À ma soeur (Catherine Breillat, 2001), also known by its strange non-translation English name, Fat Girl provides a shocking look at the sexual 'coming of age' so to speak of two sisters. The most controversial part of the film, and the most talked about in the reviews I have read is the last scene. More specifically, the last line in the film is arguably the most disturbing part of the film.
At the film's close the last words spoken by the young Anaïs to the police are that they "don't have to believe [her]." Some reviews interpret this as an admission of consent, and go so far as to say that she is happy with her mother and sister's outcome. This does not seem like a justified analysis of this statement.
Throughout the film, she is portrayed as the most 'normal' of the family. The father is an absent, disconnected, workaholic, the mother seems to have some skeletons in here closet and something else on her mind, and the older sister, Elena, is hysterically desperate for and delusional about 'womanhood' and sex. Although Anaïs is portrayed as extremely jealous of her older sister, and an over-eater, this things are both fairly normal and rational things for a twelve year old younger sibling to do.
She does make it known earlier in the film that she would like to lose her virginity to a 'nobody', but a murderous trucker is certainly not what she meant by that. In the scene she is clearly scared and upset, like her sister was, and neither of them truly wanted it. Finally, she is far to young to make that kind of decision. When asked if it was rape, she is too young to make the distinction, especially after such a traumatic event.
09 March 2010
10 February 2010
Whispering City (Otsep, 1947)
Whispering City (Fyodor Otsep, 1947) is the English language version of La forteresse produced simultaneously by the same crew. Ostep is a Russian expat. The main actors in Whispering City are American, but the rest are French-Canadian. Many reviews claim that the French version is much better, but I have not yet seen it.
It is a peculiar movie. It appears to me to be feeding off of conventions of Hollywood genre cinema, but gets them mixed up. The majority of the film, including the premise, is very much rooted in the Film Noir tradition. It tries its best to use as much Noir iconography as possible (decanted liquor, cigarettes, hats, guns, etc..).
Some important aspects of the Film Noir are missing. There is no 'femme fatale'. Instead, the witty, fast-talking, news reporter main female character, Mary Roberts (Mary Anderson) seems to be pulled straight from a screwball comedy (à la His Girl Friday [Howard Hawks, 1940]). There is some use of light/shadow, but very little. There is no real sense of claustrophobic spaces. The concept of the 'mean streets of the urban city' is underplayed by the picturesque location of Québec City.
There are some scenes that work extremely well, and make for a compelling story. There are other though, that seem so contrived, and make such an attempt to be 'Hollywood' that they are merely laughable. It is an entertaining film, that may leave a viewer that is conscious of Hollywood conventions, and that this film was made in Canada chuckling.
It is a peculiar movie. It appears to me to be feeding off of conventions of Hollywood genre cinema, but gets them mixed up. The majority of the film, including the premise, is very much rooted in the Film Noir tradition. It tries its best to use as much Noir iconography as possible (decanted liquor, cigarettes, hats, guns, etc..).
Some important aspects of the Film Noir are missing. There is no 'femme fatale'. Instead, the witty, fast-talking, news reporter main female character, Mary Roberts (Mary Anderson) seems to be pulled straight from a screwball comedy (à la His Girl Friday [Howard Hawks, 1940]). There is some use of light/shadow, but very little. There is no real sense of claustrophobic spaces. The concept of the 'mean streets of the urban city' is underplayed by the picturesque location of Québec City.
There are some scenes that work extremely well, and make for a compelling story. There are other though, that seem so contrived, and make such an attempt to be 'Hollywood' that they are merely laughable. It is an entertaining film, that may leave a viewer that is conscious of Hollywood conventions, and that this film was made in Canada chuckling.
09 February 2010
In Bruges (McDanagh, 2008)
Martin McDonagh's 2008 film, In Bruges feels a little like a poorly made Hollywood hit-man or buddy flick, but is much more. The coarsely offensive dialogue, and painfully contrived action sequences (which garner zero attention from law enforcement) act as evidence of the absurdity of life in the existential character study.
After a job goes wrong, and a young boy gets killed by Ray's (Colin Farrell) stray gunfire, Ray and his older, calmer partner Ken (Brendan Gleeson) are sent to the purgatory-on-Earth that is Bruges, Belgium. It is not too surprising that a British film about two Irishmen would have such strong religious overtones. While they are not religious men, they are searching for the meaning of life. Through all of the absurdity they encounter, Ray begins to believe there is no meaning and that there is nothing to live for, especially after killing a child. Ken seems to take the side that there may not be something inherently meaningful in life, it is what you do with it that counts.
Ray's interest in the film set is a meta-filmic reminder that the world he is in is, in fact, fiction. Through the people he meets on set, Chloe (Clémence Poésy) and Jimmy (Jordan Prentice), he is brought into an entirely ridiculous world of drugs, racism, prostitution, and criminal on criminal violence. Even when it seems as if he has made it out of Bruges, and moved onto salvation, the first and only sign of law enforcement removes him from his train for a scuffle in a restaurant with a 'Canadian'. His absurdity comes to a climax when, after being shot he stumbles back onto the film set and does not recognize it as such and literally enters into a "fairytale".
Ken's attempt to save Ray by sacrificing himself to warn him and provide a weapon for his protection is ultimately in vain. Ken attempts to, after all of the bad things he has done, do something to help someone, thereby giving meaning to his life. He is not so much a Christ figure, as another victim of this existential tragedy.
After a job goes wrong, and a young boy gets killed by Ray's (Colin Farrell) stray gunfire, Ray and his older, calmer partner Ken (Brendan Gleeson) are sent to the purgatory-on-Earth that is Bruges, Belgium. It is not too surprising that a British film about two Irishmen would have such strong religious overtones. While they are not religious men, they are searching for the meaning of life. Through all of the absurdity they encounter, Ray begins to believe there is no meaning and that there is nothing to live for, especially after killing a child. Ken seems to take the side that there may not be something inherently meaningful in life, it is what you do with it that counts.
Ray's interest in the film set is a meta-filmic reminder that the world he is in is, in fact, fiction. Through the people he meets on set, Chloe (Clémence Poésy) and Jimmy (Jordan Prentice), he is brought into an entirely ridiculous world of drugs, racism, prostitution, and criminal on criminal violence. Even when it seems as if he has made it out of Bruges, and moved onto salvation, the first and only sign of law enforcement removes him from his train for a scuffle in a restaurant with a 'Canadian'. His absurdity comes to a climax when, after being shot he stumbles back onto the film set and does not recognize it as such and literally enters into a "fairytale".
Ken's attempt to save Ray by sacrificing himself to warn him and provide a weapon for his protection is ultimately in vain. Ken attempts to, after all of the bad things he has done, do something to help someone, thereby giving meaning to his life. He is not so much a Christ figure, as another victim of this existential tragedy.
Sexy Beast (Glazer, 2000)
In many ways, Sexy Beast (Jonathan Glazer, 2000) is a standard 'heist' film. There is a place containing an abundance of valuable material, but has the best security system. The boss wants to pull together a team of all-star burglars to do the job. Our protagonist is the retired veteran that the whole plan hinges on. In reality though, it is much different. Sexy Beast not only plays with the conventions of the heist film, it incorporates stylistic techniques that are completely foreign to the genre.
Glazer uses flashback to fill in the background for much of the story, which opens after Gary 'Gal' Dove (Ray Winstone) has retired to a fantasy-like Spanish villa. This technique is not new to the heist film, but does stir up the story, revealing crucial information to the audience in small bite-sized doses. We even cut away from scenes before the climax and get the rest of the information through flashback, such as the last few moments of the super-disturbed Don Logan (Ben Kingsley).
A more uncommon stylistic choice is the use of fantastic or elements that are do not fit in our world. The most notable of these elements is the recurrence of the demented rabbit figure that haunts Gal and eventually is damned to eternity with Don underneath Gal's pool. This creature, which puzzlingly bears more than a striking resemblance to 'Frank' from Richard Kelly's film from the same year, Donnie Darko, does not seem to exist strictly in a 'dream' world. The final shot that takes us underneath the repaired broken heart at the bottom of the pool, while revealing the Dove families proverbial skeletons in the closet, also suggests that the rabbit is more of a living symbol than a dream fantasy. The rabbit figure seems to represent many things in this film, including innocence, secrets, lies and guilt.
Glazer uses flashback to fill in the background for much of the story, which opens after Gary 'Gal' Dove (Ray Winstone) has retired to a fantasy-like Spanish villa. This technique is not new to the heist film, but does stir up the story, revealing crucial information to the audience in small bite-sized doses. We even cut away from scenes before the climax and get the rest of the information through flashback, such as the last few moments of the super-disturbed Don Logan (Ben Kingsley).
A more uncommon stylistic choice is the use of fantastic or elements that are do not fit in our world. The most notable of these elements is the recurrence of the demented rabbit figure that haunts Gal and eventually is damned to eternity with Don underneath Gal's pool. This creature, which puzzlingly bears more than a striking resemblance to 'Frank' from Richard Kelly's film from the same year, Donnie Darko, does not seem to exist strictly in a 'dream' world. The final shot that takes us underneath the repaired broken heart at the bottom of the pool, while revealing the Dove families proverbial skeletons in the closet, also suggests that the rabbit is more of a living symbol than a dream fantasy. The rabbit figure seems to represent many things in this film, including innocence, secrets, lies and guilt.
07 February 2010
Alice in Wonderland (Geronimi, Jackson, Luske, 1951)
Wandering through the stacks at UBC's Walter C. Koerner library a few months ago, a title caught my eye. I was not reading a book at the time, so I decided to grab it. Once I had finished Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland I had to go back to see the Disney film, Alice in Wonderland (Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, Hamilton Luske, 1951)
Upon watching the film, I was disappointed to find out that it takes episodes from both the aforementioned novel, as well as Carroll's other Alice story, Through the Looking-Glass. There are several adventures that I rather enjoyed from the novel that are left out as well, such as the flood in the room with the table and the locked door or her encounter with the Mock Turtle and the Gryphon.
The film takes instances from two stories and weaves them into a wonderful story all its own. It does not quite tackle the existential turmoil that Alice experiences in the book, nor does it contain the play with words or science to the extent that Carroll does. It does not leave these out completely though. Along with the beautiful animation and score Alice in Wonderland stays true to Carroll's work as well as making it truly Disney (and not in a bad way).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
