Unfortunately I don't think I'm going to have as much to say about this film as Brian. I liked this film.
I have been interested in seeing Wendy and Lucy so it's good to know what I'm in for. The story is quaint which makes sense because I read that it is based on a short story. I love short stories and like how they can transition to film. It's interesting to see the juxtaposition between these two friends, though I got the feeling that it probably used to be very different. Their once natural chemistry is surprisingly absent now that they are on such different paths. From my own personal experiences this can be a very challenging emotion. The desire to reconnect and relive the old times with someone who you no longer really know. It's sad but doesn't have to be. I think that's what Mark finally figures out. Things are different now, they've grown apart, but that's okay. And the trip can still serve to refresh each others spirits.
Brian commented about the homoeroticism of the hot springs and I recall seeing that moment and thinking, "I bet a lot of people look way too much in this scene." I think Kurt was trying to help Mark, and connect with him and he finally decides to just shut up for a second and try to help his old friend relax. It's understandably a bit uncomfortable for Mark but once he remembers that this is his old friend trying to give him what he needs.
Overall, the film was good but I wouldn't call it great. At times it was a bit too slow for me but I enjoyed the relationship and the conversations.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Brian Hammons' thoughts on Old Joy
I first discovered this film after seeing director Kelly Reichardt's quiet, disarming masterpiece Wendy and Lucy (2008). It's a sparse film about a girl (and her dog, and yes, it's the same Lucy) driving to Alaska, running out of gas, then trying to figure out what to do next. It was the sort of alarmingly non-Hollywood realism that I've grown to really adore so when I dug into her filmography and found out about Old Joy I knew I needed to track it down.
I've seen this film multiple times now. Right off the bat, I'll just come out and say it -- I love it. It's a film that I see so much of myself in (in both Kurt and Mark), as well as my friends, etc. shaped by my own life experiences this far along in my journey. it really resonated with me and I find it deeply affecting. While I find it life-affirming and hauntingly beautiful I'm not beyond reason and can see how it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. While it worked on a deeply personal level with me, others may not connect with the material at all, but in that case, I hope something in the film does register with them, even if its on a base entertainment level. It's a film nobody has or is really talking about, although, the critics that did see it heaped tons of praise on it which I'll go into later on in my closing thoughts.
Let's get started -- to help myself stay structured/organized so I don't ramble into a messy love affair here while attempting an exploration of the film's themes I'll tackle the two days that we're privy to in film's world separately:
Day One
I love how the first sound we hear right away is a meditation gong. I know this from attending several meditation sittings at a nearby retreat I visit on occasion. The sound is accompanied by some tranquil images, i.e. the bird on the rooftop, etc. but the reason I think its significant is that gong is rang at the start of a period of meditation, almost as if in the film it's suggesting we're supposed to get to that place of relaxation and receptiveness. I also dig the quick shot of the ants, busily scurrying about, that juxtaposed with Mark meditating is a nice contrast, similarly to Mark and Kurt's own contrast (not that I believe the two are intrinsically linked).
The discussion between Mark and his wife Tanya rings all too eerily to real life. Now, it's not the most flattering portrayal of domesticity, and by referring to it and my own life I'm not trying to say its altogether bad, but I've been in that spot before, and I've seen other friends there also. That little argument, if we can call it that, gives us plenty of insight into why Mark may want to get away for a couple days.
Soon after we meet Kurt, one of the first noteworthy things he says is, when asked about a recent trip, how transformative it was, how he's in a whole new place now, etc. I'll be posing questions that I asked myself throughout this essay, the first relates to what Kurt said there, are we to accept is as authentic personal revelation, or, anecdotal hyperbole in attempt to glorify his way of living in contrast to Mark's?
I like the driving stuff, beautiful handheld camerawork from within the car of all sorts of Oregon imagery, as well as the conversation that goes on. The tidbit about Sid's, the record shop, closing and how Kurt refers to it as an "end of an era" was a neat little moment. I must comment here on the gorgeous musical score provided by Yo La Tengo, I'm not gifted enough to write clearly and poetically about music, but the simplicity and tone of the music is pitch perfect for the story told.
I'll tackle the nighttime campfire scene now, its a pretty meaty one, lots of important moments and story happen there. I liked the line, "you can't get real quiet anymore", it kind of calls back to Reichardt's films in general, which celebrate quiet moments. Kurt's line, "you should have been there", can be seen similarly to my question above, as either a subtle jab at the stifled life Mark leads, or as genuine sentiment. Another line I liked was Mark's, "you forget all of this is out here", which I think rings true, I know a lot of people caught in their daily grind that couldn't recall the last time they went hiking or just enjoyed the skyline.
Kurt talks about knowing more than his professor, and, I feel like a lot of us have heard people spout similar boasts. It could be true, in many cases, but whenever I've encountered people who talk like that I often find it as more of a security defense to excuse their own shortcomings in the classroom. We get another great example of the contrast between Mark and Kurt here: nonsensical ramblings (i.e. teardrop universes) vs. silent condescension. We get a feeling Mark's suddenly questioning this trek. Then Kurt drops the bombshell, "I miss you, Mark... I miss you really, really bad". This is such a telling declaration, Kurt really puts himself out there, exhibiting a fearlessness in confronting the gap that's grown between them.
Day Two
We'll start with the diner scene which is another key one I believe. It's another superb example of the contrast between Mark and Kurt, this time in regards to the speed at which they choose to operate/live their lives. When the waitress assures Kurt that the hot springs are nearby he's happy, mentioning that this means they can take their time. In stark contrast, Mark quickly gives the menu a glance then pushes it to the edge of the table, upon being asked if they needed more time, Mark quickly replies he doesn't, then after giving his order he makes a hasty retreat outside to answer his ringing phone (another item that demonstrates their differences, it appears Kurt doesn't own a cellular phone which says a lot).
Here's the first time where I was disappointed/angry with Mark, speaking to his wife he says judgmentally, "remember who we're dealing with" in reference to Kurt. It seems like a mean-spirited, unnecessary stab, probably not meant as a scornful indictment, but more as a way of showing allegiance to his wife by discrediting his friend and placing the blame Kurt's way. Then, upon reentering the diner, while Kurt's apologetic, Mark replies, "I never doubted you, man". This strikes me as a such a memorable moment. Watch Mark's eyes as he says it! I can't figure him out. This leads me to my next question: is this redemption for what he said outside, Mark revealing his true colors, giving Kurt a heartfelt vote of confidence, or, is it more deceit, a false affirmation?
Now we'll get to the woods, where the guys were headed all along, and where some more of the film's finer moments take place. Kurt says, "I'm so proud of you, Mark". He says it without much inflection, at first, you almost wonder, is he being facetious? But, at least for me, that thought quickly subsided as I believe Kurt really meant what he said. He did admire Mark for giving back to the community, unfortunately, Mark's acceptance of this praise ends up awkwardly as he sort of puts his foot in his mouth. I also want to comment here that I loved watching Lucy run around the woods during these scenes. It gave an aura of legitimacy and authenticity to the proceedings and a simple beauty which reminded me of being young and my parents taking my brother and I out to the woods with our dog.
They arrive at the hot springs, their destination, and it's all it was built up to be. As a viewer I didn't have hot water to slip into but I did feel the rehabilitating effects of the springs and could "feel" the scene. I liked Mark's smile during Kurt's fairly tangential story, it was one of the most major signs that he was genuinely happy and glad he'd came. The story does give us one of the film's best lines, "sorrow is nothing but worn-out joy".
Let's talk about the homoeroticism here, or lack there of, depending on your interpretation of the scene. Some people have very heavily believed there was a sexual element involved in the men's relationship. I'm not so easily convinced. While there's undertones that play in the scenes I don't think its overt or really directly implied. There's brief nudity as they strip down to bathe in the rejuvenating hot springs and then there's the massage. Watching it this time it was clear to me that there was a certain level of uncomfortableness on Mark's behalf at first. But, the act transforms into a really selfless, beautiful one of generosity. Kurt's relieving some the mighty stress Mark is inundated with. I think it's a really touching moment.
As Mark drops off Kurt playfully says, "hold on a sec", almost as if acknowledging Mark's desire to speed away back to his regular life. Manohla Dargis of the New York Times said in her review, "From the way Kurt looks at Mark, it seems clear he knows there won't be another reunion". Then, there's the ending. What do you make of it? I've read different opinions, but ultimately, I don't feel there's much to gain from focusing on it. As in life, with this film, I think it's more about the journey than the destination, it's the moments, both spoken and not, that we witness. As Roger Ebert said in his review, "And sometimes the greatest drama can take place between the lines, or outside the province of the frame, and all we notice is a pause or a glance." In interviews Reichardt has been clear that she wanted the film to be ambiguous and open-ended, to not tell her audience exactly what to think or feel, but to allow them to come to their own conclusions.
Conclusion
Mark and Kurt are very much a yin and yang, two opposite ends of the spectrum, one resigned to normalcy, a mortgage, family life, etc. and the other unable to release that grasp on freedom, as we recall Kurt saying, "I've never gotten myself into something I couldn't get out of". I see a lot of myself in both of them: I'm a new father and don't have the freedom to do exactly as I please anymore, so can relate to Mark, yet I'm very much like Kurt, a bit of a wandering philosopher, and definitely enjoy the solemnity of the outdoors. I can't recall another film that so poignantly tackles the topic of friends drifting apart. It has profound insight into the human condition.
I think the casting was perfect, Daniel London (as Mark) and musician Will Oldham (as Kurt) are both terrific. I've watched the film several times now and continue to notice subtle things both do performance-wise that astonish and amaze me.
I wanted to use a bevy of critic quotes, as honestly, I don't have the writing skills or eloquence, to help paint a picture. A lot of people have written wonderfully on this film and I guess I encourage you to seek much of that writing out if you enjoyed the movie. The booklet that comes with the DVD has excellent pieces from The New York Times and The New Republic in it, and Roger Ebert wrote a glowing, four-star review, from which this line came, "There are unarticulated tensions, feelings of sorrow, unease and even dread that course through the movie like a hidden creek."
I guess all that's left to say is, anybody want to go to Oregon with me and check out some hot springs?
I've seen this film multiple times now. Right off the bat, I'll just come out and say it -- I love it. It's a film that I see so much of myself in (in both Kurt and Mark), as well as my friends, etc. shaped by my own life experiences this far along in my journey. it really resonated with me and I find it deeply affecting. While I find it life-affirming and hauntingly beautiful I'm not beyond reason and can see how it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. While it worked on a deeply personal level with me, others may not connect with the material at all, but in that case, I hope something in the film does register with them, even if its on a base entertainment level. It's a film nobody has or is really talking about, although, the critics that did see it heaped tons of praise on it which I'll go into later on in my closing thoughts.
Let's get started -- to help myself stay structured/organized so I don't ramble into a messy love affair here while attempting an exploration of the film's themes I'll tackle the two days that we're privy to in film's world separately:
Day One
I love how the first sound we hear right away is a meditation gong. I know this from attending several meditation sittings at a nearby retreat I visit on occasion. The sound is accompanied by some tranquil images, i.e. the bird on the rooftop, etc. but the reason I think its significant is that gong is rang at the start of a period of meditation, almost as if in the film it's suggesting we're supposed to get to that place of relaxation and receptiveness. I also dig the quick shot of the ants, busily scurrying about, that juxtaposed with Mark meditating is a nice contrast, similarly to Mark and Kurt's own contrast (not that I believe the two are intrinsically linked).
The discussion between Mark and his wife Tanya rings all too eerily to real life. Now, it's not the most flattering portrayal of domesticity, and by referring to it and my own life I'm not trying to say its altogether bad, but I've been in that spot before, and I've seen other friends there also. That little argument, if we can call it that, gives us plenty of insight into why Mark may want to get away for a couple days.
Soon after we meet Kurt, one of the first noteworthy things he says is, when asked about a recent trip, how transformative it was, how he's in a whole new place now, etc. I'll be posing questions that I asked myself throughout this essay, the first relates to what Kurt said there, are we to accept is as authentic personal revelation, or, anecdotal hyperbole in attempt to glorify his way of living in contrast to Mark's?
I like the driving stuff, beautiful handheld camerawork from within the car of all sorts of Oregon imagery, as well as the conversation that goes on. The tidbit about Sid's, the record shop, closing and how Kurt refers to it as an "end of an era" was a neat little moment. I must comment here on the gorgeous musical score provided by Yo La Tengo, I'm not gifted enough to write clearly and poetically about music, but the simplicity and tone of the music is pitch perfect for the story told.
I'll tackle the nighttime campfire scene now, its a pretty meaty one, lots of important moments and story happen there. I liked the line, "you can't get real quiet anymore", it kind of calls back to Reichardt's films in general, which celebrate quiet moments. Kurt's line, "you should have been there", can be seen similarly to my question above, as either a subtle jab at the stifled life Mark leads, or as genuine sentiment. Another line I liked was Mark's, "you forget all of this is out here", which I think rings true, I know a lot of people caught in their daily grind that couldn't recall the last time they went hiking or just enjoyed the skyline.
Kurt talks about knowing more than his professor, and, I feel like a lot of us have heard people spout similar boasts. It could be true, in many cases, but whenever I've encountered people who talk like that I often find it as more of a security defense to excuse their own shortcomings in the classroom. We get another great example of the contrast between Mark and Kurt here: nonsensical ramblings (i.e. teardrop universes) vs. silent condescension. We get a feeling Mark's suddenly questioning this trek. Then Kurt drops the bombshell, "I miss you, Mark... I miss you really, really bad". This is such a telling declaration, Kurt really puts himself out there, exhibiting a fearlessness in confronting the gap that's grown between them.
Day Two
We'll start with the diner scene which is another key one I believe. It's another superb example of the contrast between Mark and Kurt, this time in regards to the speed at which they choose to operate/live their lives. When the waitress assures Kurt that the hot springs are nearby he's happy, mentioning that this means they can take their time. In stark contrast, Mark quickly gives the menu a glance then pushes it to the edge of the table, upon being asked if they needed more time, Mark quickly replies he doesn't, then after giving his order he makes a hasty retreat outside to answer his ringing phone (another item that demonstrates their differences, it appears Kurt doesn't own a cellular phone which says a lot).
Here's the first time where I was disappointed/angry with Mark, speaking to his wife he says judgmentally, "remember who we're dealing with" in reference to Kurt. It seems like a mean-spirited, unnecessary stab, probably not meant as a scornful indictment, but more as a way of showing allegiance to his wife by discrediting his friend and placing the blame Kurt's way. Then, upon reentering the diner, while Kurt's apologetic, Mark replies, "I never doubted you, man". This strikes me as a such a memorable moment. Watch Mark's eyes as he says it! I can't figure him out. This leads me to my next question: is this redemption for what he said outside, Mark revealing his true colors, giving Kurt a heartfelt vote of confidence, or, is it more deceit, a false affirmation?
Now we'll get to the woods, where the guys were headed all along, and where some more of the film's finer moments take place. Kurt says, "I'm so proud of you, Mark". He says it without much inflection, at first, you almost wonder, is he being facetious? But, at least for me, that thought quickly subsided as I believe Kurt really meant what he said. He did admire Mark for giving back to the community, unfortunately, Mark's acceptance of this praise ends up awkwardly as he sort of puts his foot in his mouth. I also want to comment here that I loved watching Lucy run around the woods during these scenes. It gave an aura of legitimacy and authenticity to the proceedings and a simple beauty which reminded me of being young and my parents taking my brother and I out to the woods with our dog.
They arrive at the hot springs, their destination, and it's all it was built up to be. As a viewer I didn't have hot water to slip into but I did feel the rehabilitating effects of the springs and could "feel" the scene. I liked Mark's smile during Kurt's fairly tangential story, it was one of the most major signs that he was genuinely happy and glad he'd came. The story does give us one of the film's best lines, "sorrow is nothing but worn-out joy".
Let's talk about the homoeroticism here, or lack there of, depending on your interpretation of the scene. Some people have very heavily believed there was a sexual element involved in the men's relationship. I'm not so easily convinced. While there's undertones that play in the scenes I don't think its overt or really directly implied. There's brief nudity as they strip down to bathe in the rejuvenating hot springs and then there's the massage. Watching it this time it was clear to me that there was a certain level of uncomfortableness on Mark's behalf at first. But, the act transforms into a really selfless, beautiful one of generosity. Kurt's relieving some the mighty stress Mark is inundated with. I think it's a really touching moment.
As Mark drops off Kurt playfully says, "hold on a sec", almost as if acknowledging Mark's desire to speed away back to his regular life. Manohla Dargis of the New York Times said in her review, "From the way Kurt looks at Mark, it seems clear he knows there won't be another reunion". Then, there's the ending. What do you make of it? I've read different opinions, but ultimately, I don't feel there's much to gain from focusing on it. As in life, with this film, I think it's more about the journey than the destination, it's the moments, both spoken and not, that we witness. As Roger Ebert said in his review, "And sometimes the greatest drama can take place between the lines, or outside the province of the frame, and all we notice is a pause or a glance." In interviews Reichardt has been clear that she wanted the film to be ambiguous and open-ended, to not tell her audience exactly what to think or feel, but to allow them to come to their own conclusions.
Conclusion
Mark and Kurt are very much a yin and yang, two opposite ends of the spectrum, one resigned to normalcy, a mortgage, family life, etc. and the other unable to release that grasp on freedom, as we recall Kurt saying, "I've never gotten myself into something I couldn't get out of". I see a lot of myself in both of them: I'm a new father and don't have the freedom to do exactly as I please anymore, so can relate to Mark, yet I'm very much like Kurt, a bit of a wandering philosopher, and definitely enjoy the solemnity of the outdoors. I can't recall another film that so poignantly tackles the topic of friends drifting apart. It has profound insight into the human condition.
I think the casting was perfect, Daniel London (as Mark) and musician Will Oldham (as Kurt) are both terrific. I've watched the film several times now and continue to notice subtle things both do performance-wise that astonish and amaze me.
I wanted to use a bevy of critic quotes, as honestly, I don't have the writing skills or eloquence, to help paint a picture. A lot of people have written wonderfully on this film and I guess I encourage you to seek much of that writing out if you enjoyed the movie. The booklet that comes with the DVD has excellent pieces from The New York Times and The New Republic in it, and Roger Ebert wrote a glowing, four-star review, from which this line came, "There are unarticulated tensions, feelings of sorrow, unease and even dread that course through the movie like a hidden creek."
I guess all that's left to say is, anybody want to go to Oregon with me and check out some hot springs?
Quick Note from Brian H.
I just finished watching Old Joy yet again -- a film I've hungrily revisited multiple times now and am very excited to be afforded an opportunity to share it with others. I just wanted to say my actual post on it will be up in a couple days. I took a lot of shorthand notes tonight during my screening and I'm going to flesh them out into a somewhat lengthy digest detailing my thoughts on what I believe to be a terrific little film.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Film #11: Old Joy (2006)
Old Joy is a 2006 road movie directed by Kelly Reichardt. It is based on a short story by Jonathan Raymond. Old Joy tells the story of two friends, Kurt (Will Oldham) and Mark (Daniel London), as they reunite for a weekend camping trip in the Cascade mountain range and Bagby Hot Springs, east of Portland, Oregon. The film is a story of friendship, loss and alienation. For Mark, the weekend outing offers a respite from the pressure of his imminent fatherhood; for Kurt, it is part of a long series of carefree adventures.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Brian b on the proposition
You know what's great about The Proposition? The flies. All throughout the film there are flies crawling on everyone. It makes the film seem so much more realistic.
I think it was Darrell that commented on the scenery of the film. I think this is an instance where the scenery becomes another actor. Set in a still very wild Australia, the film not only tells the story of the Burns brothers but does a nice job exploring the "civilizing" of a land. The captain seems up for the task but his poor wife is struggling to cling to civilization back in England. Racism persists though the foreigners are dependent on the aborigines for living and surviving in the harsh land, and the Burns brothers seem to have come here to exploit an untamed wilderness.
About those brothers, there is certainly some love there, even when Charlie wants to give it up and Mikey never seemed so suited for the life of a criminal. There are moments where you can see how much the brothers care and how much they really are a family. Charlie seems to have decided there is no other way out for him (and particularly his brother) than to get rid of the other third of the family.
Overall I really loved the vastness of the Australian outback juxtaposed with the grit of the actors (even when waxing poetical) and events on screens and as many of you mentioned, the acting was pretty great throughout. I also love that the movie tells you the whole story without shoving it in your face. You gradually learn of the details of the event that led to this manhunt, and you gradually fill in some holes about characters in the movie. It was nice to watch a movie that didn't feel the need to hold my hand. And finally I love the emptiness of the film. Morally, physically and audibly the film is empty. It leaves for a lot of time to think, to debate the best course of action, to absorb the sunset and to go mad.
(Sorry for missing the midnight deadline!)
I think it was Darrell that commented on the scenery of the film. I think this is an instance where the scenery becomes another actor. Set in a still very wild Australia, the film not only tells the story of the Burns brothers but does a nice job exploring the "civilizing" of a land. The captain seems up for the task but his poor wife is struggling to cling to civilization back in England. Racism persists though the foreigners are dependent on the aborigines for living and surviving in the harsh land, and the Burns brothers seem to have come here to exploit an untamed wilderness.
About those brothers, there is certainly some love there, even when Charlie wants to give it up and Mikey never seemed so suited for the life of a criminal. There are moments where you can see how much the brothers care and how much they really are a family. Charlie seems to have decided there is no other way out for him (and particularly his brother) than to get rid of the other third of the family.
Overall I really loved the vastness of the Australian outback juxtaposed with the grit of the actors (even when waxing poetical) and events on screens and as many of you mentioned, the acting was pretty great throughout. I also love that the movie tells you the whole story without shoving it in your face. You gradually learn of the details of the event that led to this manhunt, and you gradually fill in some holes about characters in the movie. It was nice to watch a movie that didn't feel the need to hold my hand. And finally I love the emptiness of the film. Morally, physically and audibly the film is empty. It leaves for a lot of time to think, to debate the best course of action, to absorb the sunset and to go mad.
(Sorry for missing the midnight deadline!)
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Adam's Thoughts on The Proposition
I must say that the thought of having a Western-type, gritty film placed in somewhere other than the Sonaron desert is quite refreshing. To place this film in the Australian outback was a very unique setting choice, which is really the best part about this film, in my opinion.
The premise of Roy Winston's (who is awesome) character bribing Guy Pearce's character to kill his older brother was a premise that had potential. The fact that Capt. Stanley was doing this to create a utopia for he and his wife to live in was a believable reason for the bribing of Charley Burns.
It's an interesting film because it makes you want to (perhaps unwillingly) place yourself in Charley's shoes: would you take the bribe, or protect your brother?
I enjoyed the arid fluidity of the film, and the gritty texture it provided onscreen. Pretty decent selection, overall.
The premise of Roy Winston's (who is awesome) character bribing Guy Pearce's character to kill his older brother was a premise that had potential. The fact that Capt. Stanley was doing this to create a utopia for he and his wife to live in was a believable reason for the bribing of Charley Burns.
It's an interesting film because it makes you want to (perhaps unwillingly) place yourself in Charley's shoes: would you take the bribe, or protect your brother?
I enjoyed the arid fluidity of the film, and the gritty texture it provided onscreen. Pretty decent selection, overall.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Jess's thoughts on The Proposition
This is not a western, as it may seem on first look. This is like an acid trip into a roasting Hell on Earth. There's a lot of familiar scenes such as the lawman out to find the biggest, baddest hombre, his dainty wife at home, he's in over his head, his deputies don't think he's worthy of being the sheriff, all that's very familiar, but on the other side you have our villains in the film, The Burns Brothers gang. They are very unlike another set of brothers we watched in the last round, the Bloom Brothers. These brothers seem to have no other bond to each other (except Charlie to the young one Mikey) except they all love carnage and being outlaws. Strang thing about these outlaws is we never see them rob anyone, just maim, kill and burn until there is only a blackened smudge left on the ground.
Violence is not shied away from in this film and as you watch, you get the true sense that this is what times like this may have been like, no hollywood dramatic moments, but pure survival, in most cases, Arthur Burns is in a sense, one of the more realistic bad guys there are, a rampaging nightmare that we never know the motivations of. For that facet of the film, it's all a big muggy as to what exactly the moral of this tale is, but I still enjoyed watching it. Could have done without the strange voiceovers and whispering, but the music was a refreshing bit of notes for this type of film. The end wasn't all together too satisfying either because we aren't left with any type of feeling that the future holds much for any of the characters that survived, which in hindsight we don't get much of a feeling any of them were headed for a very good future in the first place.
Violence is not shied away from in this film and as you watch, you get the true sense that this is what times like this may have been like, no hollywood dramatic moments, but pure survival, in most cases, Arthur Burns is in a sense, one of the more realistic bad guys there are, a rampaging nightmare that we never know the motivations of. For that facet of the film, it's all a big muggy as to what exactly the moral of this tale is, but I still enjoyed watching it. Could have done without the strange voiceovers and whispering, but the music was a refreshing bit of notes for this type of film. The end wasn't all together too satisfying either because we aren't left with any type of feeling that the future holds much for any of the characters that survived, which in hindsight we don't get much of a feeling any of them were headed for a very good future in the first place.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Brian Hammons' thoughts on The Proposition
It's nice that class, so to speak, is back in and we're back to studying movies again here at New Eyes. This was a nice bit of nihilistic melodrama that had no problem baring its teeth. The story is fairly straightforward, in the way of many great films in the Western genre, there's not lots of frills, camera wizardry, etc. just a focus on a predicament and its resolution.
For me this was mainly a film I enjoyed for its acting. I give the biggest nod of respect to Ray Winstone who I felt was able to stretch his abilities the widest and bring us some top-notch stuff. I could literally feel the stubble on his chin, unkempt from days of toiling over his plan on bringing in Arthur Burns, no time for showering and shaving. When his wife Martha tells of a reoccurring dream she's been having about an infant he stands silently in the doorway until we see two tears run down his face in one of the film's most poetic offerings.
There's not a lot of meat in the film, there's no real backstory to speak of, no reason to particularly care for any of the Burns brothers, and for a film of its running time, we're left not entirely sure what we've experienced puts us at a place much different than where we started from.
For me this was mainly a film I enjoyed for its acting. I give the biggest nod of respect to Ray Winstone who I felt was able to stretch his abilities the widest and bring us some top-notch stuff. I could literally feel the stubble on his chin, unkempt from days of toiling over his plan on bringing in Arthur Burns, no time for showering and shaving. When his wife Martha tells of a reoccurring dream she's been having about an infant he stands silently in the doorway until we see two tears run down his face in one of the film's most poetic offerings.
There's not a lot of meat in the film, there's no real backstory to speak of, no reason to particularly care for any of the Burns brothers, and for a film of its running time, we're left not entirely sure what we've experienced puts us at a place much different than where we started from.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Dspang's thoughts on The Proposition
Wow. Just wow. It has been a long time since I movie ruined my mood. This movie did. I sat down to watch this bleak and nihilistic portrait of human evil in a pretty cheery mood. After it was all over I needed a shower........Also maybe a few Prozac to get that cheeriness back. This movie did to me what "Leaving Las Vegas did to me.
So it begins with the Captain Stanley making a deal with Charlie Burns(In an unwise move as such deals always are.) to hunt and kill his psychotic brother Arthur. Charlie, played by the prince of brooding looks Guy Pearce, along with his more innocent younger brother seem to be the poor ones that were dragged along on Arthur's little rampages. Nonetheless this little "proposition" made by the good Captain in order to keep and meet justice was an unwise solution which sets a karma into action.
This is yet another "actor" movie. Guy Pearce seemed more at home in this than he did in "Ravenous" because that movie didn't seem to have such a serious tone. This one did. The thing about this movie is the only people that seemed okay in it were Stanley, his wife, Charlie and his younger brother. These four were the breaths of air in this suffocating atmosphere. What struck me the most was that every other player in this game had a moral compass that was just spinning in all directions. If mister Nick Cave were going for a portrayal of human ugliness in this movie, he achieved it in spades. But this movie poses the question, what would one sacrifice in the name of justice? This movie shows exactly how certain actions you perform can come right back around and bite you in the rear.
One thing of note though is that this is a "western" type movie that is set in Australia. I must say that this is a great place to do a western type movie. The photography on tap is particularly beautiful. Every shot of beautiful landscape doesn't last long until some brutal violence is happening on screen.
All in all, don't watch this movie when you are in a good mood. It will ruin it. At least it did mine. It is an excellent movie nonetheless which shows many facets of human evil, and portrays how karma has an effect on everyone around you. So the moral of the story, be careful with your actions. What goes down the road always comes home.
So it begins with the Captain Stanley making a deal with Charlie Burns(In an unwise move as such deals always are.) to hunt and kill his psychotic brother Arthur. Charlie, played by the prince of brooding looks Guy Pearce, along with his more innocent younger brother seem to be the poor ones that were dragged along on Arthur's little rampages. Nonetheless this little "proposition" made by the good Captain in order to keep and meet justice was an unwise solution which sets a karma into action.
This is yet another "actor" movie. Guy Pearce seemed more at home in this than he did in "Ravenous" because that movie didn't seem to have such a serious tone. This one did. The thing about this movie is the only people that seemed okay in it were Stanley, his wife, Charlie and his younger brother. These four were the breaths of air in this suffocating atmosphere. What struck me the most was that every other player in this game had a moral compass that was just spinning in all directions. If mister Nick Cave were going for a portrayal of human ugliness in this movie, he achieved it in spades. But this movie poses the question, what would one sacrifice in the name of justice? This movie shows exactly how certain actions you perform can come right back around and bite you in the rear.
One thing of note though is that this is a "western" type movie that is set in Australia. I must say that this is a great place to do a western type movie. The photography on tap is particularly beautiful. Every shot of beautiful landscape doesn't last long until some brutal violence is happening on screen.
All in all, don't watch this movie when you are in a good mood. It will ruin it. At least it did mine. It is an excellent movie nonetheless which shows many facets of human evil, and portrays how karma has an effect on everyone around you. So the moral of the story, be careful with your actions. What goes down the road always comes home.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Film #10: The Proposition (2005)
The Proposition is a 2005 film directed by John Hillcoat and written by musician Nick Cave. It stars Guy Pearce, Ray Winstone, Emily Watson, John Hurt and Danny Huston. The film's production completed in 2004, and was followed by a wide 2005 release in Australia and a 2006 theatrical run in the U.S. through First Look Pictures.
Set in the Australian outback in the 1880s, the movie follows the series of events following the horrific rape and murder of the Hopkins family, allegedly committed by the infamous Burns brothers gang.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Schedule: Round #2
Here's the information for our next round -- looks like a great one!:
Round #2
1. Brian B. - The Proposition (2005) - Sept. 9
2. Brian - Old Joy (2006) - Sept. 23
3. Darrel - Eyes Without a Face (1960) - Oct. 7
4. Adam - Ikiru (1952) - Oct. 21
5. Jessie - Legend (1985) - Nov. 4
7. Group Poll Pick - Chronos (1985) - Nov. 18
8. Group Poll Pick - Antichrist (2009) - Dec. 2
9. Holiday Pick (Optional) - Where the Wild Things Are (2009) - Dec. 16
Round #2
1. Brian B. - The Proposition (2005) - Sept. 9
2. Brian - Old Joy (2006) - Sept. 23
3. Darrel - Eyes Without a Face (1960) - Oct. 7
4. Adam - Ikiru (1952) - Oct. 21
5. Jessie - Legend (1985) - Nov. 4
7. Group Poll Pick - Chronos (1985) - Nov. 18
8. Group Poll Pick - Antichrist (2009) - Dec. 2
9. Holiday Pick (Optional) - Where the Wild Things Are (2009) - Dec. 16
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Jessie's Thoughts on the King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
I do currently and have watched a lot of pro wrestling and MMA and the object to get people to buy tickets to see these fights is to sell the fight to the fans watching, well I couldn't help but think about that analogy while watching this movie because by the time they got to right before the Guiness challenge, I was so amped up to watch Steve and Billy go head to head in Donkey Kong, I was salivating like a Seafood feast was in front of me or while watching the opening scene of shitty flick, "We Own the Night." The way this movie was paced, it built up both men perfectly, and placed Billy as the successful pioneer in video games, and apparent restaurantier and hot sauce creator and showed Steve as a guy who can never really accomplish anything, despite being a nice, maybe too nice of a guy.
We learn all and more than we ever wanted to know about Twin Galaxies International Scoreboard and it's members and judges, as well as about the yearly Funspot game Expo, haha, using that term loosely. I mock, but what gives this movie so much drama is the fact that all of these people invovled take this situation with the utmost importance, I mean you have some of Mitchell's lackeys invading Steve's home to inspect his cabinet, the whole subplot with Mr. Awesome, the slug Brian Kuh reporting to Mitchell every 5 minutes with updated scores, the whole thing at points felt like we were watching the Mafia. I started wondering eventually with so many things stacked against Steve, why he bothered to appease these cretins and keep showing up to these events to try and beat Mitchell's score. But, as many people say, he's a stand up guy, and it was more in the end about proving something to himself, a common theme most anyone in life can identify with.
This was a highly enjoyable film, probably my favorite of the first round with Brothers Bloom a close second. The whole theme of this film boils down to Mitchell proving himself a heel and villain worthy of the best I've seen by doing so little. For such a trivial (to some) topic such as Arcade games, the scene where Billy finally shows up in the arcade for a moment is full of tension and intensity for how it will play out. And the film ends on a high note with Steve finally conquering his long destined enemy: himself by taking that high score and owning it.
We learn all and more than we ever wanted to know about Twin Galaxies International Scoreboard and it's members and judges, as well as about the yearly Funspot game Expo, haha, using that term loosely. I mock, but what gives this movie so much drama is the fact that all of these people invovled take this situation with the utmost importance, I mean you have some of Mitchell's lackeys invading Steve's home to inspect his cabinet, the whole subplot with Mr. Awesome, the slug Brian Kuh reporting to Mitchell every 5 minutes with updated scores, the whole thing at points felt like we were watching the Mafia. I started wondering eventually with so many things stacked against Steve, why he bothered to appease these cretins and keep showing up to these events to try and beat Mitchell's score. But, as many people say, he's a stand up guy, and it was more in the end about proving something to himself, a common theme most anyone in life can identify with.
This was a highly enjoyable film, probably my favorite of the first round with Brothers Bloom a close second. The whole theme of this film boils down to Mitchell proving himself a heel and villain worthy of the best I've seen by doing so little. For such a trivial (to some) topic such as Arcade games, the scene where Billy finally shows up in the arcade for a moment is full of tension and intensity for how it will play out. And the film ends on a high note with Steve finally conquering his long destined enemy: himself by taking that high score and owning it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)