value of true justice as opposed to revenge and punishment, is delivered with a slightly heavy hand, though the blow is softened somewhat by the skill of the powerhouse cast.

Although this situation provides plenty of suspense and drama, the film doesn't have much to recommend it cinematically. Wellman could be a very theatrical director, and at times he seems too comfortable simply getting across his story and message as a filmed play. The whole film is lighted beautifully, though, and the nighttime scenes around the campfire, before the three captured men are set to be hanged, are haunting and gorgeous. Wellman also provides at least one striking scene here, at the beginning of this campfire segment. He opens the scene tightly focused on the men clustered directly around the fire, laughing, eating and drinking, enacting the roles of a riotous but fun-loving lynch mob. The camera pulls back slowly, filling the frame with more and more men, and then at the top of the frame the three dangling nooses come into view, hanging over the whole scene. The camera keeps pulling back until it's revealed the whole tree and the dark sky behind it, but those nooses remain the center of attention, a powerful but peripheral presence in the far background. It's a wonderfully executed scene, and one wishes only that Wellman had trusted his camerawork and mise-en-scène to present these kinds of things more often.

Nevertheless, the film remains a taut, economical drama, with the tension steadily escalating as the moment of truth comes closer, then deflates into the melancholy coda. Wellman seems to have only a passing interest in fulfilling genre requirements in this film. All the basic trappings of the Western are here, but the film feels more like a morality play dressed up in Western garb. In point of fact, its events could happen anywhere, they are not unique to the American frontier, which is of course Wellman's point. The film's power rests primarily on its script, which is mostly strong and only falters when it adds a few moments — they're hardly substantial enough to even be called a subplot — with Fonda's old girlfriend (Mary Beth Hughes), which seem intended solely to get a female lead into a plot where there's not much space for it. A few script-related missteps like that aside, Wellman's landmark film surprisingly retains much of its impact today, perhaps because the spectacle of ordinary people turned bloodthirsty and vengeful is frighteningly plausible in any era.

Oh Dennis....


The bad wigs, the thrift store dress, the non-matching purse, the old lady nail polish....

When is Dennis Rodman gonna learn that if you really like to dress as a tranny, the first requirement is fierceness? Get thee to Tyra Banks and her lacefront closet.

pic from dlisted

Jamie Foxx In Another "Interracial" Relationship...


Hopefully this one will be better than "Miami Vice", a movie that I absolutely hated. Being from San Francisco, this is of special interest to me, but it does sound promising--it might be another "Zodiac", which I did like. From AOL:

Jamie Foxx is getting good at playing law enforcement. Although most people didn't seen his latest film, 'The Kingdom', judging by the box office numbers, where he plays a member of the CIA, they may go see him in his next role as a detective in "The Zebra Murders: A Season of Killing, Racial Madness, and Civil Rights."

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Foxx will play Prentice Earl Sanders, one of two trailblazing black detectives who set out to solve a series of racially motivated serial killings that rocked San Francisco in the fall and winter of 1973-74. Ultimately, Sanders -- who, along with writer Bennett Cohen, recounted the story in the book on which the film is based -- ends up becoming the chief of police after the detectives successfully win their own battle against racism and harassment within the force.

Today In B'Days


Ruby Dee is 83. She plays Frank Lucas' mother in American Gangster, and is still quite the fiery little lady...I even forgive her for looking like she was gonna stab me in my eyeball once for having a conversation with her husband Ossie, haha.

Time For A Little Blog Lovin'.....


Must, must, MUST give love to the blog O Hell Nawl!. Every time I get on that b__ch I laugh out loud, and I loves to laugh. There is a team of folkses over there that are smart, witty, and completely the fool, even the comments are funny. Lighten and brighten your day and check them out.

My blog is obviously slanted for my community (I felt it was needed), but believe me, my world is wide open. I would like to give it up for some blogs that make me laugh too, authored by the brothers from another mother:

D-Listed: This dude Michael K. would be in an institution if he wasn't blogging, and I think I love him. He got me on the blogs like Bob-bay on crack.

What Sucks: He is really and truly on point about the suck factor, and has a pointed wit that deserves it's own T.V. show.

News As Gossip: I believe this dude is a comedy writer, but he is probably much, much funnier than anybody he writes for.

Enjoy!


i know the picture is a bit odd, but what can i say? i liked it

10/26: When a Woman Ascends the Stairs


Mikio Naruse has undergone a bit of a resurgence in recent years, after long living in the shadows of more internationally famous directors and recognized auteurs like Ozu and Kurosawa. His style is not nearly as recognizable or pronounced as either of those directors, and his tendency towards the thematic material of "women's pictures" probably also contributed, unfortunately, to the lack of seriousness regarding his work. In his way, though, he's turned out to be every bit as distinctive and worthy of attention as his better-known peers. When a Woman Ascends the Stairs seems to be something of a change from Naruse, and it's certainly set off in several ways from the three films of his I've seen from the great UK DVD box set. For one thing, in the late 50s he expanded his canvas to a widescreen aspect ratio from the squared-off Academy ratio of the earlier films, and he makes full use of the long, narrow canvas for some very interesting compositions. This film also uses a much more expressive lighting palette, and the many interior scenes in bars are even reminiscent at times of film noir in their dynamic lighting and use of shadow. The effect is enhanced by the jazzy, jangly score, which would have seemed drastically out of place in the quiet, even-keeled worlds of the other Naruses I've seen.

But these are mostly cosmetic touches, and in many ways the departure from the earlier films is not as drastic as it might seem. The story of the widowed Ginza bar hostess Keiko (the lovely Hideko Takamine), the film certainly shares the same thematic territory that Naruse was continually returning to. The conditions, opportunities, and thoughts of women in post-war Japan were a continual source of material for him, and this film, like the others, uses the milieu of the Ginza bar to lightly probe into the social conditions that limit women's options in life. There is little overt social commentary in the film, but it is nearly impossible to view its narrative arc as anything other than a condemnation of the era's treatment of women. Naruse presents a society in which women are forced by circumstances, often male-imposed, in which they must lower themselves in order to survive, and are then judged harshly by those very same men. It's a vicious Catch-22, and one certainly related to the madonna-or-whore paradox that has so often dominated male-centric views of women.

The film also lays to rest any claims about Naruse's lack of style. What he has, in fact, is a near-invisible style, but a powerful one nevertheless. His camera positioning lacks the flair or symbolic heft that critics so love to point out in Ozu, and he doesn't have Kurosawa's flashy movement either. He imparts his stamp on his films, instead, through the editing, and by giving a crisp, rhythmic layout to his scenes that seems entirely natural until you really study it. I must confess that at first I found myself falling into the trap as well, admiring the story and the characterization but finding little of interest in the aesthetic content. But then there's scene about 40 minutes in where Keiko has a discussion with her manager Komatsu (Tatsuya Nakadai) about the possibility of opening her own bar, and I began to notice the astonishing but subtle way in which Naruse was breaking down the scene. His films are often filled with lengthy two-person conversations; these are the emotional core of his work and the area in which his stylistic prowess is most at work.

In this scene — and, I came to notice, in all the film's conversation scenes — Naruse cuts between striking close-ups and a series of two-shots that are constantly re-positioning the characters in space and in relationship to each other. Naruse's cutting is precise and economical, hitting each beat with perfect timing. Close-up; shot over Keiko's shoulder with Komatsu facing her; close-up; two-shot with Komatsu in the background and Keiko foregrounded; close-up; two-shot with the pair side by side at the bar. The precision of the cuts and the shifting perspectives — at one moment we seem to be on one end of the bar, then when the shot cuts back we've moved 180 degrees — serve to emphasize the importance that Naruse places on conversations and interaction. In another scene, towards the end, when Keiko's lover leaves her at her apartment, Naruse carefully refrains from showing much of the space in the room during their conversation, largely sticking to tight Cinemascope close-ups that locate their heads to one side of the frame, leaving long stretches of empty space. This restraint enhances the impact when, towards the very end of the scene, he finally reveals the pair standing together towards the center of the large room, which suddenly seems very sparse. Naruse also deliberately foregrounds the kitchen table, where the man leaves some stock certificates as a somewhat empty parting gift, and the white rectangle of paper serves as a sad reminder of his absence even after he leaves.

Obviously, Naruse's lack of style has been drastically overstated. This film, as with everything I've seen by him, is possessed of a quietly confident sense of composition and the rhythms of life, expressed in his carefully modulated editing. It's a simple, inconspicuous style, and when the narrative is working at its best, can be almost invisible. When a Woman Ascends the Stairs is a perfect encapsulation of Naruse's subtle style and light touch within a melodramatic narrative.

Oh Jada....



*sigh*

Jada and her "band" Wicked Wisdom. Some posts just write themselves.



Speaking Of Frank Lucas....

Is the new movie "American Gangster" taking even more than the normal Hollywood liberties? Reader Cassandra sent over an article of interest involving Frank Lucas and Bumpy Johnson's widow. For those who don't know, Bumpy was Frank Lucas' mentor and was the subject of the Bill Duke directed "Hoodlum", played by Laurence Fishburne. She contends that Frank is a big fat phony, for lack of a better phrase:

Frank Lucas, the dope-dealer portrayed by Denzel Washington in the upcoming movie, American Gangster, is a low-down good-for-nothing liar. This according to someone whom would know -- Mayme Johnson.

Johnson is the 93-year-old widow of the infamous Harlem gangster Ellsworth "Bumpy" Johnson -- the man whom Lucas says was his mentor and who taught him everything he knows. Lucas goes on to say that he was Bumpy's second-in-command, and that Bumpy died in his arms in 1968.

"Frank wasn't nothing but a flunky, and one that Bumpy never did really trust," says Johnson, author of the upcoming book, Harlem Godfather: The Rap on my Husband, Ellsworth "Bumpy" Johnson. "Bumpy would let Frank drive him around, but you'd better believe that he was never in any important meetings or anything. Bumpy figured Frank as a liar, and he would say you can trust a thief quicker than a liar, because a thief steals because he needs money, while a liar lies for the hell of it."

Johnson says she was furious when she first found out that Lucas told a magazine writer that Bumpy died in his arms. Lucas, she says, was nowhere around the night that Bumpy died from a heart attack while dining at the famous Wells Restaurant on Seventh Avenue in Harlem. She says Lucas probably thought he could get away with the lie because he figured everyone who was around Bumpy at the time is now dead.

"Junie Byrd's gone, Nat Pettigrew's gone, Sonny Chance is gone, and Finley Hoskin's gone. Frank would never have said any garbage like that if one of them were alive because he'd know they'd come after him," Johnson says. "I bet he thought I was gone, too, but I'm not. I'm 93, and I don't have Alzheimer's or dementia, and I'm not senile. Frank Lucas is a damn liar and I want the world to know it."

Johnson says she thinks it's a shame that Lucas was able to fool Hollywood into believing that he's a bigger shot than he really is, and points out that if he lied about his relationship with Bumpy there's no telling what else he may have lied about in the movie. As far as she's concerned, Johnson states, everything in the movie is now suspect.

"That's why I'm writing this book after all this time," Johnson explains. "There have been legends, myths, and rumors flying around about Bumpy for decades, and I've never spoken to confirm or deny anything -- even when the movie Hoodlum was released in 1997 and contained all kinds of factual errors about the man I loved. You see I never thought the errors were malicious, they just didn't know better. But this . . . well, Frank does know better.

"So now I've finally decided to speak out. To set the record straight. To tell the truth and damn the devil. To let the world know about the real Bumpy Johnson."


From IW: In Frank's defense, even by her own admission Mayme was not the angel she was portrayed as in "Hoodlum" by Vanessa Williams. And whose to say she doesn't have an agenda of her own since, as she says, she and Frank are the only ones who are still around to know? Interesting just the same. If you would like to see the rest of her story, click here.

Countdown To American Gangster....


Saw a screener of "American Gangster" today. I don't really want to review and spoil it for folks, (I'll post my thoughts later) but I will give a few odd and end tidbits....

-Scary hair everywhere, from RZA's receding lopsided fro, to Russell Crowe's partner's Hall and Oates shag, to the worst parted wig and fake mustache in movie history on Joe Morton.

-Common plays T.I.'s father (?!)

-Somebody gets their ass whipped with a piano (don't ask).

-"Across 110th Street" is still the jam.

-Roger Guenveur Smith's eyes are actually open and alert looking.

-Chiwetel Ejiofor is starting to look miiiighty fine.

That is all.



this is a picture of the real frank lucas...a bit of a stretch from denzel, yes?

Pro-Noosers Not Welcome Here....


I noticed an interesting surge of traffic today after arriving home from the American Black Film Festival. After investigating, I saw a lot of it came from a site called kottke.org, which in and of itself is a noteworthy blog. It was a simple round-up of hyperlinks, that looked exactly like this:

Wes Anderson is racist.

Dr. James Watson is racist.


The fashion industry is racist. Halle Berry is racist.


Indie rock is racist.

Global warming is racist.

Martin Amis is racist.

Iggy Pop is racist.

Pixar is racist.

Michael Bay is racist.

Oct 25, 2007 • tags: racism

As simple as that, not even a post title. For some reason, my blog received the last tag for my post "Racism and Robots", which was a repost of a review of "Transformers" that The Angry Black Woman reposted from somebody else. I was like third in line, and the editor of the other blog I contribute to "Bonez", reposted it in his own words after me.

Even tho I didn't write the review, nor have I seen the film (and don't plan to) I thought it was a thoughtful perspective of one movie-goer's experience. While this kottke post did bring a string of folks to check out my blog, it also brought some that I have no interest in having here.

Let me make this perfectly clear: I have a community here of thoughtful, intelligent, and curious folks, that even if they don't agree with an opinion, they are respectful in their disagreement and usually give a reason why. What I love is that I don't have sniveling, cowardly "anonymous" posters that have something fucked up to say but are too fucked up themselves to reveal their identity. If you believe in what you say, why hide in your faceless indentity while saying it? You know why? Cause inside, you know it's a fucked up thing to think and say too.

While I welcome other's opinions, even if I don't agree with them, if you are pro-noose, anti-diversity, and believe that certain factions of society have no right to be here, this is absolutely NOT the place for you to hang out. And certainly not the place for you to leave your most unwanted "anonymous" hateful comments. There are lots of places for you to go, and you are not welcome here.

I find it interesting that the pictures of my anti-noose post of Emmitt Till are suddenly "missing" and the only pictures on my blog that are. To my regular readers, you are appreciated more than you know.

10/25: Portrait of Jason; Brakhage shorts


The eponymous subject of Shirley Clarke's fascinating documentary Portrait of Jason is Jason Holliday, a gay black man, originally from the deep South, who led a rough and varied life. Clarke simply puts Jason in front of the camera and lets him speak, and this proves more than enough to make this portrait engaging, funny, and genuinely moving in a surprising way. Jason seems to be a born entertainer, and the camera hardly phases him in the least. He immediately launches into a stream of hilarious anecdotes, acts out scenes from famous Hollywood movies, and generally riffs on himself and his life. He'd been a male hustler, a houseboy, a kind of amateur con man, and done all sorts of odd jobs — everything, that is, but hold down a steady 9-to-5, which he says early on is not for him. Jason's bitchy, extravagant persona is a perfect focus for a documentary of this kind, where he's the only thing on screen throughout the film. Clarke occasionally lets the camera lose focus, reducing the image to a blur, which allows her cameraman to imperceptibly switch reels while Jason's voice continues on the soundtrack. But other than these moments of visual abstraction, the whole film takes place in a single room, with the camera aimed squarely at Jason, sometimes showing him lounging in full body, sometimes focusing in for a tightly framed close-up on his expressive face. In the memorable image I've captured above, Clarke allows a skull in the background to provide a mirror image to Jason's strained grin.

Jason is always grinning here, and laughing too. He's one of those people who will laugh longer and harder at his own jokes and stories than anyone else around him, and his wild laughter is contagious. After many of his stories, he simply throws his head back and howls, collapsing backwards in gales of laughter. Even so, one senses almost immediately that there's something behind this merriment. In unguarded moments, when there's a lull in the unceasing monologue, Jason seems a bit drained and empty, uncertain even, as though only the constant flow of words and fun can keep him from fading away. In one striking scene early on, Clarke films a break in the streams of words, with Jason quietly smoking a cigarette; she shows him in a head-on tight close-up, and his unfocused eyes and blank slate of a face are a stark contrast to the vibrant, dynamic figure we'd seen before then.

Indeed, as the film goes on, the portrait being created here becomes darker and darker, with more subtle hints of what's to come. Jason's drinking, pronounced throughout the film, becomes increasingly reckless towards the end, and by the final twenty minutes he's visibly stumbling and slurring his words, clutching a bottle as his monologue takes an introspective turn. What emerges is a sense of a man who has created his entertainer persona as a shield against a pretty ugly life — an abusive father who beat him daily, racism encountered everywhere, lots of empty sex and a lack of real love. Clarke simply allows him to keep talking long enough so that the created persona falls away and the man begins to show. She's clearly heard most of his anecdotes before, and when he seems uncertain of where to go next, she's heard off-camera coaching him, "Tell the one about..." So one definitely gets the sense that she's playing a kind of waiting game here, letting Jason get through all his usual stories and acts until he runs out of the everyday stuff and has to dig deeper. He winds up digging into his childhood and his darker experiences of racism and homophobia, telling them increasingly without the nervous laugh that often accompanied his earlier, more humorously presented tales.

Clarke's film is endlessly fascinating and entertaining, largely because Jason is so fabulously interesting. The hallmark of a great documentary is to treat the subject with an aesthetic that brings out its essence, and Clarke is certainly able to do this with Jason. This sustained focus on his words and his life provides an intimate glimpse into the man, in the process casting a harsh glow on the social prejudices that guided him into the life he wound up leading. This is a stark, uncompromising portrait, both wildly entertaining and ultimately harrowing as well.



Stan Brakhage is an avant-garde filmmaker whose films continuously amaze and delight me, but writing about his work, finding a way into it that makes sense of the experience, is incredibly difficult. I hope to be writing a lot about his films here, and maybe by a process of continuously thinking about his work in words I'll be able to get closer to understanding it. In any case, tonight I revisited three of my favorites from him. Brakhage's abstract films, especially his purely painted one, provide so little ground for thematic interpretation that it's often very tempting to rest a reading on the film's title, and to view the film's abstract imagery through the lens of that title's contextualization. In the case of Love Song, one of Brakhage's late painted works, it's very difficult not to think of the film in terms of erotic imagery.

The film starts with thick, tactile clumps of paint, some of the most pronounced textural effects I've seen in my admittedly limited exposure to Brakhage's painting. The paint seems to be elevated off the film cells, deeply layered and creating a shaky, start/stop frame-by-frame flow. As the film's ten minutes go by, the painting gradually becomes more fluid, less raised, and the flow becomes smoother. The effect is undeniably sensual, as the jerky, frantic motion calms down into a more relaxed but equally passionate flow. It's also hard to deny the temptation to inscribe forms upon the black masses that flow across the frame over the course of the film's second half. Constantly shifting shape and pouring into each other, being absorbed by other black shapes, these forms nevertheless suggest human figures, limbs flailing, in a flood of bodies set off against the pale, watery washes of color that form the frame's backgrounds. More importantly than such semi-figurative hints is the way in which the sense of movement in the film suggests its connection with eroticism and sexuality. The black threads streaming through the frame are continually coupling and separating, creating a sensation of stickiness and wetness, like strands of seminal fluid intertwining and coming apart. The overall effect is like watching a series of primal embraces taking place between opposing areas of color.

It's difficult to overemphasize the extent to which a film like this is first and foremost a visceral, sensory experience, and only secondarily an intellectual one. In Brakhage's mature style (or styles, since he never stopped developing and changing), images rarely stay on the screen for more than a fraction of a second, and the overall pace is so rapid that it lends itself primarily to in-the-moment experience. This is not to say that the mind isn't working during a Brakhage film. Quite to the contrary, his abstract but suggestive images inevitably trigger waves of mental associations and fleeting connections. But it's only afterwards that my brain can catch up to the images, to process them and form overall impressions outside of the momentary visceral flood. This remains possibly my favorite Brakhage of the handful I've seen, because not only is its visceral effect incredibly powerful — this is very common in Brakhage's films — but because of the specificity of this effect, its erotic charge and sense of bodies in motion.

Mothlight is a much earlier Brakhage film, and is probably the film most synonymous with his name for those only vaguely aware of him. This is probably because, even more so than with Love Song, Mothlight lends itself especially well to the formation of a narrative or thematic core. The film was made by collaging together natural objects — blades of grass, moth wings, dead insects, bits of bark and leaves — onto a continuous strip which was then divided into individual film frames for projection. The effect is incredibly striking, pointing the way towards the rapid pace of Brakhage's painted films, with objects existing across multiple frames in ways that are simply impossible with traditional photography. In conventional film, an object exists from frame to frame because the camera is taking subsequent still images of it as it moves over time. In Mothlight, objects like blades of grass exist from frame to frame because they are literally stretched across the filmstrip, so that each subsequent frame shows an additional section of the object. In other words, if traditional film moves in time, Brakhage's work here is much more concerned with space.

What Mothlight achieves in this regard is to make the viewer aware of the illusion of cinematic time, to draw attention to the filmstrip as a tangible object in its own right. Because objects in this film persist across frames, the illusion that one frame is happening before or after another is shattered; what is highlighted, instead, is that one frame is next to another on the physical space of the filmstrip, and that objects are laid out across this space. The effect is something like looking at a slide through a microscope, sliding it back and forth to observe different aspects of the object on display. Brakhage's interest in his natural samples isn't scientific, though, but poetic. He's arranged the detritus and discarded bits and pieces of nature into an impressionistic rumination on mortality and decay.

Finally, I watched Brakhage's interpretation of Dante's Divine Comedy, a series of four short segments collectively entitled The Dante Quartet. Each of the sections corresponds to one of Dante's three levels of being, with Brakhage dedicating two to Hell, and one each to Purgatory and Heaven. The film opens with "Hell Itself," which provides a typically intense montage of painted cells, fierce collisions of color and only the barest hint of some urban footage which Brakhage was apparently painting over. The second section, "Hell Spit Flexion," provides a second vision of Hell, and a much more terrifying one. It consists entirely of fragmentary, sparse images flashed on screen, and contained within a much smaller frame within the frame, so that the bulk of the space on screen is black. This is Hell as a disconnection from sensory experience, a distancing from light and color and immersion in black. Hell as blindness, perhaps, or near-sightedness. Hell as a lack of sensation, or sensation felt without the visceral impact and energy that Brakhage strove for in his work. The third segment, "Purgation," maintains some of the feel of the second, with its jittery rhythms and occasional freeze-frame moments. But the inner frame expands to a larger size, creating a kind of widescreen effect within the frame; this is because here Brakhage is painting over old 35mm prints, and the movie imagery is occasionally visible through gaps left in the paint. It's as though Purgatory for Brakhage is Hollywood cinema, with its traditional narratives and representational imagery, and as much as he tries to blot it out with his own images, it still shows through.

What shows through in the final segment, though, is simply Brakhage's ecstatic celebration of life and the world. If the previous sections of the film represented Brakhage's struggles with expressing himself through abstraction, this final piece finds him at the absolute peak of his expressive powers. "Existence Is Song" is his interpretation of Dante's Paradise, a burst of passion and energy virtually unmatched anywhere. Brakhage's wild painting is at its peak, with colors dancing across the frame and circling around each other in sheer delight. He blends his paintings here with shots of the moon, and the earth as seen from space, and volcanic eruptions. In the course of the film, as the sections move steadily closer to Paradise, the background imagery that Brakhage blends with his paints followed suit, becoming both grander and more intimately integrated into the film. This secondary imagery develops from the drab cityscapes dimly visible behind the first section, to the Hollywood fantasies which provide a counterpoint in the third section, to the metaphysical images that play such an integral role in the final movement.

There's something about Dante that seems to draw avant-garde artists to revisit his work, as the multi-talented painter and designer Tom Phillips did with his illustrated translation edition and video project also based on the Divine Comedy. Brakhage's version is a powerful vision of the stages of the afterlife as a parallel for his own artistic creativity. And this creativity finds its ultimate outlet in the virtuoso display that ends "Existence Is Song," culminating the film's ascent to Paradise with an explosive celebration, not of God, but of man's sensory capabilities.

Milk Carton Alert!


What the eff happened to Taimak (he's 43!) and Julius Carry, aka "Sho'Nuff" (check out his normal picture!) from "The Last Dragon"? I wanted to know, and so did Jon from the positive blog "Chimeric Daydreams".

While Julius Carry has worked steadily in TV (could've fooled me) on shows like "Moesha" and "Half and Half", Taimak has had some spotty B-roles, oddly enough using his real life name coupled with a made up last name for his characters. Weird.

If you're interested, here is his official website, and I think he's singing/talking on it, also weird: http://www.taimak.tv/. Take a look at some exercise DVD tomfoolery he made unleashed on an unsuspecting public:

Damn! Embedding disabled...guess he needs you to buy, but here is the link:

The Last Dragon Trailer

Why do people love this movie so? It was completely ridiculous, completely unrealistic, and completely low-budget, with really bad music. My guess is a) everybody loves karate and kung-fu b) people have love for Berry Gordy (who produced) c) my reason-Taimak was fine! (horrible Michael Jackson-like stage kisses and all) and d) nostalgia for Vanity.


10/24: I Am Curious — Yellow; Sweet Movie


[This is a Transgressive Sex Double Feature, my second contribution to the Double Bill-a-thon 2007 going on over at Broken Projector.]

Although it's somewhat hard to believe now, Vilgot Sjöman's I Am Curious — Yellow made quite a stir upon its initial 1967 release and subsequent importation into the US in 1969. The film was confiscated before even being shown, and subjected to an intense censorship debate while its release drew massive crowds curious about the scandal. Looking at it now, the film's nude scenes are scarce and relatively tame — though it does say a great deal about American puritanism that, 40 years later, the scene where actress Lena Nyman kisses her lover's penis would still cause an incredible furor if it appeared in a mainstream Hollywood film. Other than that, though, times have changed, and the question becomes: now that the outrage has died down, what else does the film have to offer? The answer, predictably, is not that much.

No doubt, Sjöman was remarkably ambitious, and his film (the first part of a diptych with sister film Blue) ranges far and wide in its combination of political and sexual exploration. The film attempts to blend the personal with the political, documentary with fiction, and locate all this within the metafictional framework of the film crew making the film. It's a true Godardian project, and no doubt if Godard was making it all these disparate elements would hang together a bit better, or at least hint at something deeper beyond the mess. As it is, the film strikes too uneven a division in its balance of politics and sexuality. The first half hour or so engages in some interesting political discourse, questioning both capitalism and hardline Communism. That is, literally questioning them, through a series of probing man-on-the-street interviews that attempt to get at the nature of class distinctions in 1960s Sweden. There are some very interesting parts here, especially the tongue-in-cheek "interview" with Martin Luther King, using stock footage of him intercut with Sjöman (playing the film director within the film) on-screen asking him questions. This leads into a scene of Lena going around asking people if they've heard of non-violence — hilariously, the first people she asks are a trio of cops, who oblige by saying no, never heard of it. She then asks a middle-age woman what she's heard about King, and the answer is "Oh, he won't fight for his beliefs, right?"

This is pretty much indicative of the film's political questioning, which is amusing and frequently at least thought-provoking, but perhaps not as deep or probing as Sjöman would like to think it is. Moreover, after the very beginning, this political material is increasingly backgrounded in favor of the fictional story that's being filmed by the crew within the film, about Lena and her philandering lover, Börje Ahlstedt. This is the part of the film that earned it its notorious reputation, and as an exploration of sexual liberation, feminism, and the "personal as political," it's not without interest. But mostly it's a drab, lifeless, indifferently acted series of scenes with little energy, little intellectual depth, and even little of the crackling wit that was present in so many of the earlier scenes.

The film's hardly a total loss though. Lena's sexual journey remains of interest as an examination of the consequences of total freedom and the individual's responsibility to make his or her own life and ideas. This is an interesting time capsule of an older era, flawed and badly dated, but somewhat redeemed by its sense of humor and seriousness of purpose.



Dušan Makavejev's Sweet Movie is another film whose primary renown these days is as a source of controversy and shock value. One crucial difference between this and I Am Curious, though, is that Makavejev's film still has the capacity to shock audiences, even jaded modern ones used to seeing just about anything in films. In fact, I only thought I was used to seeing just about anything, until Makavejev reminded just how much potential ground "anything" could cover. The film's steadily escalating assault on the senses starts relatively low-key, with the hilarious introduction set at a kind of gynecological beauty pageant, and culminates in a massive scatological orgy/food fight reminiscent of the Vienna Aktionists (and indeed, Aktionist icon Otto Muehl himself appears among the shitting, vomiting revelers). The last half-hour of the film contains some of the most perpetually shocking and visually extravagant images ever committed to celluloid, and their potential to stun and overwhelm remains undiminished by the 30+ years since their first appearance.

But if that's all Sweet Movie had to offer, it would be little more than a slightly fresher version of I Am Curious, which is certainly not the case. What's interesting is that Sweet Movie appears on its surface to be an infinitely more light-hearted, less serious effort than Sjöman's film, though at its heart it hides a much deeper political core. At times, the film's episodic structure and over-the-top energy make it feel like a particularly demented Monty Python episode or a parody of Aktionist excesses. The film's epic denouement had me alternately gasping in astonishment, laughing with sheer I-can't-believe-they-just-did-that delight, and wincing with disgust, sometimes within seconds of each other. It's such a visceral experience that it's quite easy to miss the film's subtler political subtext amidst all the chocolate sauce and mashed potatoes.

The film is, most obviously, a total celebration of freedom and no-holds-barred living. The loose story follows Miss World 1984 (Carole Laure), who's chosen as the most pure and desirable woman in the world, and given the dubious prize of marrying a Texan milk billionaire. After a disastrous wedding night — instead of making love, he rubs her down with alcohol and then displays his liquid-spurting, gold-plated penis for her — she's tossed aside and spends the rest of the film being limply passed from one ridiculous incident to the next. Carole is in the hands of the capitalist West, a typical feminine image of beauty used as an advertisement — most humorously in the film's infamous chocolate bath — and a status symbol, but never as a living, breathing person of her own. But the film's depiction of Communism is even nastier, with Anna Prucnal playing the symbolic captain of a symbolic ship with Karl Marx as its figurehead and a hold full of sweets and a huge sugar tank. Prucnal seduces a Russian sailor from the battleship Potemkin, copulating fiercely in a sugar bath, and in one memorable and shocking scene, she performs a creepily sexy striptease for a gathered group of seven year-olds. She's a symbol of Soviet Communism, seductive and alluring from the exterior, but with a deadly violent streak underneath, as revealed in the finale when the police unload her boat's cargo of corpses.

But the film's iconic image of Communism is some inserted documentary footage of the bodies found in the mass graves of Russia's Katyn Forest, where Stalin's army had killed and buried over four thousand people. Makavejev uses this footage in an interesting way, inserting it into the narrative twice, once towards the beginning where it is off-putting and seems out of context, and then again at the end, after the orgiastic communal scat party. In this second iteration, the footage's purpose becomes more clear, acting as a recontextualizing reference for the previous 30 minutes. Juxtaposed against the sheer human brutality of the Katyn Forest massacre, the film's over-the-top antics seem as light-hearted as they had previously seemed gratuitous. The film is sometimes hard to take, but despite this it is not the nihilist work that it is often decried as. Its concentration on human bodily processes is couched within a framework of celebration and riotous, hedonistic fun — the commune dwellers who are smearing each other with feces, inducing vomiting, and peeing into their food may be on the absolute fringes of acceptability, but they sure look like they're having a ball. And more importantly, in spite of the strong discomfort factor, it's mostly a ball to watch them.