It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:30 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:39 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC
dda1996a wrote:
Quote:
for many people myself included it doesn't pass the 'is this entertaining?' test
worst parameter ever. Films don't have to be entertaining to be great, unless you consider everything that affects you as entertaining. Haneke, Roeg and Kieslowski are some of my favorite directors but I wouldn't really call their films entertaining.
I do and those filmmakers you mention happen to be among my favorites as well. Perhaps engaging would be a better word?

I've also never understood the tendency some people have to knock one artist, in this case PTA, to lift another.

Laura Dern in conversation with the New Yorker.


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
Black Hat wrote:
I've also never understood the tendency some people have to knock one artist, in this case PTA, to lift another.

Isn't that how this thread started?

Black Hat wrote:
to suggest her films are personal in the vein of Linklater or PTA is entirely disingenuous. If you're making the kinds of films she is that's the reason why you're broke, not the distributors, nor is it about sexism.


You can't really complain if somebody follows your lead in making further comparisons between exactly the same filmmakers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 1:40 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC
zedz wrote:
Black Hat wrote:
I've also never understood the tendency some people have to knock one artist, in this case PTA, to lift another.

Isn't that how this thread started?
Well yes in the sense that I read the article Frau posted and responded to what Reichardt said about those directors.

zedz wrote:
You can't really complain if somebody follows your lead in making further comparisons between exactly the same filmmakers.
Well no that was an entirely different conversation about financing and box office, not how good or bad one thinks a director is. In any case like I said it wasn't my lead, Reichardt made those comparisons bringing those directors up not I.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 4:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
I'm afraid I don't see how your comment from the opening thread isn't a case of using PTA and Linklater as sticks to beat up on Reichardt. Her films, apparently, "aren't personal" in the same way as theirs, and she deserves to be broke because she isn't making films like theirs (which we later discovered meant "not as entertaining").

That's certainly far more snarky than what Reichardt actually said, which seems like a perfectly reasonable comparison between herself and other American filmmakers who do similar work:
“I couldn’t point to a woman and say, ‘I’d like to have her career'. Linklater can make personal films and make a living, as can Gus Van Sant, Wes Anderson, P.T. Anderson, Todd Haynes, David O. Russell, and I can go on and on and on and name the list of men that can make personal films and make a life doing that.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC
Like I said I would never have mentioned them in reference to her if I hadn't read the interview. Not sure how you're not seeing how or why I made that connection, but that's ok.

What I would like to make clear is I never said she 'deserves to be broke'. I would love to live in a culture where an artist like her would have full reign to create as she pleases while having many zeros in her bank account, but unfortunately we live in a culture that's perilously close to voting in a grotesque vaudeville act as its leader.

Personally, I've repeatedly said I respect Reichardt's talent and am looking forward to seeing the rest of her films. As for Certain Women, I saw it once at a press screening and twice at IFC Center, places you would think are as close to her target audience as can be and I have never seen more people asleep during a movie. Now it's certainly true that some of the best sleep you will ever get is at the movies, but I think this says something regarding how mainstream commercially viable a film would be. This last point is where this whole conversation started as in my view those guys are far closer to mainstream sensibilities than she which is why I felt it disingenuous for her to make the comparison.

To clarify more I don't think a film putting you asleep automatically makes it a bad film. Tarkovsky for me is one of, if not my favorite filmmaker, and I've dozed off during each of his films multiple times.

While I see the talent on display in Certain Women, I simply failed to connect with it enough to meet Reichardt on her level. Now you could say the problem is me, but in my view I think she is culpable too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:02 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
This is a film about ascribing value to things through our actions. The stories are simple so I will be brief.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
One story is about a lawyer who has a client that goes unhinged. Most would probably distance themselves from such a situation, but she decides to make a friendship out of it.

Another story is about a wife in an inauthentic family. Her daughter and husband don't respect her. He ambivalently cheats on her, which she probably doesn't know. But she also has secrets of her own. She works to build a house around them that will be authentic. Perhaps that will make them so.

A third story is about two girls that become friends. One of them is much more invested than the other. When the relationship is no longer convenient for the other girl, she ends it without fanfare, which is what most would do. But the first girl has a need to show what it meant to her, and so she drives four hours just to say goodbye. (Gut punch.) In externalizing her feelings this way, she made it mean that much.

If you've been paying close attention, there is also a fourth story, about a girl who had a dog for a while until it died. But that girl made that dog into a star. And then dedicated this film to her.

I don't write about very many new films. I've just made this into one of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
swo17 wrote:
This is a film about ascribing value to things through our actions. The stories are simple so I will be brief.

An analysis as elegant as the film itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:51 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC
swo17 wrote:
This is a film about ascribing value to things through our actions. The stories are simple so I will be brief.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
One story is about a lawyer who has a client that goes unhinged. Most would probably distance themselves from such a situation, but she decides to make a friendship out of it.

Another story is about a wife in an inauthentic family. Her daughter and husband don't respect her. He ambivalently cheats on her, which she probably doesn't know. But she also has secrets of her own. She works to build a house around them that will be authentic. Perhaps that will make them so.

A third story is about two girls that become friends. One of them is much more invested than the other. When the relationship is no longer convenient for the other girl, she ends it without fanfare, which is what most would do. But the first girl has a need to show what it meant to her, and so she drives four hours just to say goodbye. (Gut punch.) In externalizing her feelings this way, she made it mean that much.

If you've been paying close attention, there is also a fourth story, about a girl who had a dog for a while until it died. But that girl made that dog into a star. And then dedicated this film to her.

I don't write about very many new films. I've just made this into one of them.

This was beautiful. Thanks man.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:32 pm 

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 2:23 pm
I saw this film a couple weeks back. What most surprises me still is how many times I laughed aloud--how many moments I found genuinely funny. I'm thinking mostly of the first act (and its epilogue), but even the second and third acts had their moments.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Laura Dern's reactions to her client as he was venting/railing in the car ride home. Her asking if it was totally insane for her to be walking into a hostage situation. (YES!) The shot of her walking up to the building seemingly in a daze with that dumb little map in her had. The cut to the guy in the cop car immediately after she tells them he tried to escape out the back door.

Michelle Williams' husband shutting the car door as his daughter was giving him some mouthy reply.

The teachers' questions during what's supposed to be a law course. Particularly the one that went something like "Can a student just say whatever he wants to me and get away with it?"


I wasn't rolling in the aisles in a fit of riotous laughter, of course, but based on what I had read before seeing the film, I just wasn't expecting it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
Yes. Also, almost everything James Le Gros ever does or says.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO
swo17 wrote:
I don't write about very many new films. I've just made this into one of them.

swo, you magnificent value-ascribing bastard. That was a great take on the film. Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
Thanks everyone for the kind words. I also just realized that the three stories here pretty broadly cover the areas of work, family, and friendship, respectively, which (along with health) are often brought up as the main contributors to personal happiness.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 2:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:51 am
Location: Boston, MA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
swo17 wrote:
If you've been paying close attention, there is also a fourth story, about a girl who had a dog for a while until it died. But that girl made that dog into a star. And then dedicated this film to her.


Thank you for pointing this out. Upon reflection I realized that we see both the Laura Dern and Lily Gladstone characters' relationships with their dogs.

Is there also a dog in the Michelle Williams section? I can't recall.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
Sep 19


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2016 12:47 am
Given their status on Blu-Ray,what are the chances that Criterion pick up Meek's Cutoff/Wendy and Lucy from Oscilloscope?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:22 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:11 pm
Location: Florida
Dead or Deader wrote:
Given their status on Blu-Ray,what are the chances that Criterion pick up Meek's Cutoff/Wendy and Lucy from Oscilloscope?


Or Old Joy from Kino! PLEASE.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:37 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am
It's as if Reichardt listened carefully and respectfully to the many and various objections of her critics, and then incorporated into one film everything anybody ever complained about, raised to the power ten. I don't know why the hell I liked it, I can only report that I left the theatre feeling bemused, yet refreshed and somehow lighter of heart. The best I can come up with is that Reichardt knows how to show someone driving a truck -- for one small example -- in a way that is immersive and pleasurable.

And oh my god it just kills me the way Kristen Stewart delicately dabs her mouth with a napkin that
[Reveal] Spoiler:
STILL HAS THE CUTLERY ROLLED IN IT!!!!!
Magnificent. I'm still basking in the afterglow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
bottled spider wrote:
It's as if Reichardt listened carefully and respectfully to the many and various objections of her critics, and then incorporated into one film everything anybody ever complained about, raised to the power ten. I don't know why the hell I liked it, I can only report that I left the theatre feeling bemused, yet refreshed and somehow lighter of heart. The best I can come up with is that Reichardt knows how to show someone driving a truck -- for one small example -- in a way that is immersive and pleasurable.

The moral of the story is:
1) if the filmmaker has a cinematic eye, it doesn't matter whether or not the subject is supposedly 'uncinematic'; and
2) no subject is uncinematic.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:22 am
Certain Beavers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Blu-ray


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller
Disgracefully I've only just watched this.

I thought she reached a formal and expressive peak with Old Joy. With Certain Women she just wiped me out again. She has virtually mastered a form of personal cinema in which every single thought or emotion is expressed entirely visually. I don't think there's anyone working in movies today with her total formal control. Not even directors I regard hghly like PTA and Refn at his best. To say nothing of what drives her and her seemingly endless compassion and empathy.

The comments from the person above called black hat seem to me to embody nothing in themselves about Reichardt or her movie and everything about the viewer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:28 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:35 pm
Hello forum

I am having a very strange experience watching this blu-ray (uk edition). The image looks terrible in motion. If I freeze, the image looks quite good, grainy and detailed, but in motion everything looks waxy and there is a constant problem with what I guess is usually called "mooring" (but I may be dead wrong on that). I actually found myself getting slightly sea-sick after some 15 min, and no doubt it was caused by the strange image properties.

Anyone else has this experience, or could this be a faulty disc/batch of discs? Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:34 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller
Is your monitor using some sort of frame interpolation ("film cadence") mode? If it is shut it off. While you're at it go into your settings and return every bit of digital "enhancement" to off. Sharpening, "smoothing", the lot. What is your monitor?

I am playing it back from a 4K (Panasonic UD900) player to a 4K/HDR screen with full HDR and 4k uprezzing. It looks stunning. Every single trace of grain is present and perfetly so, and things like wide shots from dark into bright backgrounds for instance look completely painterly, just as they were framed and shot. It was filmed on 16mm with Arri Alexa cameras and transferred in the 2K DI domain before encoding to 1080p. I thought the Criterion BD was perfect.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 893 Certain Women
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:33 pm 

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:35 pm
Thank you, david hare, that was helpful. Indeed I am watching on a very cheap monitor, not my usual one, but I didn't think that that could affect the PQ so much. I changed a few of those things that were turned on, and I think there was improvement, but nothing like the beauty you describe. I will try on another set asap.

BTW, I thought the film was exquisite. I want to read the short that was the basis for the middle section in particular.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection