Movies: The Official "Movie of the Week" Club Thread III

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Sent the link to the usual suspects here. If someone else would like to join the fun, just tell me.

 

[Jevo]

The Candidate (1972) dir. Michael Ritchie

Marvin Lucas, an election specialist of the Democratic party in California needs a candidate for the upcoming election for the US senate. Problem is no prominent Democrat wants to run, because the incumbent Republican is immensely popular, and it's basically a guaranteed loss. As a last resort Lucas seeks out Bill McKay (Robert Redford), an idealistic young lawyer, who's only claim to fame in politics is being the son of the former California govenor. Lucas promises McKay that since it's a guaranteed loss, he is free to say what he wants during the campaign. McKay obliges, and everything goes smoothly, he wins the primary easily, but there's bad news. He so far behind in the polls that it'll be a straight humilation at the election. So McKay is forced to moderate his message and start campaigning like a "real politician" would.

The Candidate is the brain child of Redford and Ritchie, or at least the premise is. And the differences between Bill McKay's political opinions and Redford's own are probably miniscule. The movie is undoubtedly both a satire and a protest of the American political system, and how it forces every candidate to have a bland uninteresting message, in order to offend the least amount of voters, insead of talking about actual issues. The idea is good, but a hard one to pull off, and if you do it wrong your movie will be as bland and boring as the politics you are trying to satirise. The real genius of the movie is the script by Jeremy Larner, who served as scriptwriter for Eugene McCarthy in 1968, so has intimate knowledge of how a political campaign works. His script is funny, thought provoking and probably entirely too real. Robert Redford does an amazing job as Bill McKay. The evolution from idealistic outsider who's just looking to get his message out to the public, and to a well oiled political machine made for winning elections is incredibly well done by Redford. The sense of losing himself and his ideals is incredible, and the way the look in his eyes becomes deader and deader the more bland his message gets is great to watch. This is among Redford's best performances in my opinion.

The Candidate in 2020 would probably have more twitter posts and not as many mall appearances. But other than that, there's little difference between American political system anno 1972 and today. Which probably isn't too surprising. The US election system forces a two party system, and the two party system necessitatesa bland and boring candidate to maximise chances of winning. Joe Biden probably isn't the candidate with the most enthusiastic voters ever in US history, but he doesn't alienate a lot of people, and when the other guy alienates a lot of people, that's enough to win. And like in The Candidate, you often don't get to talk about the real issues during campaigns, because that's the kind of topics that might end up making some voters not like you, and no one wants to risk that. The Candidate is still very relevant, and the US election system probably haven't gotten better in the last 40 years. In the genre of political comedies, The Candidate ranks very high.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Forgot to make a pick: Gillian Armstrong's My Brilliant Career

 

[kihei]

Sent the link to the usual suspects here. If someone else would like to join the fun, just tell me.

My cloud evaporated or whatever the hell it is that these damn things do. Please resend. Thanks.

 

[Jevo]

Windows on Monday (2006) dir. Ulrich Köhler

Frieder and Nina are a young couple with a daughter a few years old. They've just moved into a new house are doing major renovations on the house. One day after a fight, Nina goes to pick up their daughter from a friends house, but instead of picking up her daughter she drives to her reclusive brothers cabin out in the woods. At the cabin her brother is not alone, he's there with his girlfriend. Nina just wants to hide from Frieder, but isn't offering much information as to why. One day she takes a bike to a nearby sports hotel where she wanders the halls aimlessly and has an affair with a retired tennis pro doing exhibition matches at the hotel.

It's hard to do a plot summary of Windows on Monday where you give too much of the plot away as long as you stick to the things that are actually shown on screen. Because not a lot actually happens on screen. Most of the conflict and drama happens inbetween scenes, and are only implied. Köhler is not interested in why and what Nina and Frieder are fighting about, neither is he particularly interested in the fights themselves, and he's right to, because they would be far too melodramatic for the type of film that this is. What characters are fighting about in movies are rarely the interesting part of a movie, so in some way Köhler is cutting straight to the chase. It's not a very action packed chase he's cutting to, but he's getting to the meat of the film, and doesn't waste much time on anything else. What Köhler is interested in is how Nina and Frieder reacts to their fighting and Nina's running away and them being reunited again later, albeit briefly. Here Köhler is as "talkative" as ever, and most of what we can parse about Nina and Frieder's state of mind is non-verbal.

Windows on Monday is a slow meditative character study, and a particularly minimalistic one at that. It's stripped down the bare minimum, with any excess cut away. But even with only minimal dialogue left, Köhler manages to create some well defined characters. The narrative is not particularly strong, it's a story told many times before, and there's not big twist on it here, apart from the unusual way it's presented, which masks the narrative being quite basic. But that's not a bad thing, it puts more of the focus on the characters, which are the gem of the film. Köhler doesn't tell us more than we need to know, but lets the viewer observe and make their own judgements and interpretations of the characters.

Once you tune in to the slightly awkward (here not meant as a negative, but used for the lack of a better word) way that the story is presented, I think Windows on Monday is a rewarding experience for those who stick with it.

NB. The title, particularly the German one, seems very familiar to me, and I don't know why. I know I haven't seen it before now. It seems to be quite obscure, and I have no idea where I should have heard of it before. So I'm left with an awkward feeling of deja-vu regarding the name that I can't seem to shake. Thought that was a bit fun to mention.

 

[kihei]

Windows on Monday (2006) Directed by Ulrich Kohler

What seems like a new beginning--moving into a new house, renovating it to suit your needs and tastes--ends up being the turning point for Nina (Isabelle Menke) a wife in a relationship that is past its "best by" date. She impulsively decides to hide out for awhile, leaving her husband Freider to sort through his emotions. Separated for the moment and stuck between competing bales of hay, the two make slight moves in one direction or another but get nowhere fast. There have been many great relationship movies about despair--Scenes from a Marriage; Ordinary People, Blue Valentine, 45 years, and on and on. However, there are relatively few--I can't think of any except for Window on Monday--that tackle the stage that comes before despair--disgruntlement. The main problem in the marriage of Nina and Freider is that familiarity has finally led to a low-grade but unpleasant form of contempt. People change and Nina instinctively feels that now is the time for a break, a permanent one. But she goes off to her brother's cabin and sort of puts things on the back burner for a while. Meanwhile Freider bumbles around, decides to have an affair with a woman he has long been attracted to, and wants out of the marriage too---up to the point of actually doing something concrete about it. At which point, procrastination beguiles him, as well. Windows on Monday has an odd vibe. These people are unhappy, but not so unhappy that the way forward in their lives seem absolutely clear. Their marriage needs renovation more than their house, but as the house proves, renovations don't always work very well either. So what to do? Well, make love for old time's sake. And hope a little bird whispers in your ear and tells you what to do next. Nina and Freider are in limbo and it looks like in limbo is where they are going to stay for awhile.

When I was playing tennis seriously my biggest idol was Ilie Nastase, the Romanian bad boy with an artist's touch who taught Jimmy Connor and John McEnroe how to be obnoxious. I was absolutely delighted to see him appear in a significant cameo here as a tennis pro at a sports hotel who Nina picks up briefly on one of her walkabouts. He is old and out of shape now, a shadow of his former self, but in one scene he hits a forehand, and, man, is that still some sweet stroke. Later in Nina's "borrowed" hotel room, he reads his lines more convincingly than Menke does. Director Ulrich Kohler has a very oblique way of providing information in Windows on Monday, and he isn't afraid of throwing in off-beat moments such as this one. He seems to make subtle points along the way that one has to ferret out like truffles. In the case of this brief fling, marriage might offer security, love and companionship but it cuts you off from unknown moments that you will never experience that could have been interesting. I get the feeling that Kohler likes contemplating life's little existential absurdities.

subtitles

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Windows on Monday
Kohler (2006)
“Do you think Frieder and I make a good couple?”

Nina is in a rut. Her marriage is struggling. Her husband is cheating on her. Her home is in disrepair as it is remodeled. She hides in her own bathroom. She breaks free one night and sets on a journey of her own, visiting her brother, meeting strangers, having a liasion of her own. A bit of an existential walkabout. But all roads lead back home.

Interesting watching experience here. I wasn’t tech savvy enough to pair the video with the subtitles so I double screened it and tried to synchronize. I think I did alright. The nice thing was that I’m actually not sure how much knowing the exact words mattered. Not much is said with words anyway. The gist is conveyed fairly clearly by Kohler’s camera and through Isabelle Menke’s acting. Good face. Not wildly expressive, but innately melancholy. The bathroom scene early on, for example. Don’t need any words to understand everything going on.

The tone was interesting. Flat, almost unemotional. There's disagreement and strife but not really any arguments or blowups or typical movie shenanigans.

For someone who seems stuck, there’s a nice visual juxtaposition especially in the middle third with a camera that’s constantly moving, following, tracking Nina. Never quickly or flashy. Nothing about this is quick or flashy, but always right there, exploring. I particularly liked a sequence that tracks Nina from the sky riding to the right down the road on her bike. Once she’s out of screen it shifts back to the left and we eventually realize we’re in a tram ... and so is she. The couple of tracking shots through the hotel are lovely bits of low-key observation.

It felt a bit like a Richard Linklater flick. But German. And rainy. And deeply somber.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

My notes on this movie included id'ing actors as "fake Stephen Rea" and "fake Gerard Depardieu" (who turned out to be Ilie Nastase).

 

[kihei]

The Last Wave (1977) Directed by Peter Weir

In Sydney, David (Richard Chamberlain), a corporate lawyer, is asked to defend a small group of Aboriginals who are accused of killing a man. David has been having strange dreams, and as he digs deeper into the case, he begins to wonder whether he is somehow connected to the mystery in ways he can’t fathom. It becomes increasingly clear the man’s death may not have been a run-of-the-mill murder but a ritual execution of some kind involving ancient tribal costumes. The further David digs the more entangled he becomes in a world he can only barely comprehend. Director Peter Weir is trying to do something extremely challenging here, which is to introduce a tribal view of reality and incorporate that perspective into our Western way of thinking. It is a devilishly difficult trick and to me it has only been achieved once, by Thai director Apichatpong Weerasethakul’s Uncle Boonme Who Can Recall His Past Lives. In that marvelous film two ways of sensing reality, the rural Thai Buddhist view, with its vastly different approach to the spirit world and reincarnation, and the traditional secular Western view, with its antipathy toward superstition, are allowed to exist simultaneously. The characters move between one and the other as easily as we might pour a glass of water.

Why does one movie work so well and the other so inadequately? For starters, Weerasethakul is at home in both worlds, so we get basically the view of an insider, someone comfortable with each tradition, someone who accepts each perspective as real. In The Last Wave, Peter Weir is the outsider looking in. While sympathetic to Aboriginal culture in Australia, it is clear his understanding of it is limited. There is nothing seamless about The Last Wave; the two cultures don’t comfortably co-exist. Rather it is like Weir has done a great deal of research but not enough to allow him to make sense of the interrelationships that the story requires. Why does Chris help David in the end? Why does David seem to kill Charlie in the end? What is this stuff about the Mulkuru? Why would that necessarily have anything to do with David? And on and on. There are just way too many loose ends where coherent answers need to be provided, too many blank spaces that never get filled in.

That being said Weir gets a lot of other things right. The atmosphere established in the first twenty minutes or so is deliciously disquieting, almost worthy (but not quite) of Don’t Look Now. And the sense of foreboding that is created pervades the movie all the way through, even when the narrative itself is no longer convincing. Richard Chamberlain gives a perfectly judged performance of a man who is both trying to win a trial while at the same time being gobsmacked by the implications of what he is finding out, especially in regard to himself. He is certainly aided by Gulpilul, who provides a riveting performance in the pivotal role of Chris, an Aboriginal who feels caught between two worlds, the proverbial man in the middle. Despite the fact that the movie fails at the one thing it most needs to accomplish, I still like The Last Wave very much. I find its atmosphere bewitching and even its failures seem to me a noble attempt to do something different. Too bad it is such a hard thing to do …but, as Weerasethakul has shown, hard doesn’t necessarily mean impossible.

 

[kihei]

My turn for a music video. Sigur Ros' Heima.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Windows On Monday (Kohler, 2006) - Well thank you guys for watching and commenting on this little gem. Like my previous choice, L'Invenzione di Morel, it felt like nobody ever talks about it even though it is to me one of the best films of the 2000s. I think the film is easily read as a keyed-down variation on Eyes Wide Shut, and too invites its spectator to consider the reality of the lived fantasies of its main protagonist. The first thing that is presented to us when Nina announces she is not coming back home is what we call in French a "Grandeur nature" (which means life-sized, as in just-like-the-real-thing): adults role-playing a little fantasy. And there she goes, ending up in that strange mountain hotel after a little pot smoking with her brother. That whole (amazing) sequence is walking a real tight line with realism, and is presented as opposition to the daily ennui of her everyday life. She eats well, drinks well and - we are to assume - f***s well too, with celebrities "magically" entering her room. A filmic quotation of Yves Saint Laurent: 5 avenue Marceau 75116 Paris, with Catherine Deneuve extatic over the quality of the clothes they're dressing her with, reinforces the distance between this fantasy world and her own.
As been said above, there's no huge problem with her daily life and family, as the kid says: they're not "dead", they're "sleeping". And I think she's kind of dreaming too - of a world without the routine, without responsibilities and failed sex. I think Kohler does a fantastic job at creating a real strong sense of realism and then stretching it in weird ways, but never really breaking it, just enough to make us question why she ends up with these people playing tennis in dressed up suits.

For my next pick (if you allow me to continue playing the game even though my contribution to this thread is minimal), I'd like to propose another film that I feel very few people have seen. Maybe not as interesting on a thematic level, but for sure a little technical wonder: Wicked, Wicked (Bare, 1973). Please tell me if you can't find it, I certainly have it somewhere.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

The Last Wave
Weir (1977)
“The law is more important than just man.”

David Burton is a lawyer. He takes on the case of five Aboriginal men accused of killing one of their own under mysterious circumstances. There’s a conflict between the laws of society and the ancient laws and rules of the tribe. To top it all off David seems to be plagued with visions of an environmental apocalypse. The weather IS unseasonably odd now that you mention it and man does that wave seem unusually large ....

I have a lot of love and patience for Peter Weir. He’s a true personal favorite of mine and Picnic At Hanging Rock (which also dabbles in the etherealness of Australia) really may be among my 10 favorite movies if pressed to make such a list. He’s an empathetic and understanding filmmaker. But The Last Wave feels a bit like hooey to me perhaps even in spite of best intentions.

The mystery of it all is slightly engaging. I did want to see where this all was heading, but it felt pretty slight in the end. White man with mystical ties to native peoples. Square gets his life turned upside down by magic? Meh. Some of the visuals were good — the oil rain, the flooding house, the subterranean climax. But the parts didn’t add up into much of a whole for me.

 

[Jevo]

The Last Wave (1977) dir. Peter Weir

A man gets pulled out of a bar by a gang of aboriginals, in the scuffle he dies. David Burton (Richard Chamberlain) is not a criminal lawyer, but he volounteers to defend the aboriginals. However the group is not very talkative, and don't want to disclose any real information about what happened to David and why the man was assaulted. David becomes more and more convinced that the murder is tribal in nature, despite everyone telling him there's no tribal people in Sydney, and hasn't been for centuries. Meanwhile strange extreme weather phenomenons are happening, and David starts getting strange dreams and visions.

One thing Peter Weir does extremely well as a director is eerie. Picnic at Hanging Rock which I believe we've reviewed here before, has this fantastic eerie feeling to it, and Weir recreates it here as well, at least in part, because the focus is different here. But the opening sequence in the desert is fantastic and sets the tone very well for the rest of the film. It continues in the opening parts of the movie in the city as well. Where a feeling that something larger is at play, but you can't pinpoint it, and the characters are only just starting to wonder. It left me with a great eerie feeling watching it. It's probably no surprise that Weir collaborated with many of the same people here as he did on Picnic at Hanging Rock, including the cinematographer and editor. When the narrative really gets going, the focus on mood falls to the background in favour of getting the story rolling. The narrative is a mix of mystery og spiritualism, which I don't think the movie ever really manages to mix in a satisfactionary manner. Also because the movie never seems really clear on whether David's visions and spiritual experiences are actually real, or whether he's going a bit nuts. Which I think somewhat undermines the spiritual exploration that David is going through. David realising that the spiritual world and the material world are intertwinned is what makes him able to figure out why the murder took place in the first place, so being a bit vague about whether David's visions are real or imaginary is not to the benefit of the movie in my opinion.

Despite the narrative not being done in a very satisfactionary way in my opinion, the movie is still good, and does many things very well, in particular mood, which it does very well. For that alone the movie is worth seeing. The scenes of David's dreams/visions are great.

 

[Jevo]

I've been thinking about Weerasethakul and how he uses the spiritual world in his films so effortlessly. Because it's present in many if not all of his films, but not as prominently as in Uncle Boonme in most. It never feels out of place, and always blends really well with the material world. And I think the reason he can do that so succesfully, is because from his point of view, there's no disconnect between material and spiritual, both are equally real to him. So he doesn't have to explain or justiy the spiritual elements in his films, because they just are, the same way material things in his films just are there as well. It's not presented as mysterious and magical, but as real, and that makes it really easier for the audience to accept. It's still not easy doing what he does as well as he does. But his perspective is what allows him achieve it.

 

[Jevo]

For my next pick (if you allow me to continue playing the game even though my contribution to this thread is minimal), I'd like to propose another film that I feel very few people have seen. Maybe not as interesting on a thematic level, but for sure a little technical wonder: Wicked, Wicked (Bare, 1973). Please tell me if you can't find it, I certainly have it somewhere.

For me it's no problem for you to pick another movie. Your picks are mostly outside of what gets picked usually here, and that's one of the good things about this thread. Getting me to watch films I wouldn't pick on my own. I don't always share your enthusiams for your picks, but they are always interesting to watch, and that's what I hope for every week here.

 

[Jevo]

The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover (1989) dir. Peter Greenaway

Gangster boss Albert Spica has recently taken over ownership of gourmet restaurant La Hollandaise. He dines there every night with his wife Georgina and various people of his gang. Head chef Richard is not happy about working for the brutish Albert leading to tension between them. Georgina is unhappy in her marriage, and starts an affair with Michael, a regular at the restaurant. They have sex in the toilet, the kitchen, the pantry, right under the nose of Albert.

The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover could almost be called an anti-intellectual movie, because the focus isn't on subtext, but rather on pure raw emotion. It might even be hard to call the characters for real characters, because they rather just personify emotions. Albert is rage and violence, while Georgina and Michael are lust, desire and love. There's no pretention in the characters, they just give in to their emotions immediately. In that way the movie is very raw. That the movie is raw and emotional is definitely something that Greenaway has not just applied to the characters, but to the whole film. In the opening scene we see Albert and his brutes torturing a man and dumping literal shit over him. A very visceral scene, and sets the tone for what is to come, and it's not the last time Greenaway tries to disgust the audience or upset a few stomachs during the film. Physical disgust is one of the most pure emotions you can feel, it's engrained deep in probably every animal, and that's how Greenaway starts his film, and ends up. Greenaway wants to be provacative with some of the choices that he's making in this film. But the film is more than shit, boobs and rotting meat. Greenaway wants to get an emotional response from the audience, the same way the characters are acting fully on emotion, and these provacative elements are a part of that. But this isn't like a snuff film where outrage and disgust are the whole purpose, there's more to it.

The most striking thing about the this film is the way it looks. It's lavish to an extreme degree. Nothing in it is based on reality. Everything is enhanced in the same way that it might be in a Baroque painting. The set design, the use of colour and picture composition has a clear root in paintings rather than in film. You can stop the film at random, and there's a good chance the still produced could work as a stand alone painting. There might not be a lot of depth to the characters, but there's so much depth to the visual side. Someone more well versed in the world of paintings than I am can probably more accurately pin point Greenaways inspirations and references for this film. Even without an art degree, there's still lots of things to appreciate about the visuals. There's so much eye candy, so many little jokes and little things going on with colours, and the set design and costumes that you don't have time to pick up on it all. I liked how Georgina's clothes changes colour depending on what room she's in. Generally red in the restaurant, green in the kitchen, white in the bathroom, matching the colour of those rooms.

The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover is perhaps best describe as an experience. You have to go along with this crazy world that it takes place in, but if you do it's a wild ride. A good ride.

 

[Jevo]

Time for some Robert Redford in the wild west? Yes I think it is. My next pick is Jeremiah Johnson.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

The Cook The Thief His Wife and Her Lover
Greenaway (1989)
“Bon apetit. It’s French ...”

I was tempted to go with Georgina’s sign-off to Albert as the quote here, but I kept it clean. Helluva last line though. Black comedy at its blackest.

This is artistic button-pushing at its finest. Maybe an idealized iteration of it. Constant finger-poking provocations of the audience and yet it never spins off into being pretentious or obtuse and, at least in my estimation, is ohhhh so very watchable. Maybe that says something about me? It’s both discomfiting and entertaining, which is a line I think very few can toe.

But Peter Greenaway can.

This and The Draughtsman’s Contract (previously viewed here a few years back) are his most accessible, effective and entertaining films. Of course that’s saying something when “accessible” depicts some of the gross abuses depicted here. I stand by my word choice! A true, defiant original. I don’t think it’s exaggeration to say he really only makes movies for his own amusement, whims, interests. I appreciate that though I certainly wouldn't go to bat for all of his movies. Our interests only align so much. But I think very few filmmakers can TRULY say that. I mean, have you seen Prospero’s Books? This is a director who absolutely DGF, as the kids may say.

The Cook The Thief ... is beautifully perverse and grotesque. Painterly can be a bit of a cliche for filmmakers, but Greenaway’s work here genuinely earns it. That patiently panning camera (left to right, right to left) ... it’s almost like the viewer is walking through a museum as opposed to the characters moving through a scene. It’s stagey and artificial, but in the best ways possible.

It’s a simple story. Practically a parable. (I believe there is some good writing about what each character does/could symbolize out there in the world though I didn’t revisit it for this. I mean, I watched the latest season of The Crown but I still only have a really basic understanding of England under Margaret Thatcher ...) But I also think you don’t have to be immediately hip to the potential greater significance to appreciate the film.

Michael Gambon gives one of the most monstrous, boorish performances I’ve ever seen. He’s horrifying to watch but riveting with every rant. Mirren is a bit of an object d’art in form and function. She’s shot as lovingly as Greenaway has shot anything. You get why possessing her destroys these men.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

This and The Draughtsman’s Contract (previously viewed here a few years back) are his most accessible, effective and entertaining films.

I'd throw The Belly of an Architect in there.

 

[kihei]

The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover (1989) Directed by Peter Greenaway

Usually on this thread, I watch the movie and write up my thoughts immediately afterward to keep points as fresh as possible. I didn't do that this time. I think reacting to Peter Greenaway movies quickly can be a mistake. In many ways he is a difficult director, and he may have grown more difficult as his career progressed though I don't really know that for a fact. After seeing his first six movies, I realize that I have only seen one, Nightwatching, since then. Partly this is the result not of animus on my part, but mere lack of availability, even in movie-mad Toronto. Greenaway is an intellectually demanding director who seems to feel that if his audience can't keep up with the cultural and historical references, well, that's our problem. Of his films that I have seen, The Cook.... is my favourite. There is something of a concrete narrative to it, not always a given with Greenaway. It is also endlessly fascinating to look at, an absolutely astounding job of art direction--one example that wowed me: how Helen Mirren's wardrobe changed depending on the color of the room she was in. It is such a genius move, at least until one begins to pander what purpose does it actually serve. But why quibble?

What I like most about Greenaway is how relentlessly, unapologetically visual his movies are. Most of his movies delight the eye and they encourage active attention spans--his frequent long tracking shots, in either direction, give the audience a chance to appreciate his meticulous commitment to detail and all the visual delights that are contained in a scene or sequence. I think he made Nightwatching primarily because he wanted to capture Rembrandt's use of light on film. It seems the kind of technical challenge that would interest him. But he can get obscure and there are sections in most of his films that I have seen where I just get bored a little or tune out. Usually my interest reawakens with an image of some kind, but his rigor isn't exactly forgiving. Again, I'm sure he would say, that's my problem.

What makes The Chef... among his most accessible works is the fact that it's got a grade "A" villain, Michael Gambon's best role, and a quite brave Helen Mirren keeping things interesting. It's a revenge tale that looks like it is designed to shock, but the movie seems more interested in its nasty, little character study--an exercise in power and humiliation for the fun of it. Greenaway may value the visual most, but that doesn't mean the dialogue doesn't crackle. It is a perverse little movie, executed with great panache. Perhaps Greenaway is one of the two great misanthropes in contemporary cinema, the other being Lars Von Trier. Somehow Von Trier seems to me the more embittered of the two, and probably the catchier director for it. Greenaway's misanthropy seems more refined, less personal. Von Trier seems to want to put his audience through the ringer; Greenaway seems more studious about it--like what's an audience got to do with it anyway.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Sorry for the delay ... it's almost as if world events in the past week or so have consumed much of brain ...

My Brilliant Career
Armstrong (1979)
“This story is going to be all about me.”

Sybylla is a girl with dreams. She has low stature, living and working on her family’s rural farm. She wants to be a writer. Life, at least for a time, has some other plans. She’s summoned to her grandmother’s (a move to both better socialize her, but also financially benefit the parents). It’s here where clashes with the upper class. Fortunes improve, then fall apart. But Sybylla remains steadfastly focused on what she truly wants even if it means sacrificing other parts of her life.

This is a dusty, sassy, Aussie Jane Austen or Edith Wharton book. Polite society interrupted by a free spirit (lower class status optional, but applicable here). It’s stern, but not fully defiant. Sybylla wants to have it all — both love and her life — and works to make that so. Those desires hold near equal stature and it’s oddly refreshing (given that this is a late 1800s period piece made in the late 1970s) and modern that it’s her passion for writing and not for a man that ultimately wins out. That Harry cannot abide her terms is a loss for him, not for her. What might be tragedy in other hands, is a triumph of sorts here.

No one is fully bad. Harry is a bit deceptive, but never unlikable. Sybylla’s otherwise stern Aunt in a moment of kindness shares that she too married for love. It didn’t work out. It’s not the advice Sybylla wants to hear but it’s not coming from a bad place.

Sybylla herself is a nicely rounded creation thanks largely to Judy Davis’ performance. She is difficult and her methods aren’t always the best. She would be frustrating. But that headstrongness is part of her appeal. I found her to be quite charming and scoffed a bit at the multiple insistences that she was “ugly.” Unconventionally attractive perhaps. Or maybe I’m just a sucker for a wild-haired red head. Davis is the reason to watch this.

 

[kihei]

My Brilliant Career (1978) Directed by Gillian Armstrong

Any Canadian should have little trouble identifying with My Brilliant Career which is basically an Australian take on Anne of Green Gables with a feminist slant. Feisty Sybylla (Judy Davis), Anne a few years older and beginning to launch her life, is headstrong and uncompromising, and like her Prince Edward Island counterpart, Sybylla drives her guardians crazy. She is a totally free spirit who resists all attempts to marry her off. Her independence is more important to her than anything, even Harry (Sam Neill), potentially the love of her live.

My Brilliant Career is a very likeable movie, in no small part because of Judy Davis as Sybylla. Davis gives her a great deal of depth and a sense of her character's uncompromising commitment to herself and her ideals. Ultimately this is a movie aimed at underscoring the importance of staying true to oneself even when it flies in the face of accepted convention. My Brilliant Career's ending was mildly controversial at the time. The audience is waiting for the usual happy boy-marries-girl ending, and the movie is set up to tease the audience's expectations precisely in that direction. Harry has waited patiently, Anne has found out more about life, now, surely she will be Harry's bride with a kiss sealing the deal as the sun sets on the outback. But, on the contrary, Sybylla says no, there is another path she must follow, the path of being a writer and to do so she can keep house for no man. It is a brave choice, a plausible one, too, but some audience members objected. At the time, that ending, Sybylla's rejection of Harry in favour of her own needs and desires, was a little shocking. Strong, willful women in the movies weren't nearly as common as they are now. But the movie's message is as necessary and as supportive today as it was then. In the end Sybylla does what Anne does not--she ignores the expectations placed upon her and ventures out into the unknown on her own terms. Good for her.

Criterion Channel

 

[Jevo]

My Brilliant Career (1979) dir. Gillian Armstrong

It's the turn of the century in Australia, and Sybylla is a young girl coming of age. Her parents are poor despite being from a good background, and they want her out of the house, either working or preferably married in a good family. Sybylla resists, she wants to make a career of her own as a writer, or musician, or some other kind of artist, and getting married as a woman in that day was a sure no to any career. Sybylla gets sent to her grandmothers estate, so that she can learn to be a lady, and attract a suitor. There she meets a childhood friend, and romance sparks between them, but Sybylla is reluctant to go along with it.

At first My Brilliant Career seems like a fairly typical romantic drama, idealistic young girl doesn't need a man, wants to make it on her own. She falls in love any way. They get married. She is still able to fulfill her dream. Except the last two points don't happen in this film. Sybylla doesn't get married. She doesn't want to get married, not under the conditions under which she could get married, and even a charming Sam Neil isn't going to change that. Happiness for Sybylla doesn't lie at the end of the church aisle, and she knows that, and she's is not going to compromise her own happiness for some man. Highly irregular for a woman in her time, and with her background. It's not really a brave story to tell, but it's one that we don't see that often in films, so in that way it stands out. The story is well told, particularly due to Judy Davis as Sybylla. A lot of Sybylla's state of mind is not stated, but it is extremely clear through Judy Davis' performance.

My Brilliant Career doesn't do anything very flashy. It's well written, well directed, well filmed, has some very good acting performances. But it doesn't do anything to stand out, and it doesn't try to be overly stylish either. In some ways it's somewhat like it's main character. A bit plain, but knows exactly what it wants to achieve, and does it. And that's meant in the best way possible.

 

[Jevo]

I don't think I've ever watched all of Anne of Green Gables from one end to the other. But I surely have seen every part of it at some point, as my mother would religiously watch it when it was on TV when I was growing up, but as young boy who was afraid of catching cooties by spending too much time watching something with a cool girl in the lead role, I never stuck around for the whole thing. So I'm a little bit embarassed that i didn't make the connection between Anne of Green Gables and My Brilliant Career, they are even both redheads.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Again, I sent the usual suspects a link to the film, but if someone else is curious about Duo-Vision, hit me!