|
Post by AD on Mar 31, 2011 23:21:38 GMT -5
Taking things in a slightly different direction this month:
Choose any director and watch and review as many of his/her movies as you can by the end of the month.
You can call this the auteur month. Either choose an existing favorite and relive their films, or challenge yourself and experience the masterworks of an artist with whom you are unfamiliar.
Hopefully the more open ended nature of this will encourage a bit more activity. If it proves more successful than, say last month, you can expect to see more ideas along these lines in the coming months. --------------
My director will be two time Academy Award winner George Stevens. I chose him because I realized that I’ve only ever seen one of his films, that being the great western Shane. Considering his reputation, I feel as though I should have seen a few more of his movies by this point in my life. I’ve actually seen more Eli Roth movies than George Stevens movies, and that seems almost criminal to me. I aim to remedy that in the next 30 days.
You don’t have to name your chosen director and explain that choice, but it might be fun…
|
|
|
Post by Her 69 Eyes on Apr 1, 2011 7:04:31 GMT -5
George Stevens is a great choice! He made some great pictures in the 1930s especially, including one of my all time favorites, Swing Time. The other films of his that have stood out to me thus far are Alice Adams and Vivacious Lady (which, although not available on DVD, features one of Ginger Rogers' better comedic performances).
The director that i'm choosing is Jean-Pierre Melville. Conveniently, i've already committed to watching his films as i've written a proposal for a lengthy paper discussing how his films imitate the mythology of the American gangster. I'll be revisiting a couple that i've already seen - Le Doulos, Bob le Flambeur - and finally catching up with some of my biggest blind spots - Le Samourai, Le Cercle Rouge, and Le Deuxieme Souffle.
|
|
|
Post by RyanGoslingFan99 on Apr 1, 2011 7:56:00 GMT -5
I am going with my favorite director, Robert Rodriguez. I know many might not hold him as highly regarded as I do but I know I can watch most of his movies in a month, and have practically watched everything he has made anyway.
I read Rebel Without a Film Crew(the story of how Robert Rodriguez got into Hollywood) and it really inspired me to go out and start making my own short films, as cheesy as they are. I know the industry has changed drastically since he came into it but alot of what is said in his book still holds true today.It will really be fun to see how much he has changed as a director over his career.
At the very least the man makes any aspiring director believe he can make a movie, myself included. I mean if we can a Sharktopus movie in our world than Shirley there is room for a Ricky Django movie...in 3D of course.
|
|
|
Post by AD on Apr 9, 2011 22:54:34 GMT -5
GUNGA DIN (George Stevens, 1939) Netflix description: Watching Gunga Din is about as much fun as one can have at the movies. It’s classic Hollywood escapism at it’s most entertaining. Those looking for a realistic depiction of the horrors of combat, or some sort of treatise on 19th century British imperialism should look elsewhere. Those looking for a lighthearted swashbuckling romp, or a superiorly crafted action adventure movie need look no further. War isn’t hell in the universe of this film. It’s more like a sport. Something to get the adrenaline flowing and make you feel alive. It’s a sad fact that as filmmaking technology has progressed, filmmaking technique has regressed. Look at the two big action sequences in this film. They’re both more entertaining, and far easier to make sense of than just about any similar scene you’ll see in one of today’s CGI-fests. It’s mainly because a basic sense of geography is established and adhered to while the shots are held long enough for our eyes to process the image. Just imagine what directors like George Stevens could have achieved if they had the technological advantages of today’s filmmakers to go along with their more disciplined formality. Sadly, the movie is also a victim of the unfortunate ignorance of it’s time. Most if not all of the speaking Indian characters, including Gunga Din himself, are portrayed very stereotypically by white actors performing in brown face. I guess you can’t get too caught up in those types of details and hope to enjoy too many classic Hollywood films, but I can't blame the people of India for being offended by the film, even though I personally enjoyed it a good deal. Gunga Din was originally supposed to be played by Sabu (not the wrestler), who was actually of legitimate Indian ancestry, but when he couldn’t do it, in one of the silliest pieces of replacement casting ever, the producers cast Sam Jaffe. A forty seven year old Englishman filling in for a teenage Indian. Only in Hollywood. --- I'm already happy I chose George Stevens as my director to study this month. Next up is Swing Time...
|
|
|
Post by AD on Apr 14, 2011 19:08:47 GMT -5
SWING TIME (George Stevens, 1936) Netflix description: Swing Time features one of the most delightful scenes I’ve ever seen in any movie from any decade and in any genre. It’s not a beautiful musical number or a spectacular dance routine, as you might expect. It’s just Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers together in a dressing room as he awkwardly compliments her gown and they tentatively move closer and closer for their first kiss. If anybody ever wondered why these two made such a popular screen couple they need only watch this scene. Ginger Rogers shines particularly bright in it. And the rest of the movie is just as great! Since my review of Gunga Din inadvertently turned into a rant about the state of today’s action movies, I suppose it’s only right for this review to turn into a rant about the state of today’s movie musicals. There are still some good ones, but I kind of hate how the musical numbers today are so heavily edited that they look like any music video you can see on MTV. Hey Rob Marshall (director of Chicago), I don’t care how many times you cut between close-ups on Richard Gere’s face and some tap dancing feet, you aren’t going to convince me that Richard Gere can dance like that! I don’t know much about dance, but I do know that it is most easily appreciated when you can actually see the motion of the dancer’s body. That’s why I so enjoy watching Fred Astaire in action. When he’s dancing, he’s always photographed from head to toe in the longest takes possible. But that requires hard work and lots of rehearsal time, and today’s actors are too busy pretending to hate being photographed by the paparazzi. Alright, now back to Swing Time, and back to George Stevens. In this film he clearly took a “less is more” approach to directing. Consider the way he stepped back and let his actors’ chemistry shine in that scene I described in the first paragraph. I’ve also already mentioned why I think his minimalist approach to the filming of dance routines is a big plus. In fact, his direction is so unnoticeable, one could easily argue that Fred Astaire, through his choreography and signature character, was the real auteur of this picture. But, it’s probably no coincidence that this, the film justifiably considered Mr. Astaire’s finest, was directed by a renowned filmmaker such as Mr. Stevens.
|
|
|
Post by Her 69 Eyes on Apr 25, 2011 2:54:43 GMT -5
I haven't forgotten about the month, but the way things have worked out another paper has taken immediate priority over my Melville paper. I will try to post reviews for the Melville films but they will likely be in late.
Glad to hear you loved Swing Time as much as I do!
|
|
|
Post by AD on Apr 27, 2011 23:04:00 GMT -5
So, I watched A Place In the Sun the other day, and I liked it well enough as sort of a B movie melodrama, but I just can't seem to find the motivation to write anything significant about it. The multiple Oscar wins is a bit befuddling, but I guess that's the type of movie that won Oscars in those days, what with All About Eve winning the year before that.
Also, I'd like to point out that under the rules laid out for this month if you're only going to review one film you can technically write about whatever the hell you want. I'm not going to whine and beg for participation, but it would be nice to see something, however minor, come of this month. I actually do read everything that's written in these threads.
|
|